AT&T has announced that it's lit up 4G LTE service in "several" new markets today, including 20 highlighted in today's news release. Check out the full list after the break.

Today's new additions include — 

  • El Centro, Calif.
  • Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, Calif.
  • Jasper, Ind.
  • Cedar Rapids, Iowa
  • Danville, Ky.
  • Richmond, Ky.
  • Somerset, Ky.
  • Cadillac, Mich.
  • Niles-Benton Harbor, Mich.
  • Tunica, Miss.
  • East Liverpool, Ohio
  • Erie, Pa.
  • New Castle. Pa.
  • Aguadilla-Isabela-San Sebastian, P.R.
  • Fajardo, P.R.
  • Ponce, P.R.
  • Barre, Vt.
  • Burlington, Vt.
  • Wheeling, W.Va.
  • La Crosse, Wis.

If you're seeing AT&T service for the first time today, shout out in the comments.


Reader comments

AT&T lights up new LTE markets


I'll be leaving Tmo in a couple of weeks for AT&T because I need better coverage than what I'm getting from Tmo.

Sent from my Note 3 rockin Jelly Bean 4.3

I get to leave Sprint in June and this is the first time that I see an LTE rollout area that I live in. I think going from an average of less than 1 mbps to LTE is going to make it all that much better. Plus I will be off contract so I will end up paying about $15 less per line than I am paying now. June will be a great month.

My home internet its about 1 Mbps, but my AT&T LTE is 20+ Mbps. I wish I could have unlimited LTE, then I'd use it instead of my home internet :P

Posted via the awesome Nexus 7

I wonder if we will ever get to the point where wireless ISPs become mainstream alternatives for wired ISPs.

I doubt it, especially with the huge push for fiber cable rollout here. Mobile data has a lot longer to go until it can match fiber in speed or low latency.

Posted from my Nexus 5

Not very likely. You can only cram so much information into limited bandwidth. Having so many people using mobile data services for regular internet service would cripple the system.

As at&t expands their LTE imprint, will their network slow down as VZW's has, or is their lte tech used differently?

Posted via Android Central best phone available: moto x

I would imagine that each area is dependent on concentration of LTE users. More and more phones are LTE ready so each area is getting more saturated. I do not believe the wider their LTE footprint, the slower the speeds. This is the same as Verizon. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

I agree. The big problem for Verizon is that in more populated areas, the 700MHz band they use can't handle all the people. That's why in more populated areas they're rolling out higher frequencies. More room for people, less congestion.

Where I live, I see anywhere from 6-10mbit from Verizon, and when I'm close to a tower (-75db or better) I have seen as high as 44mbit down and 12mbit up.

The problem is the amount of backhaul going to the tower, VZW went years with a very small amount of backhaul at their towers because the 3G is so slow it didn't need much, now as all their customers get LTE phones and start downloading faster the slow fiber or copper connection underground to the tower gets bottlenecked. At&t on the other hand has had experience with data hungry iPhone use since 2007 and they stay on top of how much backhaul each tower needs, plus they use QOS to slow the unlimited users so they can't wreak havoc on the speeds, VZW on the other hand is barred from throttling their speeds.

I'm don't think the iPhone has anything to do with that, since it didn't even have LTE until the iPhone 5 which was released in late 2012.

Posted from my Nexus 5

The point he was making was that AT&T had the iPhone exclusively for years and it absolutely crushed their network. They had to address the problem by adding tons of back end capacity to their towers, before any phones had LTE. So as AT&T rolls out LTE their towers already have had the back haul addressed so it will not be as negatively impacted as Verizon's LTE is in high user density areas.

I live in San Diego and can say from doing many speed tests side by side that AT&T almost always beats Verizon on LTE (and absolutely destroys it on 3G). I would venture to guess that there are as many AT&T users in this area as there are Verizon so user density should be the same. In time I am sure they will all have very similar speeds and capacities, but AT&T will always win when you fall off of the LTE because HSPA+ is far better than CDMA for 3G data.

Vermont has had LTE on fir the past 2-3 months now. Great coverage and speeds seem to be good 90% of the time! :D Loving the upgrades.

My area in northern westchester county NY(north of White Plains) has lit up LTE in the past 2-3 months as well. Not all towers, but they seem to be lighting up more LTE over the past few months.

Really jasper Indiana? The whole 5,000 people that live there will be thrilled lol

Posted via Android Central App

Excuse me sir but 5,001 because I'm moving there and yes we're rockin 4G LTE.

Sent from my Note 3 rockin Jelly Bean 4.3

Because small towns shouldn't get good things like LTE

Posted from my newly Kit Katted Droid Ultra

Not saying that but a town of 70,000 should get it before a town of 5,000

Posted via Android Central App

The 2 towers they had to upgrade get done a heck of a lot faster than the 500 in ny

Sent from my Spark enabled SprinT Mobile Note 4. Why yes I am from the future...

So sad that Columbus, Ga will never get LTE because Imo of the city officials here and there's rural cities here in Ga with it. Smh

Posted via Android Central App

Wait, what? Columbus has no LTE? My town has 1/10th the population, and yet I have AT&T LTE even outside in more rural areas.

Posted from my Nexus 5

2 months later and here I sit looking at LTE on my phone as I type this, not sure how much coverage there is but its here now at least somewhat. I am currently at work, downtown Columbus so not sure if I will have LTE when I get home in North Cols but at least they have started.

I wonder how long AT&T's going to keep ignoring central PA. Have a crap ton of people there - more than some of these podunk places - plus Penn State in the middle of the state. They keep expanding all around it but ignoring that area.

Meanwhile, Verizon's had that area blanketed in LTE for years.

What gives, AT&T?

So does sprint

Sent from my Spark enabled SprinT Mobile Note 4. Why yes I am from the future...

They could have gotten you covered if good ol Randall S. hadn't blown 4 billion in cash when the deal with T-Mobile went belly up.

Posted via Android Central App

I just moved from T-Mobile and getting 30Mb down to AIO and throttled to 4Mb. The difference is barely noticeable for day to day use. There is not much you can do to saturate a 4Mb connection let alone a 30Mb one.
If I didn't have home internet (and I received T Mobile data at home) then the LTE connection and unlimited data would be nice. Otherwise, that data speed isn't important yet.

Posted via Android Central App

Very true. Most LTE networks are already fast enough for me. I want coverage over speed.

Posted via Android Central App

I can confirm Wheeling, W.Va., has the 4G lights on — two years and three months after one of the AT&T store reps swore up and down that "it'll be here in two months, tops."

Your picture is absolutely hilarious, lol.

Posted from my "Gift from God" Note 3, my "God-Given" iPad Mini 2, or my "Risen" Samsung Chromebook.

I am in West Texas and get around 20 mb and it is very stable and reliable but the voice calls suck big time. Thank goodness for SMS or I would ditch AT&T in a heartbeat.

Posted via Android Central App