Vodacom Puts mMIMO on Two Bands in One Antenna, but Performance Remains Unproven

On September 29, 2026, Vodacom South Africa announced a pilot in the Western Cape of a passive-active integrated antenna developed with Nokia. The device can provide Massive Multiple Input, Multiple Output (mMIMO) capabilities in both 2.6 Gigahertz (GHz) and 3.5 GHz frequency bands, and the solution is designed to allow for increases in 4G/5G capacity at sites where conventional site-scaling is restricted by structural or physical constraints.

Vodacom presents the solution as a world first, a claim that warrants closer examination. Integrated passive-active antennas are an existing product category. Nokia’s Interleaved Passive Active Antenna (IPAA), developed with CommScope, entered commercial deployment in 2021, and the IPAA+ generation followed from 2023. The element that appears to be new is mMIMO on two bands within a single unit. Multi-band integration also has precedent. Nokia’s Optus-specific IPAA configuration incorporated a 2.3 GHz 8T8R array alongside a 3.5 GHz element, with an array configuration that is not specified in the information available, within the same antenna footprint. The 8T8R configuration is a lower order array than the 32T32R or 64T64R arrays typically considered mMIMO. Thus, the 2.3 GHz band in question cannot be mMIMO. While the 3.5 GHz band may well have been mMIMO, this is unconfirmed because it was not stated; either way, it cannot have offered mMIMO on both bands, which is why this unit does not represent the same offering as the new dual bands 2.6 GHz and 3.5 GHz mMIMO unit. Vodacom has yet to disclose any information on capacity increase, equipment size, weight, and number of sites to be equipped. This pilot suggests feasibility and capability of deployment in constrained sites; however, its performance has yet to be determined.

The pilot reflects a shift in where mid-band capacity growth is limited. In mature urban networks, the limited availability of physical infrastructure for radio layers determines how much new capacity can be built into the system. Each layer needs to be fitted with mounting sites, tower or rooftop space for the equipment, power, and cooling. In already busy locations, making these arrangements is more complicated than getting the requested spectrum, not to mention that new sites involve considerable costs, such as site rentals, license applications, and equipment installation.

Integration changes the unit of upgrade. A separate dual-band mMIMO deployment would normally involve additional radios, further mounting positions, and often structural work. Housing both bands in one compact antenna reduces this to something closer to a single antenna swap, with savings arising from fewer installation interventions, less structural modification, and avoided site acquisition. The extent of those savings will depend on the existing site configuration and how much equipment can be retained. The installation savings may be partly offset by higher power and cooling needs, because active mMIMO on two bands is likely to draw more power than the equipment it replaces, and Vodacom has not published figures on this. The two bands are also likely to play different roles. mMIMO on 2.6 GHz could lift 4G capacity, although 2.6 GHz is also used for 5G in some markets, while 3.5 GHz typically carries 5G, and the passive portion of the unit continues to support legacy layers. This allows an operator to preserve established coverage while adding capacity, and it explains the 4G and 5G framing of the announcement.

The benefit will be uneven across a network. At sites with spare space and loading headroom, a conventional upgrade may prove cheaper and simpler, leaving integration with little to add. Without data from Vodacom, the share of sites that could benefit cannot be sized, but it is likely to be a minority, which suggests a niche solution unless screening shows otherwise. Operators with dense, mature urban networks, scarce site space, and holdings in both mid-bands stand to gain most. Value is likely to concentrate in the constrained tail of the network, where the alternative is structural work or a new site. Even there, the gain is not automatic. Having two mMIMO bands occupying the same size does not mean double throughput, as results are subject to the conditions in which the technology is employed—the depth of the spectrum, the design of the arrays, interference, traffic distribution, and optimization. The integration of active and passive radiating elements may result in other factors being affected. These include weight, power consumption, thermal considerations, and maintainability. Power and cooling become particularly significant when deployed in markets where energy prices and power grid stability already dictate the economics of the site infrastructure.

This reframes how integrated solutions should be compared. The relevant measure is usable capacity delivered per unit of site constraint, such as mounting position, tower load, and installation visit, set against total cost. The credible alternatives include separate dual-band radios, higher-order single-band mMIMO, sector splitting, and new sites. The pilot provides no evidence yet on how integrated dual-band performs against these options, which limits what can be concluded about its commercial value.

Understanding the value of integration requires measuring the size of the constrained tail of a network. Because of this, site estates need to be screened to find locations where an upgrade of mid-band requires structural modifications, additional installation points, or new sites, and what fraction of the whole portfolio those installations account for. In practice, this means shortlisting sites where busy-hour utilization on the existing mid-band layers is near its ceiling, structural or lease constraints block further equipment, and power and cooling can support the upgrade, using structural assessments and site audit data. The size of the constrained tail primarily governs whether integrated dual-band mMIMO is an actual mainstream upgrade path or merely a specialist tool.

In addition, there needs to be an investigation into whether there are reasons for using both bands of mMIMO at each site in question. If one layer is carrying almost all of the traffic, then there is little reason to use the second band, as implementation of a dual-band unit is costly and complicated compared to potential returns.

Any pilot should then be designed around matched comparisons at constrained sites. The integrated unit and its alternatives cannot both be deployed at the same site, so each integrated site should be compared with a matched constrained site that took the alternative route (separate dual-band radios with structural work, sector splitting, or a new site). Where no such site exists, the comparison should use a costed estimate of the alternative for the same site. Both comparisons should be made on capacity delivered and total cost, with unconstrained sites serving only as a secondary reference. Results should be reported by site category so that strong performance at constrained locations is not diluted by an average across the network.

Vodacom’s pilot is an early real-world test of integrated dual-band mMIMO and merits close monitoring as a reference case. Important aspects to observe will be the criteria for site selection, the percentage of sites that fulfill those criteria, and whether the results are given separately by type of site and in terms of 4G and 5G improvements. Results over time are equally important, because installation gains only hold if service reliability and maintenance requirements are not compromised.

Strong, repeatable gains at difficult locations would give the wider industry a template for identifying candidate sites. They would also be a proof point for Radio Access Network (RAN) evolution, because each new generation adds bands and higher-order arrays while tower load, mounting space, and power are slow and costly to expand, making physical sites a limit on RAN capacity growth alongside spectrum. Modest gains, or benefits confined to a small share of the estate, would indicate that integration remains a niche solution.

Vodacom may publish only limited performance data. In that case, two indirect indicators become more important: the pace and scale of its deployment, and whether comparable solutions appear in other operators’ upgrade plans.