5G Networks: How India's Leapfrog Strategy Outpaced the US in Speed and Affordability

The global race to 5G has revealed fascinating differences in deployment strategies, with India and the United States taking dramatically different approaches that have led to equally dramatic results. While American carriers like AT&T and Verizon struggle with speeds around 100 Mbps at $65 per month, Indian providers like Reliance Jio are delivering 400 Mbps speeds for just $50 per year. The secret lies not in the technology itself, but in how each country chose to deploy it.

What is the Difference Between Standalone and Non-Standalone 5G?

In the context of 5G, the difference between a standalone (SA) network and a non-standalone (NSA) network is essentially about how the 5G infrastructure is deployed and what it relies on. A non-standalone (NSA) 5G network uses the existing 4G LTE infrastructure as a sort of anchor. In other words, it still relies on the 4G core network for certain control functions and management, even though it delivers 5G speeds and performance.

A standalone (SA) 5G network, on the other hand, is built entirely on a new 5G core infrastructure. It doesn't rely on 4G LTE at all, meaning it can fully utilize all the advanced capabilities of 5G, such as lower latency, network slicing, and improved reliability.

Why Does India's 5G Outperform the US?

It's actually a pretty interesting comparison. In India, providers like Jio rolled out 5G using a lot of standalone architecture from the start, mainly because they were building out newer infrastructure and didn't have as many legacy networks to deal with. This allowed them to deliver higher speeds (like the 400 Mbps you're seeing) relatively quickly because they weren't layering 5G on top of older LTE systems.

In the U.S., many carriers like AT&T started with non-standalone 5G, which means they rely more on existing 4G infrastructure, and that can limit the top speeds and performance initially.

How Can Jio Use Existing Towers and Still Be Better?

So Jio is indeed using their existing 4G towers, but they've implemented a lot of their 5G as standalone 5G on those towers. That means even though the physical towers are the same, the core network and the way they handle 5G traffic is fully 5G SA, which can give you that faster performance.

On the other hand, AT&T and many U.S. carriers started out with a lot of non-standalone (NSA) 5G, which relies more on their existing 4G LTE infrastructure. Because of that, the speeds might not be as fast in certain areas, and the network might not feel as purely "5G" as what you've experienced with Jio. Research on 5G implementation in India has documented this strategic approach, highlighting how the country's unique market conditions enabled rapid adoption of standalone architectures.

Why is 5G So Much Cheaper in India?

The pricing difference comes down to a few factors. First, market dynamics and competition play a big role. In India, the telecom market is extremely competitive, and companies like Jio have driven prices down significantly to attract a massive user base. They often operate on lower margins but gain from high volume, making it possible to offer cheaper annual plans.

In the U.S., the telecom industry often has higher infrastructure and operational costs, as well as different regulatory environments. Carriers like AT&T and Verizon also invest heavily in maintaining vast networks and often have different pricing strategies, which can lead to higher monthly fees. They might bundle in other services or rely on long-term contracts, which also affects the pricing model. So all of these factors together explain why you might get a much cheaper annual 5G plan in India compared to a monthly plan in the U.S.

What Could US Carriers Do to Improve Performance and Lower Costs?

There are definitely a few things U.S. carriers like AT&T and Verizon could consider to deliver better 5G at lower latency and cost. First, they could accelerate the rollout of standalone (SA) 5G networks. By moving away from the non-standalone (NSA) setup that depends heavily on 4G infrastructure, they could unlock the full potential of 5G. Standalone 5G generally offers lower latency and better efficiency, which can improve performance and, over time, potentially lower costs.

Second, they could invest in more spectrum and infrastructure upgrades to increase capacity and coverage. This means deploying more small cells and expanding fiber backhaul. Third, they could rethink their pricing strategies to be more competitive.

Could Drones Improve 5G Coverage and Latency?

Using drones as a kind of lower-altitude relay infrastructure could definitely help improve connectivity and coverage in areas where laying traditional 5G infrastructure is challenging or expensive. Drones could essentially act as mobile or semi-fixed 5G base stations, hovering at lower altitudes than satellites and providing more targeted coverage.

This could be particularly useful in areas where you need temporary or flexible coverage or where ground infrastructure is limited. It's kind of like having a floating cell tower that can adapt to demand. The idea is similar to what Starlink is doing from orbit, but at a much lower level where the latency can be reduced and the connection might be easier to maintain. It's definitely a creative approach and could work well for scenarios where quick deployment and flexible coverage are needed.

The Future: Cloud Computing and AR/VR Applications

For emerging technologies like AR glasses, the low-latency capabilities of standalone 5G networks become crucial. Using cloud-based servers for the heavy computational lifting instead of relying on microprocessors inside the glasses themselves is a really smart way to reduce heat, save battery life, and keep the device lightweight.

If the network connectivity is good—like with low-latency 5G—then offloading those computations to the cloud can make the user experience much smoother. The glasses won't have to work as hard, they won't heat up as much, and the battery will last longer. Plus, it makes the glasses more comfortable and practical for everyday use, which is a huge win. Leveraging the cloud for the heavy lifting is definitely a forward-thinking approach and could make AR glasses a lot more user-friendly.

The Bottom Line

India's approach demonstrates that sometimes starting fresh can be more effective than building on legacy systems. By leapfrogging directly to standalone 5G, India achieved higher speeds at dramatically lower costs, though they still face infrastructure challenges like fiberization and spectrum pricing.

The US, meanwhile, leads in infrastructure robustness and enterprise ecosystem integration, but the initial reliance on NSA architecture limited performance, and pricing remains a major barrier to accessibility.

As we look toward the future of mobile connectivity, the lessons from both approaches will be crucial. India's affordability and SA adoption success, combined with the US's infrastructure strength and enterprise focus, point toward a future where 5G can truly transform how we connect, work, and experience the digital world.