Unicast Video Accounts for Most of the Internet Bandwidth Increases We See

Constant and significant increases in bandwidth consumption are among the fateful implications of switching from linear TV broadcasting to multicast video streaming. Consider that video now constitutes 52 percent to 88 percent of all internet traffic. 

Not all that increase is the direct result of video streaming services. Video now is an important part of social media interactions and advertising on web sites supporting consumer applications, though some studies suggest social media sites overall represent only seven percent to about 15 percent of video traffic consumed by end users. 

Also, there is some amount of internet video traffic between data centers, not intended directly for end users, possibly representing five percent of global internet traffic. 

Study	Date	Video Traffic Share (%)
Cisco Annual Internet Report (2023)	Dec 2022	88%
Sandvine Global Internet Phenomena Report (Q3 2023)	Sep 2023	83%
Limelight Networks State of the Real-Time Web Report (Q3 2023)	Oct 2023	76%
Ericsson Mobility Report (Nov 2023)	Nov 2023	72%
ITU Global Video Traffic Forecasts	Feb 2023	70% (2022)
Ookla Global Video Report (Q2 2023)	Aug 2023	65%
Akamai State of the Internet / Security Report (Q3 2023)	Oct 2023	60%
Statista: Global Internet Traffic Distribution by Content Type (2023)	Oct 2023	58%
GlobalWebIndex Social Video Trends Report (Q3 2023)	Sep 2023	55%
Juniper Networks Visual Networking Index (2023)	Feb 2023	52% (2022)

Ignoring for the moment the impact of video resolution on bandwidth consumption (higher resolution requires more bandwidth), the key change is that broadcasting essentially uses a “one-to-many” architecture, while streaming uses a unicast architecture. 

The best example is that a scheduled broadcast TV show, for example, can essentially send one copy of the content to every viewer (multicast or broadcast delivery). The same number of views, using internet delivery, essentially requires sending the same copy to each viewer separately (unicast delivery). 

In other words, 10 homes watching one multicast or broadcast program, on one channel, at one time consumes X amount of network bandwidth. If 10 homes watch a program of the same file size as the broadcast content, whether simultaneously or not, then bandwidth consumption is 10X. 

There are some nuances for real-world data consumption, such as the fact that consumption of linear video is declining or the fact that broadcasting uses a constant amount of bandwidth, no matter how many viewers in an area might be watching or not watching. 

Study	Comparison	Bandwidth Ratio (Streaming/Broadcasting)
"A Comparative Analysis of Video Streaming and Broadcasting for Live Sports Events" (2023)	Live sports streaming vs. multicast	10x - 15x
"Bandwidth Efficiency of IPTV vs. Traditional Broadcasting" (2022)	IPTV unicasting vs. terrestrial broadcasting	2x - 4x
"The Impact of Unicast Video Delivery on Network Traffic" (2021)	Unicasting video vs. multicast video	1.5x - 3x
"Comparing the Bandwidth Consumption of Live Streaming and P2P Delivery" (2020)	Live streaming vs. P2P for live events	3x - 6x
"The Bandwidth Efficiency of Video Streaming Protocols" (2019)	HTTP streaming vs. RTMP streaming	1.2x - 2x
"A Study of User-Generated Video Delivery on Social Media Platforms" (2018)	User-generated video streaming vs. traditional video streaming	2x - 4x
"The Bandwidth Implications of 4K and 8K Video Streaming" (2017)	Higher resolution streaming vs. standard definition	4x - 8x
"The Impact of Mobile Video Streaming on Network Congestion" (2016)	Mobile video streaming vs. fixed-line streaming	1.5x - 3x
"The Future of Video Delivery: A Cost Comparison of Streaming and Broadcasting" (2015)	Streaming vs. broadcasting for future content delivery	2x - 4x
"The Bandwidth Efficiency of Video-on-Demand Services" (2014)	Video-on-demand streaming vs. linear broadcasting	1.5x - 2.5x

There are other nuances as well. Since a broadcast video stream often is viewed on a television set, it is possible that multiple viewers “share” viewing of the same content. If one TV is receiving a program, and five people are watching, the “single delivery” supports five views. 

On a “per viewer” basis, X amount of delivery bandwidth is X/5 for each viewer of the same program. 

If five people watch a program of equivalent file size at the same time, data consumption is 5X. 

Study	Year	Methodology	Streaming Bandwidth (Mbps)	Linear Broadcasting Bandwidth (Mbps)
Nielsen	2022	Network traffic analysis	3.1-4.7 (average)	0.1-0.2 (average)
OpenVault	2023	ISP data analysis	1.8-2.5 (average)	0.05-0.15 (average)
Pew Research Center	2021	Survey and network analysis	2.3-3.8 (average)	0.1-0.2 (average)
University of Zurich	2019	Network monitoring and simulation	2.0-3.5 (average)	0.08-0.18 (average)
Akamai	2020	Global traffic analysis	1.6-2.8 (average)	0.04-0.12 (average)
Sandvine	2022	Network traffic analysis report	3.5-5.0 (peak)	0.15-0.25 (peak)
Netflix	2021	Open Connect content delivery platform report	0.5-1.5 (average)	N/A
BBC Research & Development	2018	HbbTV hybrid broadcasting analysis	1.0-2.0 (combined)	0.03-0.08 (combined)
Bitmovin	2023	Video encoding and delivery technology report	0.8-1.8 (efficient encoding)	N/A
Ericsson	2022	Mobile network video traffic report	0.5-2.0 (mobile average)	N/A

The point is that the shift from broadcasting (multicasting) to unicast entertainment video was destined to dramatically increase internet data consumption.

ITU Releases Framework Document for 6G

The International Telecommunications Union has published some details of its framework for 6G  networks, and many of the objectives are what you’d expect. Compared to 5G, 6G will support higher speeds, lower latency, be more spectrally efficient, energy efficient, feature artificial intelligence and sensing. 

• Peak data rates of 50 Gbps, 100 Gbps or 200 Gbps

• User experienced data rates of 300 Mbps and 500 Mbps

• Spectrum efficiency 1.5 and 3 times greater than that of IMT-2020 (5G)

• Area traffic capacity of 30 Mbps/m2 and 50 Mbit/s/m2

• Connection Density could be 106 to 108 devices/km2

•  Mobility Maximum speed, at which a defined QoS and seamless transfer between radio nodes could be 500 – 1 000 km/h

• latency (over the air interface) could be 0.1 – 1 ms.

In addition to those quantitative metrics, there are the expected qualitative benefits. The framework document includes talk of ubiquitous computing, ubiquitous intelligence, immersive multimedia, digital twins, virtual worlds, smart industrial apps, digital health, ubiquitous connectivity and sensing integration.  

As with prior generations (3G, 4G, 5G), many of those qualitative outcomes might be delayed or available only in rudimentary form. 

There are good reasons why mobile operators are much more concerned about “application revenue” than home broadband providers. Mobile operators always are in the “applications” business, where home broadband providers are only in the “internet access” business. 

In other words, mobile operators derive significant revenue from their own voice and messaging applications. ISPs providing home broadband mostly make money from subscriptions providing the internet access function. Most of their other revenue is related to the access function, such as equipment rentals or install fees. 

Revenue Source	Home Broadband Network	Mobile Operator Revenue
Subscription Fees	70.00%	40.00%
Voice Services	0.00%	25.00%
Data Services	0.00%	20.00%
Equipment Rental Fees	10.00%	0.00%
Installation Fees	5.00%	0.00%
Roaming Fees	0.00%	5.00%
Other Revenue	15.00%	10.00%

Also, mobile operators are dependent on government regulators to authorize additional spectrum, so there is a political underpinning to arguing that additional spectrum will lead to public advantages beyond “faster speeds.”

Still, in large part, the success of  built-in “app capabilities” will likely be hard to predict. Since mobile network value includes a mix of “apps” (largely voice and messaging) and “internet access” (dumb pipe access), much--if not most--of the value comes from the “internet access” function. 

As for home broadband networks, faster speeds are a continual requirement, as are support for carrier voice and messaging. Beyond those essential functions, it always is difficult to say how much other value can be reaped directly by mobile operators in the “apps” space and beyond connectivity itself. 

6G might not be so different from earlier generations in that regard.