5G/NR - Challenges

 

 

 

5G Challenges

In this note, I am going to try to keep track of somes challenges on 5G in terms of technology and business perspective. Not for deep-dive into the details, just tracking high level descriptions on various challenges. (NOTE : I am also tracking high level description on how 5G evolves in terms of deployment and applications with a little bit of positive aspects in another note here).

Reading the dates : Entries marked April 2021 record the early deployment discussion. Commercial SA networks and devices have since expanded. The additions below consider what can still delay a particular investment, rather than treating the original observations as a current market survey. [Reference]

Things to think of

Followings are some of things that popped lately in my mind as 5G challenges. I am NOT trying to say "there are so many issues / challenges with 5G and it will eventually fail". I am a strong believer in the science and engineering, and great human minds. We will eventually see most of the challeges will be cleared. What I am trying to do in this note is to write down those challenges in my mind and in various forums/discussions, and more importantly to show how these challenges are getting resolved.

Is it over-hyped ?   

(Apr 2021) : In any new technologies, there has been a certain level of hypes and I don't think those hypes are intentional or any malignant intentions. But often too much hypes would result in dip trough. Personally, I got the impression that there was hypes in 5G comparing to previous generations.  Most people would recall those statements saying "You can download huge and high quality movie in a few seconds (or even in a fraction of a second)", "A laser pointer like beam would track your mobile devices in realtime whereever you move around", "You can remotely control drones, cars, industrial robots, medical surgery robots as if you manipulates by your own hands" etc. At least for now, I don't think these statement has been realized as many people expected. Technically it is understantable as 5G is still at early phase, but the current state may look a little bit disappointing for many of general public.

Is mmWave performance as good as expected ?

(Apr 2021) : You may have watched many of YouTubes showing near 2Gbps throughputs at many places. Most of those result came from mmWave 5G Cells. Definately it is an amazing technical achievement. But you might have watched other videos complaining about the robustness of the connectivity with mmWave cells, like call drop (or fall back to LTE) when they change the direction or position of the mobile phone just a little bit or walking down the street just a few hundred meters away from the cell site. It seems that implementation of beamforming and beam management with desired quality is not as easy as expected.  ==> this video captures pretty good status of mmWave deployment / challengest as of 2022

Are we getting enough indoor penetration with 5G ?

Even though there were some demonstrations showing pretty good performance from outdoor gNB and indoor reciever, a lot of end users are complaining about the poor indoor user experiences. There are many factors affecting the indoor user experience like the material and thickness of walls, glasses and how many walls the signal has to go through to reach the device etc. By RF common sense, we can easily figure out that outdoor to indoor penetration of 5G/NR would not be as good as legacy technology. Not to say of FR2 which is using extremely higher frequency than the legacy technologies, even common used FR1 frequencies (e.g, FR1 band higher than 3Ghz) is using the higher frequencies than the legacy frequencies. This kind of higher frequency would be the major factors for the poor indoor experience. I personally don't see any easy technical solutions for this. Probably the only solution would be to use indoor small cells... then we have to justify why we should take the indoor small cells when there is low cost/easy-to-setup solution called WiFi.

NOTE (Oct 2026) : The frequency band matters here, not the generation name by itself. NR can also use low-band spectrum. Mid-band and mmWave coverage concerns should not be applied equally to every 5G deployment. [Reference]

Is there any killer APP ?

(Apr 2021) : Up to 4G, I think there had been some killer apps which was well recognized and accepted from the early stage of deployment, but I don't see any appealing applications (or business models) for 5G yet. Why ? There had been a lot of use cases that claimed to be a 5G killer app (e.g, VR/AR, Remote Control, V2X, IoT etc), but I don't see any of those use cases are attracting people as yet. Is it because 5G technology is not mature enough to implement the use cases or those use cases themselves are not so attractive as expected ?

NOTE (Oct 2026) : FWA and differentiated connectivity now provide concrete commercial opportunities. The remaining question is whether a particular service produces sufficient additional value in its intended market. [Reference]

Does the number of sold devices and the deployed carrier indicate the acceptance of 5G ?

(Apr 2021) : Various types of report or press releases numbers showing how many carriers deployed 5G and how many 5G phone are rolling out, trying to hint that 5G is getting well accepted in the market and 5G business would blossom in no time. Would it be really the case ? I think the number itself would be true, but it wouldn't necessarily mean that those numbers are directly associated with the acceptance of 5G in the market.  Almost every network operators wants to show that they are not behind the trend. Large portions of 5G phone buyers are just passive buyers. They just wanted to buy the latest high end phone and all of the highend phone happened to support 5G.

Is 5G Core Network Deployment fast enough ?

(Apr 2021) : A lot of promises that 5G made would not be kept only with Radio Access Network(RAN), it would require the innovations all the data path along the end-to-end. From various reports and statistics, we see how fast the RAN is getting deployed, but we don't see similar reports/satistics showing the progress of 5G Core Network (5G CN) and other backend data path. I think the technical solution to deploy 5G RAN without 5G CN (i.e, NSA : Non-Stand Alone) was a good idea and it might be a very important factors to show such an amazing speed of provisioning 5G service, but it would be a factor that slow down 5G Core Network deployment. Many carriers managed to claim that their network is 5G capable with only RAN investment and then they would wait further until they will be more confident about 5G business model without much investment on 5G Core Deployment.

Good business opportunities for contents or application service provider, but not so lucrative for carriers ?

(Apr 2021) : For every new licensed spectrum, carriers has to invest a lot for the auction. For every new technology (e.g, 3G, 4G, 5G etc) they have to invest a lot for deployment and maintenance. It seems that some network operators start thinking "Will all these investment bring enough return for us ? or we are just paving the road with a lot of investment, but all the drivers are running on the road without paying tolls. See we set up all the infra structures of the mobile network, but now most of voice call, video call, short messages are being provided by somebody else almost for free. Woudn't this repeat in 5G as well ?". You may say "Carriers are still charge a lot for data service", but the carrier may have different opinion.

Why 3GPP is so complex  ?

(Apr 2021) : 5G promised about many applications which might not have been the area of cellular communication (like industrial automation, V2X etc). To expand 5G playground, the technology should accommodate those engineers to 3GPP worlds who was not so familiar with 3GPP. But to be honest, 3GPP would look overwhelming (or itimidating) for a lot of good engineers but not familiar with 3GPP. This can be a huge practical and psychological barrier for many application. Should it be designed in such a complicated way ? You sure that there no simpler way ?

Can 5G win over WiFi  ?

(Apr 2021) : I personally didn't think of this much before. I just thought Cellular and WiFi has its own advantage and doesn't compete much. In some part, it still holds true. But as cellular technology try to expand its application and WiFi tries the same thing as well, I think I see the competition between the two grows stronger especially when WiFi 6 came out with many of the features which used to be the strong points of celluar system and WiFi 7 will be ready in a few years claiming that I would be amount to (or even surpass in some as aspect) the features that seemed to be the unique capability of 5G. Then how 5G can justify on taking 5G instead of WiFi considering the cost, easy of use, easy of deployment etc ? According to this and this statistics, the smartphone sales is about 1.5 billion units per year and the sales of wifi connected devices are over 20 billions per year in the latest year.

NOTE 1 : You may refer to another list of 5G challenges summarized by ABI Research in 5 Beyond The Consumer Market.

NOTE : The additional questions below were added in October 2026. Their importance varies between public networks, private networks and individual markets. The practical responses are engineering considerations, not promises that every deployment will be profitable.

Will the next investment produce enough additional value ?

An operator can carry more traffic without earning much more from each customer. That makes the next investment difficult to justify, especially when existing LTE or 5G NSA already handles the services that customers buy.

The question is what the additional spending changes: lower cost per delivered GB, more sellable capacity, or a service with a paying customer. FWA and differentiated connectivity offer possible returns, but they need their own demand and capacity calculations. A cautious rollout can therefore reflect a weak local business case rather than a technical failure. A practical response is to compare a limited upgrade with a wider deployment before committing the full budget. [Reference]

Is spectrum affordable and predictable enough ?

Buying radio equipment is only part of the investment. Spectrum acquisition, annual fees and licence renewals also consume money. An operator may have suitable technology but too little remaining budget to build the network that uses it.

Uncertain renewal terms also make long-term planning harder. A lower price per MHz does not automatically mean a lower total bill when an operator needs more spectrum. The practical questions are how much usable bandwidth is available, for how long, and at what total cost. Affordable assignments and predictable renewal conditions can reduce this barrier; the answer depends on the local spectrum framework. [Reference]

Can we obtain the sites, power and backhaul ?

A radio plan can identify the right location without making that location available. Operators still need landlord agreements, permits, suitable mounting space and a power connection. A delay in any one of these can delay service.

The site also needs transport capacity towards the core network. Adding radio capacity will not remove congestion in an undersized backhaul link. Fibre construction, leased connectivity and remote-site access can add cost before useful traffic arrives. These dependencies make site reuse and infrastructure sharing worth evaluating. A deployment schedule should include civil works and transport readiness, alongside delivery of the gNB. [Reference]

Does better energy efficiency mean a lower electricity bill ?

5G can use less energy per delivered bit while the network still consumes more electricity overall. More traffic, additional radio layers and more sites can outweigh the efficiency improvement. Operators pay for the total energy consumed.

Low-load periods matter as well as peak throughput. Equipment still needs power when little customer traffic is present, and overlapping network generations add operating costs. Sleep features and retirement of older equipment can help, but their settings must preserve the required coverage and service quality. The useful comparison is annual energy and operating cost at realistic traffic levels, not only peak bits per joule. [Reference]

How long do we have to operate 4G and 5G together ?

Launching 5G SA does not immediately remove the need for LTE and EPC. Existing devices and services still need support. The operator must introduce the new system while keeping voice, messaging and customer sessions working.

The work extends to subscriber data, policy, charging and operational systems. Voice adds another dependency: VoNR needs suitable devices and radio coverage, while EPS fallback can retain a role during migration. These combinations need testing before a broad rollout. A staged migration reduces immediate disruption, but it can prolong the cost of maintaining both systems. The retirement plan is therefore part of the deployment business case. [Reference]

Do the actual devices support the features we want to sell ?

A device labelled 5G does not necessarily support every feature in the network plan. The required band, SA operation and service capabilities must work together. A growing device catalogue does not guarantee that a particular deployment has suitable terminals.

For example, a network feature is difficult to sell when most target customers cannot use it. Device qualification should use the actual models and software versions intended for service. Public SA networks and commercially available devices have expanded substantially since the early rollout period. The remaining question is specific compatibility, availability and replacement cost, rather than a general claim that 5G devices do not exist. [Reference]

Who will integrate and operate the new software systems ?

Installing network functions is only the beginning of operating a software-based 5G system. Teams must configure, monitor and troubleshoot the combined radio, core and computing platform. More configuration choices can make diagnosis harder.

A fault can cross several supplier boundaries, so the support arrangement needs clear ownership. Practical acceptance should include upgrades, rollback and recovery, alongside successful traffic transfer. Integration skills and repeatable operating procedures can be as important to deployment as the equipment price. [Reference]

Can the application meet its latency and reliability targets in production ?

A short radio transmission time does not guarantee a short application response time. Packets also pass through computing and network functions. Queuing, processing and implementation choices can change both delay and its variation.

Industrial buyers need tests under their intended load and operating conditions. An average delay alone can hide occasional late packets that disrupt a control task. Define the measurement endpoints and acceptance limits before the trial. Results from one software-based testbed should not be treated as a limit for every commercial 5G implementation. [Reference]

Is the uplink good enough for the intended application ?

A strong downlink speed test does not establish that the uplink will meet an application requirement. Cameras and live video send substantial traffic towards the network. Device transmit power and uplink coverage can become the limiting factors.

Many TDD deployments allocate more resources to downlink traffic. Adding bandwidth alone may give little benefit when the UE is power-limited. Improving coverage or using suitable FDD resources can help, while some enhancements also require compatible devices. The deployment test should therefore measure sustained uploads at difficult locations. It should not infer camera or industrial performance from a nearby smartphone download test. [Reference]

Who owns cybersecurity and supplier risk after deployment ?

5G security features do not remove the work of securing an actual deployment. Operators must manage configuration, access permissions, software updates and supplier dependencies. An enterprise also needs to know who handles an incident.

Cloud infrastructure and management interfaces add systems that require protection throughout their lifetime. A private network still needs monitoring and maintenance after installation. The contract should identify responsibility for patching, recovery and continued support. Supplier restrictions or an unsupported component can also change the replacement plan. These are deployment and lifecycle costs; they are not evidence that every 5G network is inherently insecure. [Reference]

Can a factory change its network without interrupting production ?

An existing factory already has machines, control systems and established maintenance procedures. Adding 5G must fit that environment. The buyer may reject a technically attractive network if integration requires an unacceptable interruption to production.

A practical assessment includes device interfaces, coexistence with existing networks and responsibility for troubleshooting. A limited deployment can establish those requirements before a wider change. The commercial benefit must include the integration effort, not just the wireless equipment. [Reference]

Why does a successful pilot not always become a large deployment ?

A pilot can prove that a connection works without proving that the complete service is affordable. A wider deployment needs a repeatable solution, available devices and an operating model. Each additional site can introduce different integration requirements.

An enterprise needs a clear use case and a supplier arrangement that supports it over time. Demonstrating a useful business result makes the next decision easier than demonstrating throughput alone. A practical next step is to price the complete rollout and support process while the pilot is still running. [Reference]

  • Readiness is end to end: Spectrum, sites, transport, core, devices and applications must support the intended service together.
  • The comparison is local: Evaluate the proposed improvement against the network and services already available to that customer.
  • Deployment includes continued operation: Include integration, energy, support and migration costs when assessing the expected benefit.

YouTube

3GPP Reference

The sources below cover technical deployment constraints and commercial adoption concerns. They include industry research as well as technical publications. Each entry identifies the portions used for the additions.

  • 5 Beyond The Consumer Market
  • MWC 2026 analysis : S&P Global Market Intelligence - Can the industry sell network experiences? (April 2026); public article
  • Global Spectrum Pricing (2025) : GSMA Intelligence; executive summary and renewal discussion
  • Mobile Policy Handbook (2019) : GSMA; Base Station Siting and Safety, pp. 72-73, and Infrastructure Sharing, pp. 84-87; general deployment considerations, not a statement of current local law
  • Mobile Net Zero 2026 : GSMA; electricity consumption and energy-efficiency discussion
  • ETR, 24 February 2020 : Ericsson - Migration from EPS to 5GS; interworking, subscriber data and services discussion
  • 5G Standalone, December 2025 : GSA; public summary only, not the member report
  • NIST TN 2363 : Software-based 5G Industrial Wireless Private Networks: Challenges and Opportunities for Mission-Critical and Time-Sensitive Applications (February 2026); abstract and deployment/latency sections
  • ETR 9/2025 : Ericsson - Enhancing 5G uplink performance to enable differentiated services; coverage and capacity discussion
  • 5G Security and Resilience : CISA; archived technical risk and security guidance overview, not current policy advice
  • Accelerating the 5G Industrial Revolution (2021) : Capgemini Research Institute; public survey summary, used for integration and adoption concerns, not current adoption percentages