Both TDMA and FDMA technologies achieve the same 6.25kHz narrowband capability via different methods. The difference is that the FDMA system is a 'true' 6.25kHz channel and the TDMA system provides 6.25kHz channel 'equivalence' via the time slots in 12.5kHz band-width. From the perspective that 12.5kHz is considered the current narrowband standard channel spacing, then both systems achieve so called "double capacity". The difference is that the FDMA system is ALWAYS double capacity whether it is used with or without infrastructure. For TDMA, double capacity is ONLY achieved when a repeater is synchronizing the time slots, and that two users are in the same geo-graphical area, accessing the same repeater at the same time. Click on the thumbnail below for spectrum diagrams.

In theory, in identical conditions, the narrower channel width of the FDMA system would allow the signal to achieve better coverage than the12.5kHz TDMA (or FDMA) system when transmitted at the same output power. This is because the noise floor of any receiver is proportional to the filter bandwidth, therefore the smaller the bandwidth the smaller the signals that can be received. In real world use, various factors such as topography, antenna height of base stations and surrounding buildings etc. all affect coverage, so without specific comparison tests, either system cannot claim to be better than the other. What can be said is that when compared to an analog FM signal, digital easily out-performs analog at the fringes of the communication range, thus providing more reliable audio over a greater total area, even if the coverage footprint is the same as analog FM. Click on the Thumbnail below for a coverage diagram

The manufacturer of the TDMA system claims 40% improved battery life in digital mode as the radio is transmitting only half the time (Ie. one time slot). While only market feedback will prove this true or false, to date, we have not been able to find any figures on actual transmit power consumption in public literature to make any accurate judgments on this claim. As such, the user cannot calculate if there really is any improvement in digital mode battery life. As explained in “Coverage”, in the FDMA system, reduced noise components with the narrower channel bandwidth improves receiver sensitivity. Therefore, it could be possible to transmit at reduced power, which in turn conserves battery life and thus can prolong radio use time.

Without getting too technical, the basic difference between FDMA (Frequency Divided Multiple Access) and TDMA (Time Divided Multiple Access) is the definition of a channel and how it is used (accessed). In FDMA a particular bandwidth (E.g. 6.25kHz) at a particular frequency (E.g. 150.000MHz) is used to define a channel. Basically, the way channels have been allocated for decades. In TDMA, the same principle applies regarding bandwidth and frequency, but the signal is divided into time slots that allow the channel to have 'extra' capacity in the same bandwidth E.g. Two 6.25kHz 'equivalent' channels in a 12.5kHz channel. See the diagram below for a graphical explanation.

Until now, TDMA was more spectrum efficient at wider channel spacing's like 25kHz, as for example, two or three users could access the same bandwidth as one FDMA channel user. However, in the case of the newly developed narrowband 6.25kHz FDMA technology liked PMR, both this and 2-slot 12.5kHz TDMA technology achieve the same result as far as spectrum efficiency is concerned.