USB 3.0 Proposed

[error_f0rce]

Originally Posted by TheGuruStud

stupid intel. When will everyone learn? USB sucks. Always has (and most likely always will).
1394 is the way to go. Who wants slow speeds and high CPU utilization?

Reminds me of this huge argument we had with an instructor that thought intel was cool. Took us forever to get him to believe that 1394a slaughters usb 2.0 (same thing happened with him and CPU performance a couple yrs ago). Theoretical and synthetic tests doesn't mean jack (especially with intel haha).

/rant

Apparently the Guru is here to make us all Disciples of 1394

Please qualify your original statement. I fail to see how you proved Intel is stupid... and for that matter I don't think you offered a convincing argument that USB sucks. Are you saying it sucks because its slower than 1394? How does that follow? Does this mean anything that's not the fastest sucks? Using a similar argument, I could state that 1394 sucks because eSATA is faster.

You must see the foolishness in this logic.

Do I think 1394 is superior to USB? Yes. Would it be great if it had overtaken the personal electronics & peripherals market instead of USB? Yes. Does that make Intel or USB stupid? Certainly not.

Save the bashing/flaming for a different forum please.

[WarEagleAU]

All in the efforts of making things faster. This should be backwards compatible with older stuff, like USB 2.0 is. I think this is a good thing, faster is always better, but personally, I would like to see eSATA take off more.

[Ravenas]

Originally Posted by jocksteeluk

Fire wire costs far too much per port to make it an industry standard, a USB port costs approx 15 cents per port while Firewire costs $1 per port. If Apple wasn't so greedy they could have had the industry standard but Apples greed over firewire shows why single small collaboratives should not own the rights to any industry standard that is to be a world wide standard.

Usb is the peoples champion!

Lol it costs more because it's better. Also, all Apples have more USB ports than firewire ports. I dont understand your logic, firewire is faster than USB, but you think it should be cheaper?...

No offense at all, and I'm not firewire biased or anything.

I'm actually using eSata for an external hard drive on my current rig

[Darkrealms]

I think that the way SATA is setup (even eSATA) it is not designed for use with constant plug and play devices. I don't think any of the connections or current cable designs will hold up.
I think FireWire is the better solution but as previously stated it lost out on the major adoption and has lost (at least for the next4 years if it does even try). I use firewire with my digital video devices but thats about it, USB is easier with other components.
USB has well designed connectors and cables. There has been a lot of thought put into it and I think it being so cheap has a lot to do with its quantity. I wish some of the mechanics of it were redesigned. I know I don't like USB storage devices as much as firewire ones (and of coarse eSATA is faster but cables/connectors are weak).

All three have good and bad points. I'm just happy to see advancement on what is actually being adopted.

[lemonadesoda]

Originally Posted by Ravenas

Lol it costs more because it's better. Also, all Apples have more USB ports than firewire ports. I dont understand your logic, firewire is faster than USB, but you think it should be cheaper?...

No offense at all, and I'm not firewire biased or anything.

I'm actually using eSata for an external hard drive on my current rig

There's no arguing that firewire is faster. But the point is that (in the early days) that Apple's patent control over firewire IN ADDITION to the need for much more expensive hardware on the device side, meant that firewire was WAY TOO EXPENSIVE for any device under $200 to implement.

USB filled the gap of cheap peripherals, grabbed market share, and bumped up speeds so that IT CAN be used for high data transfers (even though firewire remains faster, it is NOT an order of magnitude faster, e.g. 5-10x faster). Hence USB wins in 99% of consumer applications = de facto standard.

[panchoman]

Originally Posted by Grimskull

SATA 6 is due to be launched soon. It has 6gb transfer rate

whoa sweet, and one more thing, i doubt you'll be able to run external grafix cards lol, though usb3 would be powerful, i doubt it can carry the power of 2x 8 pin connections for a 2900xt.

[kwchang007]

Originally Posted by panchoman

whoa sweet, and one more thing, i doubt you'll be able to run external grafix cards lol, though usb3 would be powerful, i doubt it can carry the power of 2x 8 pin connections for a 2900xt.

You use either an external psu, or run the ables outside the case

[panchoman]

about the data, wouldn't pcie still be faster then usb?

[Ravenas]

Originally Posted by lemonadesoda

There's no arguing that firewire is faster. But the point is that (in the early days) that Apple's patent control over firewire IN ADDITION to the need for much more expensive hardware on the device side, meant that firewire was WAY TOO EXPENSIVE for any device under $200 to implement.

USB filled the gap of cheap peripherals, grabbed market share, and bumped up speeds so that IT CAN be used for high data transfers (even though firewire remains faster, it is NOT an order of magnitude faster, e.g. 5-10x faster). Hence USB wins in 99% of consumer applications = de facto standard.

Yeah, the great thing about USB is exactly what you are touching on, it's universal!

[kwchang007]

Originally Posted by panchoman

about the data, wouldn't pcie still be faster then usb?

Yeah, because usb 3.0 will probably be connected to the sb, and that connection to the nb is slower than a pci-e x16 connection. Not to mention I'm pretty sure pci-e can come close to its stated max, unlike usb.

[TheGuruStud]

Originally Posted by error_f0rce

Apparently the Guru is here to make us all Disciples of 1394

Please qualify your original statement. I fail to see how you proved Intel is stupid... and for that matter I don't think you offered a convincing argument that USB sucks. Are you saying it sucks because its slower than 1394? How does that follow? Does this mean anything that's not the fastest sucks? Using a similar argument, I could state that 1394 sucks because eSATA is faster.

You must see the foolishness in this logic.

Do I think 1394 is superior to USB? Yes. Would it be great if it had overtaken the personal electronics & peripherals market instead of USB? Yes. Does that make Intel or USB stupid? Certainly not.

Save the bashing/flaming for a different forum please.

eSATA (or just sata in general) is a lot newer than 1394 and can't (at least yet) interface with most peripherals (it's not in the same class). Intel and their idiot friends approved a standard that was sub par and dead on arrival (in terms of speed). As usual, intel can't make shit by themselves so they whipped up the 2nd version and pushed it out by sheer force, not caring what the market wanted/needed. I feel that USB 3 won't be much different. It doesn't have anything to do with it being just slower. But slower by such a huge margin that it's pathetic and a pain in the ass to use for more than copying a couple files here and there. Printers, keyboards and regular mice are about the only useful thing I can think of for it. Sure, for ma and pa, IE browsing rednecks, USB is fine. But what if I want to use external drives, cameras, sound/video controllers, etc, that need a lot of bandwidth to function optimally? USB is abysmal. Replace with firewire and everything works great and everyone is happy. I'll pay 10 bucks extra for a MB with 8 FW ports. Saves me the extra cash it costs for a card.

[error_f0rce]

Thanks for offering a clear argument, I definitely appreciate what you're saying. I get encredibly frustrated with it myself

[Nemesis881]

Originally Posted by PVTCaboose1337

Then ready boost could actually boost.

That is if companies put out good flash drives that won't crap out because of the extreme transfer speed.

[DanTheBanjoman]

Originally Posted by Ravenas

This maybe a stupid question, would this enable the use of external graphics cards?

Those already exist, though they don't perform that well. They're only usable in some exceptional circumstances.

[Ravenas]

Originally Posted by DanTheBanjoman

Those already exist, though they don't perform that well. They're only usable in some exceptional circumstances.

Yes, with pci-e but I'm talking on a USB 3.0 basis.

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

so esata was a waste then?

[TheGuruStud]

Originally Posted by error_f0rce

Thanks for offering a clear argument, I definitely appreciate what you're saying. I get encredibly frustrated with it myself

good, then we can be friends


Oh wait, it says you have an intel CPU

maybe next year