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

Motherboards USB Ports naming/renamed - Confusing or what?...

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by Guest-44432, 21 Oct 2020.

  1. Guest-44432

    Guest-44432 Guest

    So for those of you that may not have come across this, or assume "USB 3.0" has been surpassed by "USB 3.1 Gen 1" and "USB 3.2 Gen 1" you will soon understand that this is all marketing rubbish...

    Here's my example;
    I have just had the experience when trying to buy a Type C cable for my Quest 2 with the maximum bandwidth possible. When checking the max speed, my motherboard with "USB 3.2 Gen 2" will be connected to a PC case with a front I/O which is "USB 3.1 Gen 2" Things then start to get confusing. You would think that the "USB 3.2 Gen 2" is far superior to "USB 3.1 Gen 2" - Right? Wrong...

    Here is why,
    "USB 3.0" got renamed to "USB 3.1 Gen 1" and then further renamed to "USB 3.2 Gen 1".
    The max transfer speed is still 5Gbps. So one is not superior to the other, just "USB 3.0" got renamed, not once, but twice... Confused yet?

    So now when we look at "USB 3.1" this supports upto 10Gbps transfer speed.
    However, "USB 3.1 Gen 1" is not the same as "USB 3.1" - Wait, what?...
    So to save more confusion, "USB 3.1" got renamed to "USB 3.1 Gen 2" and then renamed again to "USB 3.2 Gen 2" all of which is the same thing.

    Then we continue to "USB 3.2" with upto 20Gbps transfer speed. This also got renamed, to which it is now called "USB 3.2 Gen 2x2"

    Due to all this confusion, cables have yet to catch up with the multiple name changes, so you could well end up buying a cable with lower transfer speeds if you didn't do your research on this.


    If you plan to buy a new motherboard, and it states it has USB 3.2 Gen 2, and your PC case has the old USB naming - I.E "USB 3.1 Gen 2" you can rest assure it is the same bloody thing...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: 22 Oct 2020
  2. Xlog

    Xlog Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2006
    Posts:
    652
    Likes Received:
    63
    And then you add fun stuff like USB-PD, where it requires e-tagged cables for higher current, but there is no official marking for it. Oh and adapter themselves usually don't specify what output voltages they support.

    p.s. you forgot USB 3.2 Gen 1×2....
     
    Guest-44432 likes this.
  3. Spraduke

    Spraduke Lurker

    Joined:
    23 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    639
    Likes Received:
    134
    This is why we need usb4 pronto just to clear up the pissing naming convention. Idiots!
     
    Guest-44432 likes this.
  4. Guest-44432

    Guest-44432 Guest

    Or just simplify it to the speed the ports can handle like they did with sata3 and sata6.
    Also, as Xlog has mentioned with USB-PD, to save further confusion, have a set standard where the cable is rated up to 5A 100w.

    My example;

    USB 2 = 480Mbps (As we have always known this port to be called USB 2.0)
    USB 5 = 5Gbps
    USB 10 = 10Gbps
    USB 20 = 20Gbps
     
  5. Spraduke

    Spraduke Lurker

    Joined:
    23 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    639
    Likes Received:
    134
    Not to mention making type C available to usb 2 standard. Whilst I appreciate its just a connector type it's just going to confuse the hell out of people when somethings can charge rapidly etc with USB C and others just crawl. Should have made it exclusive to USB 3.? (I honestly have no idea anymore which one is which)

    In my head its still 3.0, 3.1 and 3.2 for 5, 10 and 20Gbps respectively. I refuse to use 3.1 gen x,y,z,millenial because rebranding just confuses everyone who's not a tech news follower.
     
  6. sandys

    sandys Multimodder

    Joined:
    26 Mar 2006
    Posts:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    274
    It's not really that difficult and will always be the problem when you keep the port the same, most of the devices these ports have been designed to go on outside of PCs have no space for labelling.

    You have also missed the other confusion that is thunderbolt and USB C trying to explain that to colleagues when their displayport cable doesn't one in one port vs another :duh: look for the thunderbolt damn it :grin:

    The only surefire way to resolve would be to change the port at which point years of backwards compatibility is broken, over time the old standards will die.

    Motherboard manufacturers needs to stop cheaping out and support the latest standard across the board.
     
  7. Guest-44432

    Guest-44432 Guest

    I agree, but without doing the research or keeping up to date with USB ports naming, you could find yourself confused, especially when cables don't follow suit with the new naming.

    Only way I knew that the best possible cable to give me the maximum transfer speed was to search 10Gbps Type C cable. Then you are in the realms of PD tagged cables, where some don't specify what the max amp and watts it can power.

    So you could quite easily pick up a 2.4A cable and then your judgment on the cable, and the battery drain on the Quest 2, would be different to someone using a 5A 100w cable, where the battery may not drain.

    You also have people buying these third party link cables, thinking they are the best bang per buck, but you find people stating they are only getting 480Mbps bandwidth, rather than 10Gbps. Which again, can cloud someone's judgment on the quality they get when playing the Quest 2 in PCVR.

    So it is very confusing when you see all these different names, thinking one is superior to the other, only to find out after many searches, that USB 3.0 had two name changes, along with the others... :wallbash: :grin:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: 22 Oct 2020

Share This Page