Comparison of NEMO & CNT DTs

WLL RF Optimization Central

Route Map

RX Level (Map)
NEMO Tool CNT Tool

RX Level (Stats)
NEMO TOOL(AVG-58.771 db) CNT TOOL(AVG -63.36 db)

SINR (Map)
NEMO TOOL CNT TOOL

SINR (Stats)
NEMO TOOL (AVG 6.242db) CNT TOOL(AVG 6.63 db)

TX (Map)
NEMO TOOL CNT TOOL

TX Level Stats
NEMO TOOL (AVG -24.12db) CNT TOOL(AVG -20.23 db)

DRC Index (Map)

NEMO TOOL CNT TOOL

DRC(Stats)
NEMO TOOL(AVG 1073.46kbps) CNT TOOL(AVG 1072.06kbps)

10

Summary
NEMO Tool calculated 52 Lac samples in above specific DT Route while as CNT calculated 16 Thousand. NEMO Serving SINR differ with CNT serving SINR in which CNT SINR is showing 3 to 4 db gain while DRC index remains same both in NEMO & CNT !

11

Serving SINR
NEMO TOOL CNT TOOL

12

Serving SINR Stats

NEMO TOOL (Avg 2.64 db) CNT TOOL (Avg 6.2db)

13

Conclusion

There is difference between NEMO and CNT in Serving SINR Parameter while DRC index remains same in both tools. RX level is almost comparable Best SINR showed same in both tools TX also remains same Nemo Calculation were based on more than 100 times more sample count the in CNT (same route and simultaneously measured). CNT log file size is more than 900 Mbytes whereas Nemo size is 22 Mbytes.

14

Thank You !!!

15