logo
Starlink vs. T-Mobile Home Internet: Clash of the Broadband Disruptors

Starlink vs. T-Mobile Home Internet: Clash of the Broadband Disruptors

Yahoo16-02-2025

Just recently, T-Mobile made headlines by announcing its partnership with Starlink's satellite internet service for its mobile plans. But in terms of broadband, how do these providers compare? What makes Starlink and T-Mobile Home Internet solid options for rural communities? One word: availability. Unlike most cable and fiber internet service providers, Starlink and T-Mobile generally offer extensive coverage throughout the country.
CNET recommends Starlink over T-Mobile Home Internet, here's why. Starlink's satellite internet is available virtually everywhere, even on the go. This is particularly convenient for rural Americans that often have limited options for broadband. In other words, accessibility is everything. T-Mobile is the leading 5G Home Internet provider in the country, yet for many rural Americans, you may find yourself on T-Mobile's long waitlist (currently sitting at over a million people in queue) to sign up for service. Starlink ditched it's nationwide waitlist in 2023, but it's reported that several cities could still be waiting to sign up for service. Service ranges from $120 to as much as $250 monthly -- and that's not including the steep up-front costs of equipment. T-Mobile Home Internet, on the other hand, is significantly cheaper than Starlink.
Both providers offer maximum speeds of over 200 megabits per second with unlimited data and latency low enough to support online gaming. T-Mobile Home Internet happens to come at a much lower price than Starlink and regularly offers perks and deals, making it the better choice in areas where the two ISPs are available.
CNET's individual reviews of each provider further that notion. T-Mobile Home Internet scored a 7.4 out of 10, one of the highest ratings out of all 40-plus ISPs CNET has reviewed. (Verizon Fios has the best overall score at 7.6.) Starlink, on the other hand, earned a 6.5, well below T-Mobile Home Internet but still higher than competing satellite internet providers Hughesnet (6) and Viasat (6.1).
As always, it's important to examine the fine print to decide which service is ultimately best for your home. Here's the full rundown of everything Starlink and T-Mobile.
Starlink offers multiple plan options depending on whether you need fixed or mobile internet service. Fixed home internet service comes down to either "standard" or "priority" data. Standard is the cheapest option at $120 a month for expected speeds ranging from 25 to 100 megabits per second. Priority service offers a higher, more consistent upload and download speed range (40 to 220Mbps), at least until you've reached the data limit. After that, your service is bumped to standard for the remainder of the billing cycle.
In addition to its roaming plan, T-Mobile Home Internet recently introduced new plans offering faster speeds than its Home Internet and Home Internet Plus plans, which only have a single speed tier. If you're just interested in home internet, T-Mobile Home is half the price of Starlink's cheapest plan (and even cheaper for qualifying T-Mobile voice customers) and has a higher anticipated speed range. Here's a look at each provider's plans.
As mentioned above, T-Mobile Home Internet is half the cost of Starlink's cheapest plan, starting at $50 per month compared to $120 with Starlink Standard. Plus, a $15 discount is available to qualifying T-Mobile voice customers, bringing the monthly rate down even further.
There are no set price increases with T-Mobile Home Internet, and the provider is currently running a unique 'price lock,' offering to pay your final bill if the monthly rate ever increases.
Likewise, there are no set price increases with Starlink, but the monthly home internet rate has fluctuated in the short time since the service has been available (in fairness, T-Mobile Home Internet rates have shifted between $50 and $60 multiple times). Starlink's home internet plan, the most suitable for everyday home internet use, runs $120 per month.
For a priority data connection with a faster speed range and better speed consistency during periods of network congestion, Starlink home internet will run you $140 to $500 per month depending on your chosen data allotment of 40GB, 2TB or 5TB. I would probably pass on the 40GB option, but 2TB is plenty of data and more than the average household will use in a month.
Read more: My T-Mobile Home Internet Experience: 5 Things I Love and a Few Things I Could Do Without
Starlink and T-Mobile Home Internet plans advertise an expected speed range, meaning the maximum speeds a home receives will vary based on location, network congestion and other factors. T-Mobile Home Internet's speed range is higher than Starlink (87 to 415Mbps versus 25 to 100 or 40 to 220Mbps), but that doesn't guarantee it to be the faster provider.
T-Mobile Home Internet estimates that '25% of our customers see speeds below and 25% see speeds above' the 133 to 415Mbps range, according to the provider's FAQ page. The speeds you get with T-Mobile Home Internet will depend on your proximity to a mobile tower and the number of nearby customers who rely on the T-Mobile network for home internet, contributing to network congestion. In some cases, T-Mobile will lean on its 4G LTE network to deliver home internet, which can result in speeds slower than the advertised speed range.
Starlink says that 'a majority of customers [experience] speeds over 100Mbps.' Like with T-Mobile Home Internet, Starlink's available speeds will vary by location and network congestion, but Starlink is more transparent about what speeds you can expect in different parts of the US, as displayed in the map above. With every new Starlink launch, maximum available speeds and resistance to network congestion could continue to improve.
Those with priority data are less vulnerable to slowed speeds during periods of high activity. Starlink's Fair Use Policy states, 'Priority data is given network precedence over Standard and Mobile data, meaning users will experience faster and more consistent download and upload speeds.'
T-Mobile Home Internet doesn't offer standard versus priority service tiers, so everyone is at the same mercy of the network's capacity and capabilities.
Latency, or the time it takes your connection to send data back and forth, is notoriously high with traditional, geostationary satellite internet services, rendering online gaming and other tasks next to impossible.
Starlink and its network of low-orbiting satellites drastically reduce the time it takes to send data from the sky to your home and back. Advertised latency for Starlink internet is between 25 and 60 milliseconds, a significant improvement over Hughesnet or Viasat (which can hit 400 ms or higher) and low enough to support online gaming.
T-Mobile Home Internet signals have a shorter distance to travel, and as a result, expected latency ranges are lower than Starlink at around 16 to 36 ms (24 to 40 when relying on its 4G LTE network).
Still, latency from either provider is low enough that you likely wouldn't notice a difference between Starlink and T-Mobile Home Internet. Both ISPs have a latency range that will comfortably support online gaming, so don't let latency influence your decision too much on Starlink versus T-Mobile Home Internet.
Speeds and latency are a toss-up between Starlink and T-Mobile Home Internet, but the latter has a clear advantage when it comes to equipment and accompanying fees.
There are no equipment fees, upfront or ongoing, with T-Mobile Home Internet. Your equipment arrives with free, two-day shipping and setup is simple -- just plug in your router, then create your Wi-Fi network (and don't forget to take these steps to secure it).
Starlink recently hiked its equipment purchase fee to $349 in most locations but may run as much as $100 more (or less) in other markets. Equipment fees are due at the time of your order.
That's a huge upfront cost compared with T-Mobile Home Internet. On top of that, a shipping and handling fee of around $20 may apply. Equipment is included at no extra cost for T-Mobile Home Internet, just look out for that $35 activation fee when you begin service.
Despite the shipping fee, it will probably take longer to get your equipment than T-Mobile Home Internet -- up to two weeks. The setup appears to be fairly straightforward (check it out in the video below), but it's still going to be more involved than T-Mobile Home Internet.
Nothing really to move the needle one way or the other here. Neither provider enforces data caps or requires a contract for service.
Granted, Starlink has its Priority plan with varying amounts of data, but there is still no cap on your total usage. Once the priority data pool is depleted, customers fall to the Standard and still unlimited data plan.
Choosing an internet provider starts with what's available in your area. Starlink has the availability advantage over T-Mobile Home Internet and basically every other nonsatellite provider.
According to the most recent Federal Communications Commission data, Starlink is available to 99.7% of US households. A few pockets across the US aren't yet serviceable for Starlink, the biggest areas that lack availability are in west-central New Mexico and along the Virginia-West Virginia border. For the most part, Starlink is immediately available everywhere else.
T-Mobile Home Internet's availability has rapidly increased, and there's no reason to expect the ISP will slow down anytime soon. Still, nationwide availability sits at just under 60% as of June 2024, per the most recent FCC data. Coverage is particularly low in the western states of Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming -- states where Starlink indicates its fastest speeds are available.
Starlink booted it's nationwide waitlist in 2023, but select cities may still be waiting for service. T-Mobile's 5G Home internet, on the other hand, has over a million people currently in the queue.
Even in areas largely serviceable for T-Mobile Home Internet, availability can vary by address and the current network capacity. As a result, home internet service may not be available, even if you can get 5G on your phone.
Along the lines of availability, Starlink also offers Roam internet with service intended for 'RVs, nomads and campers' that allows you to take your internet connection essentially anywhere. Service starts at $50 to $165 a month for standard unlimited data, while priority data plans range from $250 to $1,000. The Roam Unlimited plan recently increased from $150 to $165 a month, but I'd say the added perks are worth the extra cost. In addition, Starlink also introduced a mini satellite dish that is best suited for travelers. Service starts at $50 or $165 monthly; this does not include the upfront equipment fee of $499.
T-Mobile Home Internet also launched a roaming plan of its own, T-Mobile Home Internet Away. At $110 a month for 200GB or $160 for unlimited data, the monthly rate is more in line with Starlink, although going with T-Mobile will save you a good bit on equipment costs.
Both providers are fairly new to the home internet market, so there's limited historical data tracking customer satisfaction trends from Starlink or T-Mobile Home Internet. But both seem to be off to a good start.
In its third year to include T-Mobile Home Internet in its annual report and second year to distinguish fiber from nonfiber providers, the American Customer Satisfaction Index gave the ISP a score of 76 out of 100. The score, a three-point increase year over year, was well above the average for nonfiber providers (68) and T-Mobile took the top spot in the category.
Starlink isn't included in ACSI data, but an Ookla Speedtest Intelligence report from the first quarter of 2023 gives insight into customer reception and satisfaction. (Ookla is owned by the same parent company as CNET, Ziff Davis.) Data from the report shows that Starlink had a significantly higher Net Promoter Score (a study of how likely a customer is to recommend a service) than the averaged score from all other ISPs despite having slower median download speeds. Starlink outperformed other ISPs exceptionally well in nonmetropolitan settings, which makes sense as the service is geared toward rural internet users.
Since entering the broadband space, Starlink and T-Mobile Home Internet have improved high-speed availability and connectivity, particularly in areas where options have long been (and still are) highly limited.
Both providers provide significant upgrades in speed and reliability compared with other rural internet services, but I recommend Starlink as it boasts wider availability. However, if given the option of the two, go with T-Mobile Home Internet. T-Mobile Home Internet is considerably cheaper than Starlink, upfront and month to month, while service is potentially faster and easier to get started.
T-Mobile Home Internet isn't available everywhere. In areas where T-Mobile Home Internet doesn't yet reach, Starlink is likely to be the best option for high-speed internet compared with geostationary satellite internet (Hughesnet, Viasat) or DSL internet.
Starlink and T-Mobile Home Internet match up fairly evenly regarding speed, data caps and contracts. Starlink's main advantage over T-Mobile Home Internet is availability, as the satellite ISP is available nationwide, whereas T-Mobile Home Internet currently covers just over half of US households.
Where both providers are available, T-Mobile Home Internet will be the cheaper option. Service starts at half the cost of Starlink's cheapest plan, and there are no equipment fees, saving customers $349 or possibly more in upfront costs compared with Starlink.
Starlink's Standard home internet service advertises a speed range of 25 to 100Mbps or 40 to 220Mbps, depending on your chosen service tier. T-Mobile Home Internet's new plans offer a slightly faster download speed range, 87 to 318Mbps or 133 to 415Mbps.
Location, network congestion and other factors impact actual speeds from both providers, so Starlink may be faster in some locations while T-Mobile Home Internet is faster in others.
Starlink's Priority plan could deliver faster speeds and better reliability by giving users network precedence over Standard users, eliminating or mitigating slowed speeds due to network congestion. T-Mobile Home Internet doesn't offer a similar service tier, so customers may be more likely to experience speed issues during peak usage times or in areas with many users relying on the network.
Not for home internet. Just recently, T-Mobile announced it's partnership with Starlink to expand its mobile connectivity to remote locations beyond the reach of T-Mobile's network. SpaceX launched the first set of satellites for T-Mobile use earlier this year.
Starlink and T-Mobile Home Internet are less susceptible to service disruptions due to bad weather than traditional, geostationary satellite internet service. Still, heavy cloud coverage, rain or other severe weather conditions can interfere with Starlink signals. Additionally, snow or ice accumulation on the satellite dish could impact service.
Internet signals from T-Mobile Home Internet have a shorter distance to travel and are far less susceptible to service disruptions during bouts of bad weather.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Fed seen on track to resume rate cuts after inflation, job market data
Fed seen on track to resume rate cuts after inflation, job market data

Yahoo

time19 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Fed seen on track to resume rate cuts after inflation, job market data

By Ann Saphir (Reuters) -The Federal Reserve's path to interest rate cuts starting in September appeared to widen on Thursday, after a pair of government reports pointed to cooler inflation and signs of potential weakening in the labor market. U.S. producer prices advanced 2.6% in May from a year earlier, after rising 2.5% in April, the Labor Department reported. Taken together with tamer-than-expected increases in the Consumer Price Index in May, economists estimated that inflation by the Fed's preferred gauge of underlying price pressures, the core Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index, likely rose in line with the Fed's 2% goal last month. Economists still expect the Trump administration's tariffs to push up prices and lift inflation later this year, but "the near-term trend remains favorable, enabling the (Fed) to signal next week that it still intends to begin easing policy again later this year," economists at Pantheon Macroeconomics wrote. They estimate that core PCE rose by just 0.12% in May from April, based on the latest PPI and CPI data. Economists at other Wall Street firms issued similar estimates. The Fed is nearly universally expected to leave its policy rate in the 4.25%-4.50% range at its June 17-18 meeting. Futures that settle to the Fed's policy rate show traders now expect a quarter-percentage-point reduction by September, with another such move likely in October. Before Thursday's data, traders had expected the Fed to wait until December to deliver a second rate cut. The U.S. central bank cut rates three times in 2024. A separate Labor Department report on Thursday showed initial weekly claims for jobless benefits held steady at a seasonally adjusted 248,000 for the week ended June 7, while continuing claims jumped to 1.951 million, their highest level since November 2021 and a sign that it is getting harder for unemployed workers to find a new job. "Americans, especially recent graduates, are worried about how hard it is to find a job," said Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union. "If layoffs worsen this summer, it will heighten fears of a recession and consumer spending pullback." Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

U.S. Steel shares slip as Nippon Steel faces Trump's hurdle over control
U.S. Steel shares slip as Nippon Steel faces Trump's hurdle over control

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

U.S. Steel shares slip as Nippon Steel faces Trump's hurdle over control

(Reuters) -Shares of U.S. Steel dipped in premarket trading after a Nippon Steel executive told the Japanese Nikkei newspaper that its planned acquisition of the company required "a degree of management freedom" to go ahead, after President Donald Trump said he would exercise "total control" over the U.S. steelmaker. The comments signal that last-minute discussions continue regarding the structure of the deal, which was opposed by then-U.S. President Joe Biden and Trump when it was first proposed. Trump said on Thursday that the U.S. will have "a golden share" in U.S. Steel. "It's 51% ownership by Americans," Trump said while speaking to reporters at the White House. He did not provide details on how the arrangement would be structured. The $14.9 billion deal was first announced in December 2023 to opposition across the U.S. political spectrum, and has run a long, uncertain route in the year-and-a-half since. U.S. Steel shares fell 4% in premarket trading on Friday. Trump's public comments, ranging from welcoming a simple "investment" in U.S. Steel by the Japanese firm to floating a minority stake for Nippon Steel, have created confusion. Last month, Trump told reporters the deal still lacked his final approval, leaving unresolved whether he would allow Nippon Steel to take ownership. Sign in to access your portfolio

Factory jobs aren't the future working Americans want
Factory jobs aren't the future working Americans want

The Hill

time29 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Factory jobs aren't the future working Americans want

Undaunted by his predecessor's failure to spark a manufacturing renaissance, President Trump also dreams of reindustrializing America. He won't succeed either, because no president has the power to undo a half-century of post-industrial evolution. Why have our two oldest presidents fixated on 'bringing back' factory jobs? Both grew up in the '50s, when the United States bestrode a war-ravaged world like an industrial colossus. But the answer isn't just nostalgia for a lost 'golden age.' There's also a pervasive feeling that our country owes a promissory note to working families hit hard by deindustrialization. The disappearance of manufacturing jobs with decent pay and benefits — traditionally their ticket from high school to the middle class — has undermined their living standards and social standing. Since 1971, the share of Americans who live in lower-income households has increased, reports the Pew Research Center: 'Notably, the increase in the share who are upper income was greater than the increase in the share who are lower income. In that sense, these changes are also a sign of economic progress overall.' The emergence of a highly educated upper middle class, however, is scant consolation to economically insecure working families. This divergence in the economic prospects of college and non-college workers is at the root of today's working-class revolt against political elites here and across Europe. Populists insist that the cure for economic inequality is more factory jobs. But is this really what working Americans want? Urged on by progressives, President Biden spent trillions to rebuild the economy 'from the middle out,' shelved trade in favor of tariffs and industrial policy, and tried to break up Big Tech companies that have supplanted yesterday's industrial giants. Yet Bidenomics delivered only marginal net gains in production jobs. President Trump thinks he can do better by taxing imports so much that manufacturers will be forced to locate production here lest they lose access to America's huge consumer market. Both approaches gloss over the fact that the U.S. still has a healthy manufacturing sector — in 2023, it was the world's second largest after China in terms of output. What's changed is that productivity gains and automation have combined to shrink factory employment. Since 1980, the share of U.S. workers in manufacturing has steadily declined to just over 8 percent. This trend away from labor-intensive production won't be reversed. The only way a high-wage country like ours can stay competitive in manufacturing is to make our factories more efficient. Meanwhile, nearly 80 percent of Americans make their living in service-oriented jobs. The Economist notes that the manufacturing wage premium is falling, and there are lots of jobs with decent pay available to workers without degrees in skilled trades, repair and maintenance, health care and tech-related fields. The digital economy, especially, has become a prodigious source of good jobs and careers for workers on either side of the diploma divide. A new analysis by my Progressive Policy Institute colleague Michael Mandel finds that, since 2019, employment in the tech/info/ecommerce sector — which encompasses broadband, cloud computing, software and data centers as well as online retail — has risen by 18 percent, compared to a 4 percent gain in the rest of the private sector. The average weekly pay is 47 percent higher than in other private sector jobs. Given these shifts in the locus of opportunity for working Americans, Trump's inflationary tariffs make no economic sense. They're best understood as reparations for past economic injuries suffered by his blue-collar base. Yet non-college Americans don't seem eager to return to assembly-line work. Asked in a PPI poll where in today's economy they see the best career opportunities for their children, only 13 percent picked manufacturing, while 44 percent chose 'the communications/digital economy, such as writing code, managing data or e-commerce.' Democrats should leave the smokestack reveries to Trump and the populist left and offer frustrated working families something different: A positive vision for how they can flourish in post-industrial America. Their top economic priority is getting the cost of living down. Perversely, Trump's tariffs do just the opposite. Democrats should offer full-throated opposition to protectionism and work to dismantle tariffs on U.S. friends and allies. They should also get out of their defensive crouch on trade. In a supreme irony, Trump's trade wars are making Americans free traders again. Not only are his tariffs unpopular, but voters now overwhelmingly say that trade improves their quality of life. Putting working families first also means cutting regressive taxes on work, fighting exclusionary zoning that drives housing prices out of reach and breaking up concentrated markets like food processing, ticketing and hospitals and health care providers to expand consumer choice and drive prices down. The centerpiece of a new Democratic offer to working families should be a new national commitment to guaranteeing 'high skills for all.' Non-college Americans, a majority of the electorate, need a more robust alternative to college: A post-secondary system of work-study opportunities that enable young people to get in-demand skills, credentials and work experience quickly and affordably. Key features of this twin-track approach to upward mobility include dramatically ramping up apprenticeships, eliminating degree requirement for all but highly technical jobs, expanding 'workforce Pell Grants' for high-quality training programs, creating work-study opportunities for all high school students and supporting innovative 'apprenticeship degrees' that enable people to earn money while earning degrees. President Trump isn't wrong that blue-collar workers have borne the brunt of deindustrialization. But his promise of a factory job boom is Fool's Gold. Instead, Democrats should offer working families a new deal that equips them to compete for the jobs that define America's future, not its past. Will Marshall is the founder and president of the Progressive Policy Institute.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store