bit-tech.net

Why you should insist on USB 3

Comments 26 to 50 of 53

Reply
faugusztin 21st March 2012, 14:51 Quote
To guys who talk about eSATA - the trouble with eSATA is power. The data connector without correct support for powering the device is as useless as it gets. Most eSATA connectors are just data connectors, so you need to use external power brick or another USB cable just to power your eSATA device.

Sure, later they come up with eSATAp, which is just that - a USB connector in the eSATA connector, which is not even common enough to be a usable platform.

Unfortunately, this disqualifies eSATA for most use cases.

And why should you use USB3 instead of USB2 ? Because then you can reuse your old SSD and put it in your USB3 caddy and get awesome speeds :D :
http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/764/hdtunebenchmarkintelssd.png
nilesfoundglory 21st March 2012, 15:43 Quote
The reason why USB 3.0 hasn't caught on can be summarized by the latter half of the first sentence on Page 2: It's not a native part of a chipset yet. If anybody pays attention to the computing industry outside of the enthusiast circle, no Tier 1 manufacturer in their right mind adopts a new I/O until it's native on-chip somewhere. Seeing as how there's no less than *seven* USB 3.0 controllers available, and considering there's no consistency between any of them (reference: http://vr-zone.com/articles/usb-3.0-speed-tests--7-way-host-controllers-roundup/13358.html), no wonder the big-box ODMs are waiting for Intel to bake it into a chipset. They're waiting for a known quantity.

BLC and Gareth: ThunderBolt, for the time being, requires a controller on both ends to work properly at this point, so, to this point, it doesn't operate much differently than FireWire, with the exception of what bus it attaches to (FW = PCI, ThunderBolt = PCI-E x4). FireWire never caught on as something that should be included on every chipset (I blame Apple), but ThunderBolt belongs to Intel, so I expect that to be on-chip (not sure if it will originate from the CPU or the chipset - I'm willing to bet the latter, though) sometime in the next few years.

FireWire was a stable connection for uncompressed video and audio (huge files) that USB 2.0 (which does better with smaller files due to it's inability to compensate for error overrun) couldn't handle with any level of consistency. If you've ever experienced trying to import HQ DV from a pro video camera over USB 2.0, you'd understand.
AmEv 21st March 2012, 16:06 Quote
^That's the reason I have FireWire and USB connections coming from my tower to desk.


Just wish burning DVDs over FireWire worked, and didn't hang the burning process.
Sarakon 21st March 2012, 16:31 Quote
I have been using USB 3 since it was first launched, well just after and can say that it is awesome...highest write speed I've managed on the USB3 flash drive was 120MB/s for about 5 seconds and then it dropped to 90MB/s for the rest of the 4GB file...
ZeDestructor 21st March 2012, 17:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by nilesfoundglory
The reason why USB 3.0 hasn't caught on can be summarized by the latter half of the first sentence on Page 2: It's not a native part of a chipset yet. If anybody pays attention to the computing industry outside of the enthusiast circle, no Tier 1 manufacturer in their right mind adopts a new I/O until it's native on-chip somewhere. Seeing as how there's no less than *seven* USB 3.0 controllers available, and considering there's no consistency between any of them (reference: http://vr-zone.com/articles/usb-3.0-speed-tests--7-way-host-controllers-roundup/13358.html), no wonder the big-box ODMs are waiting for Intel to bake it into a chipset. They're waiting for a known quantity.

BLC and Gareth: ThunderBolt, for the time being, requires a controller on both ends to work properly at this point, so, to this point, it doesn't operate much differently than FireWire, with the exception of what bus it attaches to (FW = PCI, ThunderBolt = PCI-E x4). FireWire never caught on as something that should be included on every chipset (I blame Apple), but ThunderBolt belongs to Intel, so I expect that to be on-chip (not sure if it will originate from the CPU or the chipset - I'm willing to bet the latter, though) sometime in the next few years.

FireWire was a stable connection for uncompressed video and audio (huge files) that USB 2.0 (which does better with smaller files due to it's inability to compensate for error overrun) couldn't handle with any level of consistency. If you've ever experienced trying to import HQ DV from a pro video camera over USB 2.0, you'd understand.

You make some very good points. Wthout any doubt, USB3 will succeed, but the real question is will intel open up Light Peak (yes, I will call it by its proper name, not the apple rebrand) and allow everyone to implement it or will it be kept closed? As of now it's an intel exclusive item (damn near apple-exclusive), which I suspect is because intel is still ironing out the optical PHY's bugs or convicing ODMs to pick it up...
Sutura 21st March 2012, 18:28 Quote
I doubt Usb 3.0 will take over the stage that fast. There are plenty of devices that still support 2.0 (so many new laptops still go with it). And with the Intel's claim to introduce Thunderbolt in 2013/2015, it might be the shortest lived standard out there.
billysielu 21st March 2012, 19:30 Quote
Yes OK - so USB3 is better than USB2.

But how many people really NEED that improvement?

It doesn't change anyone's day.
Guinevere 21st March 2012, 20:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmEv
I'd love to get USB3.

Unfortunately, my only x1 slot is covered by the graphics card. (SERIOUSLY, GIGABYTE?!?)

You know you can plug a x1 card in any PCIe slot?
Guinevere 21st March 2012, 21:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeDestructor
Light Peak (yes, I will call it by its proper name, not the apple rebrand)

It was just codenamed Light Peak. The Thunderbolt name is trademarked and belongs fully to intel. (Okay was registered by apple and then transferred). It'll never be referred to as Light Peak as it's never been released under this name. Many products and technologies get rebranded like this.

Also, IMO, Light Peak is a terrible name for a technology that supports both electrical and optical connections. It's launched with electrical and optical cables will arrive later this year (and offer no benefit to the likes of you and I)
Farting Bob 21st March 2012, 21:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmEv
I'd love to get USB3.

Unfortunately, my only x1 slot is covered by the graphics card. (SERIOUSLY, GIGABYTE?!?)

Any PCIe slot will take a 1x card. Stick it in a 16x slot further down the board and it'll work exactly the same.
IvanIvanovich 21st March 2012, 21:44 Quote
I could care less about usb3. The only usb devices I use everyday are keyboard and mouse. I have usb audio device I use for timecode input from turntable, but I don't think it would make any difference as it seems to be almost as good as my pci-e soundcard input. Other than that I use flashdrive to install OS and thats it. I don't charge anything with usb ports, or use usb storage so i see little benefit. This is why it has not caught on. It's not really that necessary to many people.
SpAceman 21st March 2012, 22:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Lister
My only gripe is that the external drive's USB cable has a weird non standard looking connector at the end going into the drive. If all the manufacturers are using that connector then that's fine, but if not that will put me off USB 3. I'm not a fan of proprietary connectors at all - there is no need for it.

That is likely the USB 3.0 micro-B connector. If you look carefully you will notice that half of the plug looks like a USB 2.0 micro-B plug. This is because it is. The other half is for the extra pins that USB 3.0 uses.
SinxarKnights 21st March 2012, 23:27 Quote
While my customers represent a very small part of the real mainstream PC user, I feel that USB 3 is not getting adopted nearly as fast as expected quite simply because nobody (except us, the minority) wants to buy a new PC or upgrade. The avg PC user is completely ignorant of add-in cards, even if they did know, what use would it be to them? Their P4 XP PC works just fine for surfing the web, why drop more cash on something they will most likely never use.

When XP support is finally dropped and people find the need to upgrade, then USB 3 adoption will blossom. Only because it will be standard, not because the consumer wants it.
Gradius 22nd March 2012, 02:28 Quote
I use since it come out, so no surprise here.
AmEv 22nd March 2012, 04:27 Quote
For clarification:

I have the Gigabyte ga-78lmt s2p.

And a 550TI.
SpAceman 22nd March 2012, 07:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmEv
I'd love to get USB3.

Unfortunately, my only x1 slot is covered by the graphics card. (SERIOUSLY, GIGABYTE?!?)

Surely you have another PCIe slot you can use? My PCIe x1 sound card is in one of my full length PCIe x4 slots. You did know you could do that right?

EDIT: Oh... Get a new motherboard.
ZeDestructor 22nd March 2012, 09:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinevere
It was just codenamed Light Peak. The Thunderbolt name is trademarked and belongs fully to intel. (Okay was registered by apple and then transferred). It'll never be referred to as Light Peak as it's never been released under this name. Many products and technologies get rebranded like this.

Also, IMO, Light Peak is a terrible name for a technology that supports both electrical and optical connections. It's launched with electrical and optical cables will arrive later this year (and offer no benefit to the likes of you and I)

Bah. I thought only Apple called it Thunderbolt... In any case, intel wants to remove chips from inside the cables, which means that at some point the optical emitter will move into the PC chassis, at which point it will likely piggyback USB2/3/4 connectors for power and housing as per original plans.
Uxon 22nd March 2012, 16:37 Quote
Bought one of those Asus U3S6 cards a while ago as I didn't want the hassle of a motherboard change and I have to agree USB3 is very nice, shame I didn't pick up a USB3 external before the HDD prices went nuts.
azrael- 24th March 2012, 16:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinevere
It's a shame Apple haven't adopted USB 3 or... it's a shame the PC world hasn't jumped on Thunderbolt.

Even though Thunderbolt is the better tech (IMO) I don't mind which gets adopted as the new standard as long as one of them does!

Thunderbolt has the edge because it's based on PCIe and therefore allows use the use of external PCIe devices in an enclosure. It also carries video, eight channel audio and will allow connections over extreme distances (Using 'smart' cables of extreme price!)

The reason Thunderbolt (or LightPeak, as it was called, when it was originally developed as an optical transport layer) hasn't catched on is that it was only introduced last year, and as a favour by Intel to Apple as an Apple exclusive. This year we'll see it on PCs. However, it's quite a costly solution/chip. Furthermore, the Thunderbolt/LightPeak tech is completely controlled by Intel, which may also hamper its widespread adoption.
ssj12 25th March 2012, 04:57 Quote
why isnt there a test of USB2 drive in USB3 slot?
faugusztin 25th March 2012, 10:32 Quote
ssj12, because USB2 drive connected to USB3 connector uses the USB2 pins in the USB3 connector, which means it will have USB2 speeds, so it would be ultimately pointless ?
thewelshbrummie 26th March 2012, 07:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Lister
My only gripe is that the external drive's USB cable has a weird non standard looking connector at the end going into the drive. If all the manufacturers are using that connector then that's fine, but if not that will put me off USB 3. I'm not a fan of proprietary connectors at all - there is no need for it.

If it looks like 2 sockets side-by-side, it's probably the standard micro-USB3 socket & cable. I bought a USB3 2.5" external HDD (it matches my netbook, even though my netbook doesn't have USB3 support my desktop does) and at first I thought it was some proprietary connector. Then I tried a standard USB2 micro cable and it fitted perfectly into one of the sockets, so backwards compatibilty with micro USB2 cables works perfectly. There's 2 sockets as USB3 has 8 wires inside the cable to USB2's 4 (for bi-directional transfer as mentinoed in the article). I guess there wasn't the space or reliability to integrate micro USB3 cables to the same size as existing USB2 and side-by-side to allow device manufacturers to keep products thin. Try it out though - I'm guessing it'll be fine.
ut66 1st April 2012, 18:31 Quote
disgusting suit pigs.... no standard PCI-Express 3.0 USB 3.0, Light Peak, thunderbolt etc, i might as well use my old mobo, at least it has IDE!
ut66 6th April 2012, 16:10 Quote
got a new 1155 mobo. guess wut? i choosed no sata6, no usb3! > GA-H61M-S2V-B3 . super expensive wr i leve ( 97 usd yep crap country) the usb3 version? insanely expensive! (x2)
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums