Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 6, 2013, 06:54 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
SuperSpeed USB 3.0 Promises 10Gbps Data Transfers, Coming in 2014




The trade organization behind the USB 3.0 specification has announced a new upgraded spec that promises higher data speeds over backwards compatible connections.

The new spec enhanced SuperSpeed USB 3.0 spec should deliver a 10 Gbps data rate -- the same as current Thunderbolt connectors -- though don't expect it any time soon. The new protocol should be finalized sometime in 2013, with initial products featuring the connector appearing in late-2014 or 2015, reports CNET.
Quote:
To take advantage of the double-speed USB 3.0 interface, devices such as computers, hubs, and digital cameras will need new USB controller hardware. However, the new version of USB 3.0 uses the same connectors, so existing USB devices can be plugged into the higher-speed ports.

USB 3.0 cables may or may not work. "Existing SuperSpeed USB cables are not certified to operate at 10 Gbps; it is possible that some existing SuperSpeed USB cables may be capable of operating at 10 Gbps," the group said.
The new devices should be backwards compatible with older USB hardware, though not at the upgraded speeds.

Thunderbolt, which moves data at up to 10Gbps in both directions, appears mostly on Apple devices currently, but devices tend to be more expensive than their USB 3.0-compatible counterparts. However, Thunderbolt does have a strong ally in Intel, with the company pushing the standard heavily.

Article Link: SuperSpeed USB 3.0 Promises 10Gbps Data Transfers, Coming in 2014
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 06:56 PM   #2
Axemantitan
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
I much prefer Thunderbolt. It has much lower CPU usage, and can be used to connect displays. That's not the case for USB.
__________________
√-1 2^3 Σ π

Favorite website: http://www.mammals.org/
Axemantitan is offline   30 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 07:02 PM   #3
MrDc2
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axemantitan View Post
I much prefer Thunderbolt. It has much lower CPU usage, and can be used to connect displays. That's not the case for USB.
I think it would be a replacement for USB 2.0, not TB.
MrDc2 is offline   11 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 07:07 PM   #4
JS82712
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axemantitan View Post
I much prefer Thunderbolt. It has much lower CPU usage, and can be used to connect displays. That's not the case for USB.
and how much do thunderbolt accessories cost again?
JS82712 is offline   32 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 07:11 PM   #5
DJJAZZYJET
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
DJJAZZYJET is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 07:19 PM   #6
MrDc2
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
Restoring an entire user from an external drive when the internal HD fails.
MrDc2 is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 07:33 PM   #7
simsaladimbamba
macrumors Core
 
simsaladimbamba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: located
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDc2 View Post
Restoring an entire user from an external drive when the internal HD fails.
Speaking of drives and HDs, they are most often still a Hard Disk Drive (HDD) and offer slow speeds compared to SSDs.

Firewire 800 would be enough for that, USB 3.0 would be overkill and Thunderbolt would be just a waste for this.

Fast platter based HDDs offer 100 MB/s and a bit more, current SSDs offer 450 to 600 MB/s, but almost no one uses an SSD as backup device, as the GB/price ratio is still to high to make it a valid choice for such a task.
Only if someone uses the fastest SSD to backup to and also the fastest SSD as internal drive, from which one backups, Thunderbolt can at least be satisfied of being used at half its potential.
Or one uses a striped RAID box to backup to, though not really a good choice to backup to, unless the striped RAID is mirrored again, to get even half the speeds TB offers.

In other words, TB is not really that slow to offer advantages over USB 3.0 or Firewire 00, to use it as backup tool.

But then again, those are just numbers, hell I do not even have a 2011 or 2012 Mac, so I am still using "old" technology.
__________________
FREEdomly passports. Circumwent bürocrazy.
simsaladimbamba is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 07:34 PM   #8
Tech198
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Australia, Perth
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
I dunno.. Maybie movies, Actually, i think its mostly just porno.

New hardware, doesn't matter what it is. Sata Iv sounds good, but i'm just getting my first SSD.
__________________
13" MBP-R, i5, 256Gig SDD, 8 Gig Ram, Apple TV (3rd-Gen.), iPhone 5S 16Gig, iPad (4th-Gen.) 16Gig, Mac Mini 2.3Ghz i7, 1TB HD

"There are no stupid questions, just stupid people."
Tech198 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 09:57 PM   #9
bwillwall
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDc2 View Post
Restoring an entire user from an external drive when the internal HD fails.
A bigger reason is likely to compete with thunderbolt. Because, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you will ever actually get 10 GB/s copying anything because the CPU can't handle that transfer speed. It's just that standards are prepared for the faster speeds of the future.
bwillwall is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2013, 11:40 AM   #10
iChrist
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 3 countries for tax benefit
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDc2 View Post
Restoring an entire user from an external drive when the internal HD fails.

Oh yeah. That happens ALL the time.



__________________
"We should think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone--an image made by man's design and skill."
iChrist is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 07:28 PM   #11
ps45
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
Not this again. I don't know what you need it for, but others might need it to improve the way they do the work they do for a living.
ps45 is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 08:05 PM   #12
turtlez
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
To support future data speeds maybe?

Think about the past, we used to get along fine on a 56k modem. Now that wouldn't do anything but load an IM client. As time goes on so does quality and quality comes for a price. You need to upgrade speeds on our data transferring to cope with the data increase that comes with quality. Imagine if we were still on USB1, taking raw photos off a camera would be an afternoon process. Scanning at 1600dpi would break the computer, video import I don't even want to think about. We are getting 4k TVs these days that means 1080p which you are probably used to will look like dog poop. You want to import 4k resolution footage from your gopro hero 3 over USB2? Nah you don't, the battery wouldn't outlast the transfer hahahaha
turtlez is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2013, 02:43 AM   #13
RobertMartens
macrumors 6502a
 
RobertMartens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by turtlez View Post
You want to import 4k resolution footage from your gopro hero 3 over USB2? Nah you don't, the battery wouldn't outlast the transfer hahahaha

You are talking about problems that are at least 5 years way. Thunderbolt is out now.
__________________
I need a new phone, One that won't make me sick, One that won't make me crash my car, Or make me feel three feet thick, One that won't hurt my head, One that won't make me nervous,Wondering what to do
RobertMartens is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 08:56 PM   #14
ECUpirate44
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NC
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
Imagine if all engineers had that mindset
ECUpirate44 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 09:25 PM   #15
a0me
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
Pro users handling hundreds of GB of data (audio, video, etc.) on a daily basis, for example.
Consumers that have a substantial media library would sure appreciate faster transfer rates. 300 ripped CDs alone can take up to 100-200GB, and with movies you need to multiply that by a factor of at least 10.
__________________
iMac 24"; MacBook Pro 15"; iPhone 4; iPhone 5s; iPod touch; tv
a0me is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 09:32 PM   #16
AidenShaw
macrumors G5
 
AidenShaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Peninsula
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckinfutz View Post
Because Ivy Bridge was the first Intel chip with native USB 3.0 support in their Hub.
But even Intel was putting the NEC USB 3.0 chip in their systems/motherboards long before Ivy Bridge.

Apple fail. (Or Apple marketing decision to try to push some proprietary technology over something useful.)
__________________
Edward Snowden - American Hero.
Daniel Ellsberg: "Edward Snowden: Saving Us from the United Stasi of America"
Marriage equality is unstoppable
AidenShaw is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 10:00 PM   #17
coolspot18
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by a0me View Post
Pro users handling hundreds of GB of data (audio, video, etc.) on a daily basis, for example.
If a pro had to handle that much data a Fibre Channel SAN might be a better choice than a DAS. Just saying... large local storage arrays is only a very specific application - and probably one that won't sustain TB for the long term.
coolspot18 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2013, 02:08 AM   #18
NedBookPro
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.

Ahh.. I remember the days of 1200 baud modems when they just came out. Cost $300 at the time, and one would wonder why anyone would need something faster. Why on earth would anyone even consider the dizzying speeds of a 2400 baud transfer?



.
__________________
'10 MBP 13 iP 4S, iP 4, iP 3GS 2G iPod Touch 5G iPod nano 2G aTV Newton 110
NedBookPro is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2013, 06:27 AM   #19
macs4nw
macrumors 68020
 
macs4nw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: On Safari…..
Quote:
Originally Posted by NedBookPro View Post
Ahh.. I remember the days of 1200 baud modems when they just came out. Cost $300 at the time, and one would wonder why anyone would need something faster. Why on earth would anyone even consider the dizzying speeds of a 2400 baud transfer? .
Nail
^
head
macs4nw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2013, 08:07 AM   #20
Bubba Satori
macrumors 68040
 
Bubba Satori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: B'ham
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
Is this a trick question?

For me it would be for moving around thousands of 50MB RAW files
and 100GB of video footage a day. Cutting the time to do that in half might be helpful.
Bubba Satori is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2013, 12:39 PM   #21
riz22
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
Editing video without an external hard drive is one reason. Creative professionals will always have the need for max bandwidth... For consumers, not so important for sure.
riz22 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2013, 10:47 PM   #22
MadDawg2020
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
Video editing for one...
Backing up your system in minutes instead of hours another...

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech198 View Post
If they start calling it "Superspeed USB" that will confuse me like crazy.
"Now faster"


FYI.. You can get cheap TB cables from other sources. MonoPrice.

But i still agree, lack of hardware support by manufactures.
Yes but lack of hardware support really doesn't matter the tech is BACKWARDS COMPADABLE which means your USB puck mouse from your original iMac along with any USB printer, scanner or camera will work NO PROBLEM.

This is why USB works! The technology can evolve and not be a problem to the end user and you don't have to force users to adapt to a new interface and $50 cables to use with devices that don't exist!
MadDawg2020 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 08:49 AM   #23
coolspot18
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDawg2020 View Post
Video editing for one...
Backing up your system in minutes instead of hours another...
Is video editing the only application? If so, Thunderbolt's life is very bleak.



Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmacward View Post
I know that's specialised so lets take a real world example - Time Machines system restores that are done within a minute. Backups that happen in seconds. Music, image and video library, iPhoto, Aperture database transfers... the list goes on and on...
Not possible unless computers have a massive internal disk array.

So it's a pointless example (for now) of the use of Thunderbolt.

Thunderbolt needs exciting applications that are possible TODAY, not fluff or niche applications to survive.




Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
In reality, we've seen it for the last close to 2 years. Some of you just want to ignore it. Jason Ziller, from Intel, which I've quoted time and time again explained it 2 years ago. You guys just don't want to accept it : Thunderbolt is not consumer level tech and consumer level devices aren't really in the pipeline.
It's unfortunate it was included in the iMac in this case ... the iMac is hardly a workstation machine.

I still think real-professionals who need to move this much data will stick with tried and true technologies such as Fibre Channel. The costs are not that much - but you get even more storage and more peripheral choices. There's even an article on SmallNetBuilder about building your own FiberChannel SAN for < 1000.00USD!

Last edited by coolspot18; Jan 8, 2013 at 08:57 AM.
coolspot18 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2013, 04:45 AM   #24
johnmacward
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJAZZYJET View Post
and we need 10gb data transfer for what exactly.
Famous last words - think about it, who complains about SSD speeds nowadays - "SSD'd are just too fast". Imagine transferring DVD or BluRay images, video files in the 100's of gigs over in a matter of seconds.

I know that's specialised so lets take a real world example - Time Machines system restores that are done within a minute. Backups that happen in seconds. Music, image and video library, iPhoto, Aperture database transfers... the list goes on and on...

There's never any point in complaining about faster speeds because they are always better than slower and although the price isn't right at the moment, faster is ALWAYS better and inevitable.
johnmacward is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 07:12 PM   #25
iKanit
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
I use Macbook Retina, but I less prefer Thunderbolt. How can you accept interface system which cost you $59 only for a cable?
__________________
'12 MBP Retina 15" i7/16GB/512GB | 27" Thunderbolt Display | iPad 2 64GB Wi-Fi/White
iKanit is offline   7 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
USB 3.0 High-Speed and SuperSpeed EnigMoiD MacBook Air 10 Jan 4, 2014 11:48 PM
USB Finalizes 10Gbps SuperSpeed+ Standard as USB 3.1 MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 187 Dec 6, 2013 05:49 AM
Google Launches Newsstand App for Android, Promises iOS App in 2014 MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 127 Nov 30, 2013 02:11 AM
USB 3.0 speed being increased to 10gbps. Set to make thunderbolt next to obsolete? rmwebs Mac Peripherals 2 Jan 6, 2013 07:22 PM
What's the difference between USB 3.0 SuperSpeed vs High-Speed Bus? sunsluv MacBook Pro 3 Jun 21, 2012 07:37 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:43 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC