Gigabyte also claims that this header provides three times as much power as that of a standard USB port, meaning that gadgets such as iPhones charge up to 40 per cent quicker. However, we cant help but wonder if this extra power could present a problem for a gadget that wasnt expecting it.
No. Unless the device sucks and does not abide by USB specs. USB devices will negotiate current with the USB controller and what current they receive is what they negotiate for, barring controller limitations. Gigabyte's just has 3 times the limit of a normal USB port.
It is not the voltage that is higher than usual (it's still 5V), it's the MAXIMUM electic current the USB port CAN provide. Usually a USB port has a maximum electric current of 500mA (900mA for USB 3.0), which would result in a maximum electical power of 2.5W. "Three times as much power as that of a standard USB port" would simply mean that the USB port can supply up to 7.5W of electrical power if a device such as the iPhone needs it.
Assuming that a device that uses less power would take damage from a power source with a higher maximum power would be the same as assuming your computer might take damage from being powered by an oversized PSU.
Originally Posted by r3loaded So I take it the latest BIOS has fixed the problems that existed in the CPC review?
From the first paragraph!
Quote:
Originally Posted by The article However, when we originally tested the updated rev 2 version in Custom PC, we found a serious issue with its BIOS. This has now been fixed via an update, so here's the revised, updated, definitive review of the Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R (rev 2).
Originally Posted by NetSoerfer It is not the voltage that is higher than usual (it's still 5V), it's the MAXIMUM electic current the USB port CAN provide. Usually a USB port has a maximum electric current of 500mA (900mA for USB 3.0), which would result in a maximum electical power of 2.5W. "Three times as much power as that of a standard USB port" would simply mean that the USB port can supply up to 7.5W of electrical power if a device such as the iPhone needs it.
Assuming that a device that uses less power would take damage from a power source with a higher maximum power would be the same as assuming your computer might take damage from being powered by an oversized PSU.
+1
Just because the board is able to provide 1500mA over the conventional 500mA does not mean that it would endanger devices, as devices will only draw the current they need to operate which in this case can be up to 1500mA.
I like this feature as I have a few devices that require a good chunk of power, some of which use either an external AC to USB power supply or dual usb Y splitter cables to share the power load across 2 ports which still provide 5V but with double the current :).
It is interesting to see where the board sits in benchmarks considering I own this board also, which seems ot me to be a good choice :D.
Yet again an another good review form BT :)
the USB power comment on page one was intresting as lack of basic understanding but posters in here seems to have shown the flaw in pauls first page (like haveng an PSU that can do 1KW the system is not going to use 1 KW of power)
It is borderline ludicrous statement. Last thing people want is to be constrained by storage connectivity. I understand that some people don't need 10 SATA ports as they running with 1 HDD and a 1 or 2 dvds. OK fine by me, but there is also large group which need 10 or more. Simple as that. Chipset is main problem here - only 6 ports. If you need storage (even for purely home use) you need to invest into additional add-on cards. Instead adding more SATA ports a lot of manufacturers still including FDD/ATA/COM headers which are waste of space - in particular on high end workstation/enthusiast system.
Gigabyte did that once with 8KNXP Ultra when they bolted in 2 channel Adaptec's U320 SCSI controller. Great motherboard. They should do this again. Make a deal, add some nice (older) Adaptec series 5 controller or something new from LSI/Intel/Areca. Give people proper hardware RAID 5 option straight out of the box.
By law of distribution those that find 6 and less SATA ports satisfactory outnumber those that need ten so much that those that need ten are insignificant in number versus those that need 6 and less.
"So far, the UD3R (rev 2) is very similar to the original to see the differences, you have to look very closely. The new board includes Gigabytes new On/Off USB Charge technology that maintains the power supply to your front panel USB ports even when the computer is turned off as long as you use the correct USB header (its the bright red one). "
According to Gigabytes website the rev 1 board can do this.
Thanks for the follow-through (or follow-up) tests, analysis, and evaluation. Although I would have been (and am) interested to read a more detailed account of the CPC critique, any other early communications directly with Gigabyte, Gigabyte's initial response, and any dynamic that developed between CPC/Bit-tech and Gigabyte that led to (or perhaps had little or no influence upon) Gigabyte's developing BIOS solutions, perhaps your more detached, test/evidence-oriented approach was what was most needed at this moment. Because reality can be and usually is messy, the true developmental story (assuming that there was/is one) might not reflect well on either party...or there might not have been much meaningful interaction. Of course I'm curious about what really happened between your critique of Rev. 2 and your evidentially-based acknowledgment that the BIOS problem (whatever it was) seems to have been solved...and I hope that someone in the know will take the next (and perhaps last) step in the story: viz., telling the story of how a big company developed revisions of a successful product that crippled it; how they were called out by yourselves (and perhaps others); and how they recovered enough to satisfy at least one of their severe (or so I've heard) critics. And even if interactions were all politeness without apparent drama, the technical story should be quite interesting (and informative).
Thanks, again, for your follow-through...and for whatever role you played in turning a serious misstep by Gigabyte (as too often happens in life, a solution that apparently created more problems than it solved) into a satisfactory (if not perfect) recovery of balance. Everyone (myself included) who has purchased a Rev. 2 is at least somewhat in your debt (how much, I'm curious to know). But even if your influence might appear from some vantage points to be small, the whole affair seems to me to highlight how integral a role you and your colleagues play in promoting technical excellence and development. Who knows where it will all lead...but I suppose the wild ride (and stories about it) is the main thing anyway.
Could you guys please post the settings you changed in the BIOS to hit your overclocking speed of 4+ Ghz? How would the manually adjusted overclocking via BIOS compare to using say EasySet 3 to quickly and easily overclock the system?
Thanks!
Comments 1 to 18 of 18
ReplyNo. Unless the device sucks and does not abide by USB specs. USB devices will negotiate current with the USB controller and what current they receive is what they negotiate for, barring controller limitations. Gigabyte's just has 3 times the limit of a normal USB port.
In a word, yes. The revised BIOS is freely available on their site though it is still technically still in beta I believe.
Assuming that a device that uses less power would take damage from a power source with a higher maximum power would be the same as assuming your computer might take damage from being powered by an oversized PSU.
From the first paragraph!
:p
+1
Just because the board is able to provide 1500mA over the conventional 500mA does not mean that it would endanger devices, as devices will only draw the current they need to operate which in this case can be up to 1500mA.
I like this feature as I have a few devices that require a good chunk of power, some of which use either an external AC to USB power supply or dual usb Y splitter cables to share the power load across 2 ports which still provide 5V but with double the current :).
It is interesting to see where the board sits in benchmarks considering I own this board also, which seems ot me to be a good choice :D.
Yet again an another good review form BT :)
back to reading the review
It is borderline ludicrous statement. Last thing people want is to be constrained by storage connectivity. I understand that some people don't need 10 SATA ports as they running with 1 HDD and a 1 or 2 dvds. OK fine by me, but there is also large group which need 10 or more. Simple as that. Chipset is main problem here - only 6 ports. If you need storage (even for purely home use) you need to invest into additional add-on cards. Instead adding more SATA ports a lot of manufacturers still including FDD/ATA/COM headers which are waste of space - in particular on high end workstation/enthusiast system.
Gigabyte did that once with 8KNXP Ultra when they bolted in 2 channel Adaptec's U320 SCSI controller. Great motherboard. They should do this again. Make a deal, add some nice (older) Adaptec series 5 controller or something new from LSI/Intel/Areca. Give people proper hardware RAID 5 option straight out of the box.
According to Gigabytes website the rev 1 board can do this.
Glad to see the rev.2 bounce back to show it's true colours :D
Thanks, again, for your follow-through...and for whatever role you played in turning a serious misstep by Gigabyte (as too often happens in life, a solution that apparently created more problems than it solved) into a satisfactory (if not perfect) recovery of balance. Everyone (myself included) who has purchased a Rev. 2 is at least somewhat in your debt (how much, I'm curious to know). But even if your influence might appear from some vantage points to be small, the whole affair seems to me to highlight how integral a role you and your colleagues play in promoting technical excellence and development. Who knows where it will all lead...but I suppose the wild ride (and stories about it) is the main thing anyway.
Thanks!
-
« Previous
-
1
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums