1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News USB 3.1 SuperSpeed standard finalised

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Gareth Halfacree, 2 Aug 2013.

  1. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    12,400
    Likes Received:
    1,812
  2. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,261
    Likes Received:
    316
    So a USB 3.1 Developers Day is being held on Aug 21, but anyone have a idea of when it will reach consumers ?
    If its around the same time as Intel start shipping Falcon Ridge in 2014, then USB will still be half the speed of TB.
     
  3. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    12,400
    Likes Received:
    1,812
    That's a great question, and the short answer is "damned if I know."

    The longer answer is "no, but we can guess." USB 3.0 was finalised in November 2008, but it wasn't until October 2009 that the first USB 3.0 motherboards started to hit the open market in any decent quantity. Thus, we can say there was a year-long gap between spec finalisation and the first products.

    However, USB 3.1 is a smaller revision to the spec than was USB 3.0 - meaning, in theory, it should take less time for manufacturers to make the changes and release USB 3.1 hardware. In theory. In practice, it all depends on whether they think there'll be demand: if the peripheral builders hold off for the motherboard makers, and the motherboard makers hold off for the peripheral builders, it could well be longer than that until it hits critical mass.

    Yes, but USB 3.1 has numerous advantages that Thunderbolt lacks: the chief two are that it's backwards compatible with everyone's existing USB peripherals and it costs less than Thunderbolt. Sure, it might be slower - but it's fast enough to mean that manufacturers will likely choose USB 3.1 over Falcon Ridge in all but niche products. Even Intel has pledged to support the standard, despite its obvious bias towards Thunderbolt.
     
  4. Phil Rhodes

    Phil Rhodes Hypernobber

    Joined:
    27 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,415
    Likes Received:
    10
    USB (of any speed) and Thunderbolt are wildly different things. To compare them solely on bitrate throughput overlooks a huge amount of dissimilarity which will cause them to behave much differently in similar applications.
     
  5. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag New Member

    Joined:
    30 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    I'm glad they called it USB 3.1 instead of some other asinine naming scheme like 3.0b.

    Overall, I'm not sure I think USB 3.1 is such a good idea. Almost no devices will be able to saturate it's performance, and expansion cards are going to have to be PCIe 4x if they want to ensure it works at full speed on all boards (which, for desktop users, means they'll be using 16x slots).

    I don't think thunderbolt should've been a reason to work on USB 3.1, because it's functionally an entirely different platform (though I guess for marketing reasons, it makes sense). Thunderbolt also supports displays and can be daisy chained.
     
  6. Elton

    Elton Officially a Whisky Nerd

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    8,575
    Likes Received:
    189
    Thunderbolt is an entirely different subspecies though. It's incredibly low latency in comparison to the USB3 or USB 3.1.
     
  7. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag New Member

    Joined:
    30 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    Exactly, that's why I'm saying it shouldn't have been a motivator for the USB devs to try getting 10Gbp/s.
     
  8. ArthurB

    ArthurB New Member

    Joined:
    17 Jul 2011
    Posts:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
  9. KayinBlack

    KayinBlack Currently Rebuilding

    Joined:
    2 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    5,483
    Likes Received:
    281
    Considering I've never used or needed a 3.0 port, why is this an issue? Seems to me to be an answer looking for a problem.
     
  10. Elton

    Elton Officially a Whisky Nerd

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    8,575
    Likes Received:
    189
    USB 3 is honestly remarkably fast compared to 2.0 It's quite nice.
     
  11. Ljs

    Ljs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    2,217
    Likes Received:
    113
    Yay, I'll be able to charge my phone quicker.
     
  12. DriftCarl

    DriftCarl Member

    Joined:
    2 Nov 2004
    Posts:
    600
    Likes Received:
    12
    I have to copy 100gigs of virtual machine every month to about 20 USB3 sticks for various people, when we upgraded from USB 2 to 3 it saved me huge amounts of time. as ever though once I got use to how quick it was, the spare time I got was quickly swallowed up. now USB 3 seems a little slow, could really use a speed boost now :p
     
  13. fdbh96

    fdbh96 New Member

    Joined:
    29 May 2011
    Posts:
    1,894
    Likes Received:
    33
    I would say you probably wouldn't see a speed increase, as it would no longer be the port that is limiting the speed but the actual storage itself.
     
  14. Adnoctum

    Adnoctum Kill_All_Humans

    Joined:
    27 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    486
    Likes Received:
    31
    Falcon Ridge could be ten times as fast and the percentage of people who would care could be counted on your hand.
    TB is a failure because it is expensive and proprietary. Only people who have a specific need for TB, and is willing to stump up the cash for the expensive kit (Apple owners), bothers with it. The situation is worse than Firewire was, and Intel's fancy prototype TB flash stick will not change it. Unless Intel's TB strategy changes, it is just flogging a dead parrot.
    USB is cheap and everywhere and works with everything, from my newest and shiniest uber-rig to my 13-year old nostalgia-box. And it is fast enough for >99% of users and uses.
     

Share This Page