In the era of the Internet of Everything, ARM's mission is to expand the entire IoT ecosystem by providing a secure architecture that supports end devices. Recently, ARM expert Chet Babla concluded a series of meetings and discussions with global chipmakers, infrastructure providers, telecom operators, and end-users utilizing LPWA technology. How does he view the six prevalent perspectives in the cellular IoT technology sector? Let’s dive in.
---
**Viewpoint 1: Cat-M1 and NB-IoT are gaining market traction, but non-cellular LPWA tech might 'win' in the long run.**
Several articles suggest that Cat-M1 (officially known as "LTE-M") and NB-IoT are not seeing rapid adoption, while non-cellular technologies like Sigfox and LoRa are becoming de facto standards for LPWA. There are several considerations here:
First, any LPWA technology—whether cellular-based, carrier-deployed, or enterprise-deployed—must demonstrate that it can solve real-world problems in a commercially viable manner.
Second, IoT applications vary greatly in their requirements, meaning different technologies are needed to address these diverse needs. The idea of a "one-size-fits-all" solution doesn’t provide a cost-effective answer for all applications.
Third, various LPWA technologies cannot reach maturity at the same pace. NB-IoT achieved stability with the 3GPP Release 13 specification in March 2017. Hence, these technologies have different deployment timelines, maturity levels, and growth rhythms.
Chet Babla believes that the tech industry is often overly optimistic about the speed of wireless technology adoption, yet in the long term, the actual shipment volumes of these technologies tend to fall short of expectations. The ultimate commercial success of any wireless standard lies in its openness. Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and 3G serve as prime examples of open standards triumphing. Initially, these standards lacked clear commercial appeal, but once ecosystems developed and use cases became clearer, their success followed naturally.
He also notes that any open LPWA technology needs over 100 million individual node deployments to reach a self-sustaining critical market size, enabling economies of scale. This mirrors the dynamics of digital ecosystems, where analysts like Richard Windsor argue that an ecosystem needs at least 1 million daily active users to reach critical mass and profitability when scaling to 3 million users. While this isn’t a perfect analogy for LPWA, the principle of critical mass and profitability applies similarly. The 100 million node threshold aligns with the experiences of other wireless technologies.
During his recent visit to China, Chet Babla met with Chinese operators, chipmakers, and vertical IoT users, as well as participating in the GSMA Shanghai Mobile World Congress. Clearly, NB-IoT and Cat-M1 are solidifying their positions as key LPWA technologies, while LoRa holds early commercial appeal. GSMA reported at MWC Shanghai that 37 operators and 27 suppliers worldwide now support cellular LPWA, with 56 active pilot projects covering applications like smart meters, parking solutions, shared bikes, and security panels. Currently, there are nine commercial Cat-M1 or NB-IoT networks globally, supported by seven major carriers.
While these GSMA figures and recent industry announcements are encouraging, Chet Babla is more confident in the future of cellular IoT in China. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology recently issued a policy aiming for 400,000 cellular base stations to support NB-IoT services by the end of 2017, scaling to 1.5 million by 2020. These infrastructure numbers translate to approximately 20 million and 600 million NB-IoT nodes by 2020.
---
**Viewpoint 2: NB-IoT is competing with Cat-M1.**
Chet Babla dismisses this as "fake news," akin to the old VHS vs. Betamax debates. In reality, these two technologies have distinct characteristics and don't overlap significantly.
NB-IoT excels in simple sensor node applications where the "things" are typically stationary, and the data transmitted is intermittent, amounting to no more than tens of bytes per day. Examples include smart parking, smart meters, agricultural sensors, and municipal lighting.
On the other hand, Cat-M1 is ideal for IoT applications requiring higher data rates, mobility, or voice capabilities, such as digital signage, real-time asset tracking, and alarm panels. While there are overlaps in certain use cases, the two technologies complement each other. This was clearly evident in conversations Chet Babla had with operators and infrastructure providers during his recent discussions.
Thus, to address all IoT applications, single-mode and multi-mode cellular LPWA solutions, along with non-cellular LPWA solutions, will coexist.
---
**Point 3: NB-IoT does not have a cost advantage over Cat-M1.**
Most cellular LPWA chip solutions currently available (or under development) are derived from existing higher-spec LTE modem technology (Cat-1, Cat-4), rather than designed specifically for single-mode Cat-M1 or NB-IoT solutions. Additionally, Cat-M1 supports enhanced functionalities compared to NB-IoT (e.g., higher data rates, voice, and mobility), which demands higher processing power and memory requirements than NB-IoT.
Some industries claim that when NB-IoT functionality is part of a Cat-M1 solution, NB-IoT is essentially "free" due to its minimal impact on chip area. This may hold true in some cases, but conversely, **NB-IoT is likely a more cost-effective standard than Cat-M1 due to its lower processing requirements and smaller subset of features, translating to a smaller silicon footprint.**
---
**Point 4: NB-IoT suffers from interoperability issues between equipment and infrastructure.**
Historically, interoperability issues arise from natural timing differences in the software development cycles of equipment and infrastructure vendors. This gap became apparent when some non-backward-compatible changes were introduced into the 3GPP Release 13 specification update in March 2017. However, this issue will resolve itself in the coming months as software deliveries from equipment and infrastructure vendors synchronize. This serves as a good example of how multiple partners collaborate to ensure global interoperability. It does not indicate any lack of robustness in the NB-IoT standard.
It’s worth noting that inconsistencies in vendor development cycles for new or updated standards are not unique to cellular LPWA technology. A major infrastructure provider mentioned that this is a natural phenomenon in the evolution of all new cellular standards and cited recent LTE Class 16 smartphone platform interoperability issues, which did not attract media attention because industry insiders understood this was a normal part of complex, multi-vendor technology development.
---
**Point 5: Cellular LPWA solutions cannot last for 10 years on a single battery.**
Are Cat-M1 and NB-IoT energy-efficient enough to last 10 years? A 3GPP Technical Note (TR45.820) outlines a methodology for calculating Cat-M1 and NB-IoT battery life. Assumptions include receiver, transmitter standby, and deep sleep power consumption, with given power amplifiers and efficiencies, and a 5Wh battery.
The analysis also considers three coverage scenarios: "excellent," "typical," and "poor."
3GPP analysis shows that in "excellent" coverage scenarios with low sensor update rates, battery life is primarily determined by standby and deep sleep power consumption. Under these conditions, NB-IoT can theoretically last over 10 years on a 5Wh battery.
Conversely, in "poor" coverage scenarios (like deep indoors or at the cell edge) or for applications requiring frequent sensor data updates, the receiving and transmitting power consumption dominates, and NB-IoT devices with 5Wh batteries may last less than a year. In such cases, non-cellular LPWA technologies face similar challenges with poor coverage and high update rates.
For reference, typical batteries for these applications might be AA or D-sized lithium batteries, which can easily exceed the 5Wh assumption by 3GPP. A small button lithium battery could theoretically suffice, but about a dozen NB-IoT or Cat-M1 devices would need to connect in parallel to provide the required peak transfer current. It’s worth noting that 3GPP calculations don’t account for self-discharge (approximately 1% per year for lithium batteries) or temperature effects (self-discharge doubles for every 10°C increase). These real-world factors degrade battery life over time. Although NB-IoT is more efficient than Cat-M1 in terms of power consumption, this advantage diminishes in poor coverage areas.
In summary, **cellular LPWA technology can extend battery life beyond 10 years, but endurance depends on multiple variables. Non-cellular LPWA technologies also face limitations in poor coverage and high update rate scenarios. Since different LPWA technologies suit different applications, direct comparisons of battery life are somewhat simplistic.**
---
**Point 6: Cellular LPWA modules cannot cost less than $5.**
If sufficient scale and volume are achieved, economies of scale can drive down costs for any technology. In the traditional cellular M2M market, the price of 2G GPRS modules is now below $5. However, the cellular communications industry has been around for 25 years, with billions of 2G chipsets shipped, pushing prices to maturity. Yet the industry can’t afford to wait another 25 years to benefit from the "Internet of Things" connectivity. Thus, Chet Babla believes that **vertical integration of the LPWA module supply chain is essential to achieve revolutionary but still meaningful price drops.**
Traditional 3G or LTE modules targeting higher specifications and data rates do not drive supply chain vertical integration because end applications like laptops, surveillance cameras, or car connections can absorb higher module costs. For LPWAN’s aggressive pricing goals, Chet Babla argues that chip and module gross margins, along with external SIM components and RF front-end passive components, represent areas where the industry must focus to achieve significant cost reductions. He hopes visionaries will rise to meet this challenge, and ARM is actively exploring ways to support innovators through its partnerships.
Considering that 2G GPRS meets many key IoT requirements (like voice capability, mobility, and mature costs), why isn’t it the best solution for LPWA? Two key reasons stand out: first, 2G bands are a precious resource for operators being reallocated worldwide for higher data rates. Second, 2G technology’s power consumption is less competitive than cellular LPWA, which has dedicated power-saving and discontinuous reception modes.
---
What insights does this offer?
IoT is not a single technology but refers to leveraging appropriate technologies to create viable business models solving real-world problems. For the IoT industry, there’s no one-size-fits-all networking solution, and the sector must embrace this reality.
PAN, LAN, WAN, licensed, and unlicensed connection technologies all need to coexist and complement each other. Claims that "my connection technology is the best" are not only incorrect but also misleading, potentially disrupting the industry’s progression toward vertical markets like utilities, agriculture, logistics, building management, and insurance.
LPWA connectivity will undoubtedly play a crucial role in the broader IoT market. ARM remains committed to providing secure, efficient processors and connectivity solutions to help build a more extensive IoT ecosystem. Click "Read the original" to visit ARM Cordio’s homepage for further details.
---
PWM Controller
Pwm Controller,Home Solar Charge Controller,Pwm Controlador Solar,Wind Solar Charge Controller
GuangZhou HanFong New Energy Technology Co. , Ltd. , https://www.gzinverter.com