I've tried 4G networks on every continent and multiple devices and I haven't seen 450Mbit anywhere be really commercially really available.
Infact most "4G" networks out there give you less speed than what HSUPA/HSDPA 3G/3.5G networks could theoretically provide.
But even if you had those speeds the low bandwidth makes h.265 attractive not because of max download/upload speed but because of datacaps, if you only have 2GB of cellular data each month and you can have a video codec that both allows you to conduct video calls in suboptimal conditions as well at 1/5th or so of the bitrate that h.264 needs for similar visual quality it's really a no brainer which one you use.
Shrug. 4G just happens to work for me I guess. There's nothing wrong with the technology, but a lot is wrong with some carriers.
I honestly don't understand how people put up with carriers like AT&T and Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile. Their plans are (almost) 10 years behind in performance and 10 years ahead in price.
I have 50 down/10 up 4G from work and "unlimited Mbps"/50 Mbps private, practically it's about 100-150/50 Mbps. My phone is capable of 450 Mbps, that shouldn't be the limiting factor. Neither have caps nor throttling. Some months I use almost 100 GB. Ping to my home server is about 15-20 ms (fiber).
Infact most "4G" networks out there give you less speed than what HSUPA/HSDPA 3G/3.5G networks could theoretically provide.
But even if you had those speeds the low bandwidth makes h.265 attractive not because of max download/upload speed but because of datacaps, if you only have 2GB of cellular data each month and you can have a video codec that both allows you to conduct video calls in suboptimal conditions as well at 1/5th or so of the bitrate that h.264 needs for similar visual quality it's really a no brainer which one you use.