LoRa vs LoRaWAN in terms of Range and Throughput

[Bhavit]

I have done the testing of Lora and Lorawan in terms of range and throughput, so in Lora, I am getting more throughput compared to Lorawan.
Is there any difference between them in terms of range and throughput?

[jcaron]

@Bhavit beware that in most regions there are limits on the use of the ISM band/sub-band chosen for LoRa, and you usually can’t send continuously (or you have to check that the channel is available before sending). The exact details vary a lot from region to region, though.

Also throughput will of course vary a lot depending on the day rate (spreading factor/bandwidth). Some modulations are a lot faster than others (at the expense of range, in theory).

[Bhavit]

@bitvijays I have used nano gateway example code where 1st device is configured as gateway and 2nd is configured as Class A device.

LoRaWAN:
I am getting around 76 bytes/s throughput where payload size is 235 bytes and I am sending total 70 packets.

LoRa:
I am getting around 601 bytes/s throughput where payload size is 235 bytes and I am sending 70 packets.

In LoRaWAN Class A has a dedicated feature of (2 seconds) wait for gateway to receive any data from the gateway after sending each packet, which is causing lower throughput. Is there any option by which I can get same throughput as LoRa???

[bitvijays]

Hey @Bhavit Just curious, How did you tested the range and throughput of Lora and Lorawan? What tools/ code have you used? Did you wrote a custom code/ hardware or used the provided functions?