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

USB 3.0 SuperSpeed Demonstrated

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Aug 22, 2008.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    33,588 (9.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    17,151
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    USB 2.0 has been around for quite some time now, it's already become a serious bottleneck with storage devices where its "up to" 480 Mbps speed limits transfer-rate significantly compared to what today's devices demand. External-SATA had proven to eradicate that bottleneck by providing speeds for external storage devices on par with internal fixed drives. A newer standard of the USB is in the works, this newer interface on paper promises 10-times the amount of bandwidth USB 2.0 did, that's 4.8 Gbps, more than three times over that of e-SATA, 1.5 times over e-SATA II.

    At the ongoing Intel Developer Forum (IDF) event, prototype USB 3.0 boards and cables were shown transferring at 307+ MB/s. The USB 3.0 coalition proclaims this is fast enough to transfer a 27 GB HD in just 60 to 70 seconds. This interface is backwards compatible with USB 2.0 (HiSpeed) and USB 1.1 (FullSpeed), and will be referred to as SuperSpeed. A representative from Ellisys said current flash memory and hard drive storage capacities are outstripping USB 2.0 transfer speeds.

    Source: TG Daily
     
  2. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,318 (6.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,777
    I don't believe them. i bet that was just a short burst.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  3. Zehnsucht

    Zehnsucht New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    Messages:
    438 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    With powered eSATA in the works, I don't see how this will be a hit.
     
  4. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    45,866 (9.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,322
    Location:
    Australalalalalaia.
    300MB/s sounds good. As long as it does 250MB/s sustained i see a long life for that standard.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  5. theJesus

    theJesus

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,015 (1.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    917
    Location:
    Ohio
    I think it's funny that it still isn't an actual 480mbps even though they say it'll go "up to" 4.8gbps this time around.
     
  6. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,318 (6.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,777
    USB 2.0 is 480Mb(its) per second, not MB(ytes). 1MB = 8Mb.

    So the theoretical USB2 throughput is 60MB/s. USB3 is 600MB/s theoretical.
     
    1c3d0g, TheMailMan78 and theJesus say thanks.
    10 Year Member at TPU
  7. DanTheBanjoman Señor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,480 (2.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,382
    It's 50% efficiency, why can't that be true?
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  8. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,318 (6.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,777
    It's just a personal feeling, not based on any evidence as of yet. I just don't trust them. lol. Anyway, I do want to see what the new interface can do. Hopefully I'll have to eat my words.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  9. Dark_Webster

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2007
    Messages:
    392 (0.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    51
    Location:
    Portugal
    At least Microsoft must implement it well in Vista. Jeez, some times my Cruzer transfers at 30 MB ot 300KB on my lappy :).
     
  10. theJesus

    theJesus

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,015 (1.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    917
    Location:
    Ohio
    doh, the lower-case vs upper-case always throws me off as I over-look it :eek:
     
  11. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,318 (6.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,777
    I figured. That's why I pointed it out for you.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  12. DanTheBanjoman Señor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,480 (2.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,382
    And that isn't just because it's a bad stick or controller? I've had no issues with USB implementation so far.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  13. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    45,866 (9.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,322
    Location:
    Australalalalalaia.
    no one trusts the USB3 specs because the USB 2.0 specs are full of crap. 480Mb/s is 60MB/s - i've never seen a transfer (USB HDD, flash drive, etc) ever break 30MB/s (sustained).

    Its probably like wireless and powerline networking, where they measure up and down at the same time and claim its double the speed.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  14. lemonadesoda

    lemonadesoda

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    6,370 (1.61/day)
    Thanks Received:
    991
    In the bits vs. bytes discussion, dont forget that serial bit transfer requires start, stop, EC, CRC control bits etc. There is a bigger overhead than with parallel data transfer, esp. with how we measure throughput of HDDs. So you need more than 8 bits to get 1 byte worth of data. This is where the "50% efficiency" comes in. A combination of "burst", "wait" and control/EC.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  15. Ketxxx

    Ketxxx Heedless Psychic

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    11,507 (2.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    570
    Location:
    Kingdom of gods
    About time USB3 started being known about in the public. I'm still arguing why the hell does USB3 need to be backwardly compatible with USB 1.1 though.. NOBODY uses bloody 1.1 and I bet less than 3% of PC owners actually still own a USB1.1 device.
     
    1c3d0g says thanks.
    10 Year Member at TPU
  16. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    22,246 (6.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    8,991
    Location:
    'Merica. The Great SOUTH!
    Ya know Iv been messing around with computers for 20 years and I had no F#@KING clue there was a difference between "MB" and "Mb". I never gave it much thought and if I did just figured it was a typo. I feel like such a newb! :laugh: I love this forum!
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  17. chron New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2006
    Messages:
    569 (0.14/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    all i can say is wow
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  18. PVTCaboose1337

    PVTCaboose1337 Graphical Hacker

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,501 (2.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,144
    Location:
    Dallas, Texas
    This is probably right... sadly. I think the hardware though is the weak link in the examples you gave though.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  19. cdawall

    cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    25,708 (6.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,894
    Location:
    Houston
    so who thinks this will actually give good transfer rates? and who thinks this will be another firewire looks slower but smokes USB2.0 thing? this time its going to be eSATA looks slower but is really much faster because its not a burst protocol its sustained speeds like firewire
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  20. newconroer

    newconroer

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,831 (1.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    600
    Firewire > USB.

    Shame it didn't catch on more.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  21. timta2

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    870 (0.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    133
    Location:
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    I agree! In the real world Firewire 400 smokes USB 2.0.
     
  22. WarEagleAU

    WarEagleAU Bird of Prey

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    10,809 (2.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    548
    Location:
    Gurley, AL
    I have an External that is firewire and boy it transfers the hell out of some data.

    personally, I like sustained speeds and true to form data, not speculation and paper specs, which is what this seems like to me.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  23. theJesus

    theJesus

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,015 (1.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    917
    Location:
    Ohio
    Unfortunately, G15 rev1 (don't know about rev2) keyboards use usb1.1 for their pass-through ports (not the actual connection though). So if I still use this keyboard when USB 3.0 is standard, I'd like to still be able to plug a new mouse into it (unless it's some super-high dpi monster).
     
  24. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    45,866 (9.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,322
    Location:
    Australalalalalaia.
    most mice and keyboards still use 1.1. Lots of webcams do too.

    80% or so of people would still have a 1.1 device - seriously, go have a look. i still have a USB 1.1 scanner and printer as well.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  25. tkpenalty New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,956 (1.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    345
    Location:
    Australia, Sydney
    All in my input prephrieals use USB 1.1 FYI :shadedshu
     
    10 Year Member at TPU

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