1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

USB 3.0 Proposed

Discussion in 'News' started by Polaris573, Sep 19, 2007.

  1. Polaris573

    Polaris573 Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    4,281 (1.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    718
    Location:
    Little Rock, USA
    Intel has announced the formation of the USB 3.0 promoters group, a consortium that aims to create a "super speed personal USB interconnect."

    The first members of the promoter group (HP, Intel, Microsoft, NEC Corporation, NXP Semiconductors and Texas Instruments) said that USB 3.0 will deliver more than ten times the data transfer bandwidth of USB 2.0, which tops out at 480 Mb/s. The new interface will be designed to be used in consumer electronics and mobile applications and able to deal with digital media file sizes that are likely to exceed 25 GB.

    Intel stated that USB 3.0 will be based on current USB technology and ports and cabling will be backwards compatible; however version 3.0 will offer enhancements for better protocol efficiency and lower power consumption. The development group will also integrate an upgrade path to optical capabilities for USB. A completed USB 3.0 specification is expected to be released in the first half of 2008.

    [​IMG]

    Source: TG Daily
     
    Chewy, error_f0rce and JacKz5o say thanks.
  2. PVTCaboose1337

    PVTCaboose1337 Graphical Hacker

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,512 (2.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,143
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    Finally USB can be used in HDs and they can be super fast!
     
  3. Sasqui

    Sasqui

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    7,800 (2.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,523
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
    AFT (About frikkin time). That's the first I've heard of this.
     
  4. PVTCaboose1337

    PVTCaboose1337 Graphical Hacker

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,512 (2.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,143
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    You know, I wonder how all the old electronics are going to cope with this... I remember that when they made 2.0 I practically cried because everything was faster, but it overvolted my old items I had... stupid 2.0... I am quite curious: how do they make 3.0 faster? Magic? I think not!
     
  5. kwchang007

    kwchang007 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,979 (1.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    185
    Location:
    Severn, MD, USA.
    Sweet...10x480 mb/s....4.8 gb/s....very sweet.
     
  6. panchoman

    panchoman Sold my stars!

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,595 (3.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    forget sata raid, wheres the usb hdd raid? lmao.
     
  7. PVTCaboose1337

    PVTCaboose1337 Graphical Hacker

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,512 (2.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,143
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    Oh that is a good point... USB is now faster than SATA!!! Or so they say...
     
  8. kwchang007

    kwchang007 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,979 (1.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    185
    Location:
    Severn, MD, USA.
    Probably not since currant USB really can only hold a sustained rate of about 30 mb/s which multiplied by 10 is 300 mb/s. SATA is rated at 300 mb/s between the controller and the drive. 3 gb/s between the controller and the sb. So all in all, SATA is still faster if looked at realistic speeds because I believe SATA can run closer to the limits than us.
     
  9. SkylinGTR26

    SkylinGTR26 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    67 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    This is gonna be SICK!
    USB3 FTW!
     
  10. PVTCaboose1337

    PVTCaboose1337 Graphical Hacker

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,512 (2.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,143
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    I was thinking that way as well... Realistically you say...
     
  11. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Read: Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. lol
     
  12. Ravenas

    Ravenas

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,691 (1.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    349
    Location:
    Tennessee
    This maybe a stupid question, would this enable the use of external graphics cards?
     
  13. insider Guest

    No, not even close.
     
  14. kwchang007

    kwchang007 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,979 (1.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    185
    Location:
    Severn, MD, USA.
    Hell if it can pull off the full 4.8 gb/s yeah. But the thing is there's going to be overhead, and the usb bus is shared with everything that's connected onto it etc. So it's not really as good as pci-e, and anyways, pci-e 2.0 has standards for external gfx cards.
     
  15. JacKz5o New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    485 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    99
    Location:
    New Jersey
    Nice find :D

    USB2.0 was getting pretty slow for my external HD :(
     
  16. TheGuruStud

    TheGuruStud

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,654 (0.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    175
    Location:
    Police/Nanny State of America
    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
     
  17. Ravenas

    Ravenas

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,691 (1.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    349
    Location:
    Tennessee
    The only reason I don't think it would work that well is because USB sends information in bursts, whereas FIREWIRE sends information streaming.
     
  18. Leon2ky New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Messages:
    57 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4
    No matter if it's faster or not, I have 2 Firewire 400 ports on my PC, they've never been used. USB is just more readily available. (Also its near impossible to find a mobo with 1394b)
     
    error_f0rce and Mussels say thanks.
  19. Ravenas

    Ravenas

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,691 (1.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    349
    Location:
    Tennessee
    True, but it's still faster. ;)
     
  20. kakazza New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    470 (0.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Wonder if it can push more power than the current 500mA.
     
  21. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,551 (11.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,824
    firewire is faster, since it does streaming. but USB is cheaper, and more common. the compatibility is the big thing, even a pentium 2 can use a flash drive, whereas firewire as A and B that arent compatible, requiring different devices/cables to get anything to work.

    USB3 has to beat firewire 800 (B) and hopefully it supports streaming, and not just bursts...
     
  22. jocksteeluk

    jocksteeluk New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,457 (0.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    46
    Location:
    The 13th room on the 13th floor of the 13th buildi
    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!
     
    lemonadesoda says thanks.
  23. Grimskull New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    197 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    23
    SATA 6 is due to be launched soon. It has 6gb transfer rate
     
  24. Weer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,417 (0.53/day)
    Thanks Received:
    94
    Location:
    New York / Israel
    Don't get all excited just yet, guys!

    Sure, USB has the bandwidth, but it Sucks at read/write times. It's as slow as a 4200RPM HDD. What we need is improvement in that area.. if possible.

    Then, we could hook up a USB flash drive and it'll be as fast as an SSD.
     
  25. PVTCaboose1337

    PVTCaboose1337 Graphical Hacker

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,512 (2.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,143
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    Then ready boost could actually boost.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page