4G LTE module: Quectel EG25-G vs u-blox LARA-R6 - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Martin F
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2022, 07:17:06 pm
content: Hi all,we are designing a product that will use a 4G LTE module (either Cat 1 or Cat 4). As part of this we're looking at two options:1) The Quectel EG25-G:https://www.quectel.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Quectel_EG25-G_LTE_Standard_Specification_V1.3-1.pdf2) The u-blox LARA-R6:https://www.u-blox.com/sites/default/files/LARA-R6_ProductSummary_UBX-20048923.pdfWe wanted to hear if anyone in here have experiences with Quectel modules vs u-blox and have any thoughts/comments on the above two modules vs each other?Thanks!

author: Thomas F
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 20, 2022, 10:29:41 am
content: Hello Martin,1) Quectel is cheap but shows a lack of support, and only provides the module (no sim, no platform, ...).2) U-Blox is new with those LARA-R6 and LARA-R8. They say LARA-R6 is the smallest CAT1 module in the world, which is not true. Sequans' CAT1 module is smaller. Also they don't provide great support for connectivity (for example they don't have eSIM / eUICC / platform)I strongly suggest you have a look at the LTE CAT1 module C10GS of Cavli Wireless (https://www.cavliwireless.com/c-series/c10gs.html). It is Linux-based, have GNSS, eSIM inside, global coverage + platform to manage connectivity & module remotely : in short all you need to connect your end-device to your end-platform.Check our bundle offer here for 0.99 euros / month :https://www.cavliwireless.com/hubble99.html.Contact me if you need any additional detailsThomas FESQUETthomas.fesquet@cavliwireless.com

author: Martin F
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2022, 11:17:03 am
content: Thanks for the tip. I was unable to find details on regulatory certifications and provider approvals - is this something you can let me know where I can find on the site?

author: blopblop
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 21, 2022, 07:14:25 am
content: I have used Quectel BG96 in the past. It was a real pain. The support is not great, the docs have many errors and the firmware has strange behaviors. Just to name one that took a week to find out : when you send a command to send a package, the module will respond "send Ok". As we were in a low power application, we shutdown the module right after. We were loosing 30% of the packages because "send ok" means the BG96 has received the message to be sent, not that the message has been sent over the network.All the team had a bad time working with Quectel.

author: Martin F
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2022, 07:47:56 am
content: Thanks for sharing your experience. Our understanding from Quectel is that they have a fairly large, dedicated support team in Serbia - but I guess you did not experience this as a help in this context. Can you share when you did this work?

author: 48X24X48X
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2022, 01:29:36 pm
content: I used plenty of Quectel modules after testing many other brands in the past 15 years which includes SIMCOM, Cinterion, Sierra Wireless, and uBlox. I even prototype few other less known brands (some which already disappear). I think is probably the best in terms of balance between price and quality+support. I bought the modules from a mix bags of China distributor (which actually they are not supposed to sell to outside of China) and also directly from Quectel. I think Quectel's support is okay as long as you buy from legit channel. They will help you and figure out what goes wrong even for units already deployed out there even all the way to checking their server (I used their Quectel Location services). Documentation is also very good and excellent. Even before I was buying directly from them, there was an instance I was desperately needing the certification test results documents (not just the certificate) and they obliged to help. From there onward, I balanced the purchase ratio and split among them depending on the urgency just a token of appreciation. I really like Sierra Wireless modules but their packaging have a very bad yield during assembly. At first, I thought it was just me not doing a correct design but when I hear from my regular PCBA factory mentioning that even their customer that uses Sierra Wireless have a very low yield. Other than that, I think uBlox have a nice product line-up that maker likes due to it's slim form factor that fits into a *bread boardable* development board but they rarely have global band and they not cheap to begin with. SIMCOM on the other hand, it's a brand that if you are willing to work hard and get your hands dirty, it can be quite rewarding due to the fact their module is among the cheapest around and not too bad in terms of specification. Documentation wise, they are among the worst though.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2025, 10:02:10 pm
content: I'm looking at adding a BG95M3LA-MINIPCIE to a project I'm specing now. If they do what they say they do, the price is really good comparably (by a lot... $26.39 in 100s!).https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/quectel/BG95M3LA-MINIPCIE/13278357Given that these come on a miniPCIe carrier (which is perfect for me since I want to make this functionality optional), I figure worst case is I have to make a drop in carrier for u-blox SARA-R510M8S or other equivalent if something catastrophic happens to the supply chain (with accompanying software changes obviously).Is this a terrible decision now in 2025?

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2025, 11:54:24 pm
content: The Mini-PCIe USB+SIM pinout is quite standard and widely used for a decade now.I've used Huawei ME909s-120 and Mikrotik R11 LTE modems for a few years. They have the same pinout, a compatible connector, to BG95M3LA-MINIPCIE.Unlike WiFi cards, the 4G/LTE/5G modems do not use PCIe, only the USB pins and some additional pins for status LEDs and SIM card connection.For testing such modems, I recommend using theADT-Link WS17USB 2.0 adapter with any Linux machine (via ModemManager). That page also includes the schematic and pinout for the mini-PCIe connector for USB 2.0. Some newer ones may use USB 3.0, which uses four additional pins as usual; for those, useADT-Link WS16.Most of the cheap "mini-PCIe WWAN adapters" at eBay and AliExpress do work for testing, having the same pinout as the USB 2.0 version, but their voltage supplies are often so inefficient the entire card gets very hot very quickly in use; admittedly, I only have tested about a dozen different models. These adapters only contain some bypass capacitors, voltage conversion, and a SIM card slot, and may draw much more current than the standard 500mA limit. However, they have worked well on my HP laptops thus far, even when using quite a lot of radio power (15km away from the mast), although for long-term use one might adjust the WS17 voltage level to optimal for ones particular modem, by replacing a resistor.If you intend to maintain this for years to come, then do be prepared topossiblyadjusting the design from mini-PCIe connectors to M.2 at some point. It is not clear yet which way the best-bang-for-buck LTE modems will use in the future, in a few years. In any case, whichever connector is used, it will almost certainly use USB data pins to communicate with your host, and requires you to have a SIM card slot on your board.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 02, 2025, 12:13:06 am
content: I will probably end up using the UART instead of the USB since this thing will be talking to another microcontroller on the main board. It sounds like both work from the design guide.It's funny, when you look at other card edge modules from other companies it seems like a bunch of them actually use the same Quectel chip.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 02, 2025, 02:56:26 am
content: Modems with UART via mini-PCIe are relatively rare, though. All I have are USB-only. I suspect only modems specifically targeted towards "IoT" stuff have those.Mini-PCIe ones are relatively common on router/switch boards, for example those from Mikrotik. They only support USB, not UARTs. So, I would seriously consider a microcontroller with a native USB host (or OtG) port.Another possibility would be to use a pair of UARTs, and an additional MCU to interface to the modem itself. With a standard SIM card interface on the main board, exposed to the MCU/modem, too. The idea is to have two completely separate UART streams, one for commands and status, and the other for data. (This is what the USB interfaces have, as well.)As each interface MCU is paired to its own modem, all you need is a control protocol that can handle all the features you need, with a versioned handshake so you can upgrade support for never versions of the protocol separately keeping backwards compatibility, with the modem-specific stuff each that particular MCU. When you change modems, you change MCUs (or at least modify the modem-facing part of its firmware). With a single UART connection, it is the data-command interleaving that tends to cause bugs and instability. Splitting complex stuff into simpler, separate parts, ends up being both easier to implement and maintain, and more robust in use, in my experience. But others obviously disagree, and prefer to stuff everything into a single microcontroller with every single peripheral imaginable.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 02, 2025, 03:38:28 am
content: You have to register to get the AT commands and hardware design guide, which sucks. But it says:UART Interfaces⚫ Baud rate can reach up to 230400 bps, 115200 bps by default⚫ Used for AT command communication and data transmissionUSB Interface⚫ Compliant with USB 2.0 specification (slave only)⚫ Used for AT command communication, data transmission, GNSSNMEA sentence output, software debugging and firmware upgradeThat appears to imply that the GNSS only works over USB, but this doc says there is a command to set the output location to UART:https://www.dragino.com/downloads/downloads/datasheet/other_vendors/BG95/Software/Quectel_BG95&BG77&BG600L_Series_GNSS_Application_Note_V1.2.pdf]https://www.dragino.com/downloads/downloads/datasheet/other_vendors/BG95/Software/Quectel_BG95&BG77&BG600L_Series_GNSS_Application_Note_V1.2.pdf"AT+QGPSCFG="outport"[,<outport>[,<baud_rate>]]"So I think that particular module has everything I need over UART.I guess we will see.