NB-IoT vs LoRaWAN: A Comparison of The Two IoT Technologies

NB-IoT vs LoRaWAN are two types of low-power wide-area network (LPWAN) technologies that are designed for IoT applications. Here is a summary of the main differences:

NB-IoT vs LoRaWAN

Bandwidth

equivalent to one physical resource block within a normal LTE resource block. This means that NB-IoT can fit more devices in the same spectrum and has less data capacity and speed. LoRaWAN uses a bandwidth of 125KHz on 8 channels in 1 band. In US915, AU915, and CN470, there are 8 bands, so there are multiple ways to expand the network capacity. Please contact us on how to expand the network capacity with LoRaWAN.

Spectrum

LoRaWAN is optimized for ultra-low power and long-range applications. LoRaWAN networks operate in the unlicensed ISM (Industrial, Scientific, and Medical) band, so it is free to use. So there may be interferences from other devices in the same band. NB-IoT operates in spectrum licensed for cellular (LTE) networks and is optimized for spectrum efficiency over everything else. License fees paid by cellular operators to use these frequency bands are very high, limiting the number of licensees that can afford to pay to operate NB-IoT services.

Deployment

LoRaWAN networks can be set up in different ways: public, private, open communities, or hybrid networks, indoors or outdoors. LoRaWAN can send signals over long distances and through obstacles, so it works well in cities where you need to connect devices inside buildings or underground and in rural areas where you can cover up to 50km per gateway. NB-IoT depends on LTE cellular infrastructure. This means the networks are outdoor public networks that use 4G/LTE base stations (cellular towers). You cannot easily move base stations to other places if sensors are not in range of the tower. The cost of making an LTE network suitable for IoT use cases is high.

Speed

NB-IoT is faster than LoRaWAN, offering up to 200 kbps of data rate in downlink and uplink. LoRaWAN, on the other hand, is from 293bps to 50 kbps.

Power Consumption

Both NB-IoT and LoRaWAN have lower power consumption than regular LTE devices, meaning they can operate on batteries for longer periods. They also support power-saving features like power saving mode (PSM) and extended discontinuous reception (eDRX), which allow them to sleep or reduce their activity when not in use. However, for NB-IoT, building the TCP connection takes time (and power), which consumes extra power while waiting. And UDP is not stable. LoRaWAN does not have these problems.

Satellite

LoRaWAN (which supports LR-FHSS data rates) is perfectly adapted to direct deviceto-satellite communications, limiting downlink communications to prevent interferences with terrestrial devices, optimizing battery lifetime, and reaching a high link budget under harsh radio conditions. NB-IoT has frequent downlink communications and high power consumption due to message repetitions under harsh radio conditions, which is a challenge for device-tosatellite communications.

Mobility

LoRaWAN devices can roam between gateways in the same country. However, it is challenging if devices roam between countries because the frequency plans differ. NB-IoT is limited to idle mode cell reselection, which is not well optimized for mobile asset tracking because devices must be activated again when they roam between different base stations.

LoRaWAN vs NB-IoT Comparison Table

Summary

In general, 4G and 5G are good options for data backhaul for larger data communication devices such as gateways, cameras, etc. 4G can also be used for trackers, especially for vehicles that continuously power the tracker.

LTE-M, NB-IoT, and Cat-1 can be good options if you need a nationwide or even worldwide low-power tracking ability. For example, containers, vehicles, packages, machines for renting, etc. Please confirm the network availability with the operator or SIM card vendor before you expand your project.

LoRaWAN is a good option for tracking projects in a relatively small area, such as a factory, port, farm, work platform on the sea, or even a city. There are also nationwide LoRaWAN networks in some European countries such as France, Belgium, and Netherlands.

Long term availability
There are a few other options, like Sigfox. A client may use the system for many years and you may want to expand the same solution to different clients. So the technology’s long-term availability is a crucial yet not-so-obvious factor that must be evaluated..

Eco-system
LoRaWAN and 4G have a perfect eco-system where you can find all kinds of resources on end nodes, algorithms, network service, application service, and consultants. They expedite your project and provide alternatives as your business expands.

A tracking project is usually a combination of several communication technologies, i.e. long distance + near field. So accuracy, distance, power supply, dimension, and support are some other factors we should consider. Check our whitepaper here.

What is Difference Between 4G, 5G, LTE, CAT-M, LTE-M, CAT-1, NB-IoT, and LoRaWAN – Lansitec

Learn about the what is the Difference Between 4G, 5G, LTE, CAT-M, LTE-M, CAT-1, NB-IoT, and LoRaWAN for a tracking project.