## 4 Results and Discussion
Macro cells generally possess a larger coverage area compared to micro cells, requiring base stations to transmit signals over greater distances to cover equivalent regions. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Model** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**PL [dB] at R = 100 m**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**PL [dB] at R = 500 m**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**PL [dB] at R = 1000 m**} \\  & **28** & **38** & **60** & **75** & **28** & **38** & **60** & **75** & **28** & **38** & **60** & **75** \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{10}{c}{Urban Micro Environment} \\ \hline
5 GCM-SC LOS & 106.7 & 108.6 & 112.6 & 114.5 & 119.2 & 121.9 & 125.9 & 127.8 & 125.2 & 127.8 & 131.8 & 133.7 \\ \hline
5 GCM-OS LOS & 104.2 & 106.0 & 109.9 & 111.9 & 115.6 & 118.3 & 123.3 & 124.2 & 121.1 & 123.8 & 127.7 & 129.7 \\ \hline
3 GPP-SC LOS & 108.2 & 110.9 & 114.9 & 116.8 & 122.2 & 124.8 & & & & & \\  & 128.8 & 130.8 & 128.4 & 131.1 & 135.1 & 136.9 & & & & & \\ \hline mmMAGIC-SC LOS & 104.8 & 107.0 & 111.1 & 113.1 & 116.9 & 119.7 & 123.9 & 125.9 & 122.6 & 125.1 & 129.6 & 131.8 \\ \hline
5 GCM-SC NLOS & 134.2 & 136.9 & 140.8 & 142.8 & 155.2 & 157.9 & 161.9 & 163.8 & 164.7 & 167.3 & 171.3 & 173.2 \\ \hline
5 GCM-OS NLOS & 127.3 & 129.8 & 133.9 & 136.0 & 146.7 & 149.3 & 153.3 & 155.3 & 156.4 & 157.9 & 161.9 & 163.8 \\ \hline
3 GPP-SC NLOS & 126.9 & 129.7 & 133.9 & 136.0 & 150.4 & 153.2 & 157.2 & 159.4 & 160.8 & 163.7 & 167.8 & 169.9 \\ \hline mmMAGIC-SC NLOS & 159.7 & 162.4 & 166.4 & 168.3 & 189.6 & 192.3 & 196.2 & 198.2 & 203.4 & 205.6 & 209.6 & 211.5 \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{10}{c}{**Urban Macro Environment**} \\ \hline
5 GCM LOS & 106.1 & 108.9 & 112.9 & 114.5 & 119.6 & 122.2 & 126.2 & 128.2 & 125.5 & 128.2 & 132.1 & 134.1 \\ \hline
3 GPP LOS & 105.9 & 108.5 & 112.5 & 114.4 & 120.5 & 123.2 & 127.2 & 129.1 & 127.0 & 129.7 & 133.7 & 135.6 \\ \hline
5 GCM NLOS & 129.2 & 132.0 & 136.0 & 137.9 & 19.3 & 152.0 & 155.9 & 157.9 & 158.3 & 160.9 & 164.9 & 166.8 \\ \hline
3 GPP NLOS & 115.7 & 118.3 & 122.3 & 124.3 & 141.8 & 144.4 & 148.4 & 150.3 & 153.4 & 156.0 & 159.9 & 161.9 \\ \hline \multicolumn{10}{c}{**Rural Macro Environment**} \\ \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**R = 500 m**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**R = 1000 m**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**R = 2000 m**} \\ \hline
3 GPP LOS & 120.9 & 123.6 & 127.5 & 129.5 & 127.7 & 130.3 & 134.3 & 136.2 & 135.2 & 137.9 & 141.8 & 143.8 \\ \hline
3 GPP NLOS & 136.5 & 139.1 & 143.1 & 145.0 & 147.9 & 150.6 & 154.6 & 156.5 & 159.5 & 162.1 & 166.1 & 168.0 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Path Loss of UMi, UMa and RMa environments at 28 GHz, 38 GHz, 60 GHz and 75 GHz. By placing the antenna at a considerable distance from the ground, signals can traverse longer distances and cover wider areas. Nevertheless, signal loss can occur in both cell site types due to interference and obstructions, with the extent of loss contingent on the specific deployment and environmental conditions. Therefore, 5 GCM and 3 GPP models are considered to be optimal path-loss models in urban micro and macro, rural macro environments at an optimal distance of 150 m and 300 m, and 1000 m, respectively. From the simulation results, the advantages and disadvantages of each path-loss model are listed in Table 6.