Intel Looks to Broaden Thunderbolt 3 Adoption by Integrating Into Future CPUs, Eliminating Royalties

[raghu8912]

This is great news!

So how long until rMB gets a TB3 port?

When will thunderbolt be integrated into intel CPUs? cannon lake? seems may be to soon. Maybe we will have to wait until Ice Lake in 2019 ? so no rMB w/ TB3 until 2020?

2016 MPB already have this.
Two Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C) ports on 13".

 

[pgwalsh]

This news just confirms that Apple was right in ditching all other ports. In 2/3 years, anyone who bought an expensive computer with old ports will regret it

Apparently your a bit obtuse as to why people were upset. No one was upset that Apple adopted the port, they were upset because they dropped ports for regular USB devices, HDMI port and MagSafe which helped protect the computer. Unless you had no existing peripherals you had to go and buy an adapter to use the new ports. They didn't need to laden the computer with ports, but keeping MagSafe, a couple USB 3 ports and maybe an HDMI port would have garnered few if any complaints, where ports are concerned. Now people have to cary there, thin as hell, laptop around with an adapter.

 

[ikir]

and eGPU
www.egpu.io
[doublepost=1495660365][/doublepost]

Maybe thunderbolt will actually get some use now

It had a very important role since the first one but it is not for everyone so most "low" users trolls like you're doing. Even Thunderbolt 1 was a bless for data transfer, high efficient devices... and now I'm posting this from an eGPU, yes my ultra light Mac have a ultra power Nvidia GTX 1070 thanks to Thunderbolt 3.

 

[farmboy]

Why? Intel invented it.

But this is a really good thing.

Co-developed by Apple and Intel. Intel came up with the concept and Apple helped them make it into a feasible product.

 

[ajfahey]

Will this eliminate the confusion of not knowing whether a USB-C port is 3.0, 3.1 gen 1, or 3.1 gen 2?

God, I hope so. Outside the Apple ecosystem, gen 2 barely exists.

 

[albusseverus]

Wow, the internet just eats up spin like junk food - wake up people. Intel could reduce licence fees today if it wanted T3 adopted! This is the END of Thunderbolt, too little, years too late.
-
Is it just me or does putting T3 into FUTURE CPUs sound like years old tech being promised for future products?

This is better news, but hardly good news. Future Thunderbolt in future CPUs with affordable royalties would be good news.

Nobody is grateful that iMacs still don't have T3, it's 2015 technology, frankly on it's way out. Nobody is picking it up and THIS sounds like A LAST DITCH EFFORT to get Thunderbolt adopted! Not democratisation of a badly needed technology!! Pre-iPhone technology touch bar and T3 that, while great on paper, nobody else has adopted - what a bumper year for Mac Book Pro!!

Thunderbolt died because it was just too expensive for anyone to adopt.

 

[blumpy]

I highly doubt that will happen. There are no good AMD chips for MBP, and Apple wouldn't go for AMD on desktops and Intel on laptops.

Why not an AMD Eypc for a new MacPro? AMD will have APUs which will likely rival intel for laptops in the next month or two. The only reason to stick with Intel for laptops is Thunderbolt for pci-e speed i/o, but 90% of users will just use usb c because of its affordable pricing. Of the few people using thunderbolt at rates as high as thunderbolt 3, which is only available on the MPB with thunderbolt 3 at the moment, they're pro's. Anyone with an SSD raid capable of that sort of throughput needs a CPU that can process that amount of information. A laptop CPU is going to be a bottleneck so they're already using a desktop system.

Where is thunderbolt 3 useful for a laptop that usb c couldn't handle? A pci-e graphics card for a gaming laptop with an external display? It's no longer portable. For the amount you'd spend on that system you could build a Ryzen gaming PC for a little more and have superior gaming.

Audio i/o? Thunderbolt 3 is overkill. Thunderbolt 1 was fine, USB C is way faster.

I could be wrong. Is anyone using a thunderbolt 3 device on a MacBook pro that couldn't be handled by USB C?

 

[hishnash]

I could be wrong. Is anyone using a thunderbolt 3 device on a MacBook pro that couldn't be handled by USB C?

5k display

 

[cult hero]

Best tech news of the day by far. Thunderbolt devices have always carried an obnoxious premium (and I have a bunch too).

I think the USB-C standard is an utter mess. If it fits, it would work. But if you're rocking a Thunderbolt 3 device, fits = works is pretty much guaranteed.

I could be wrong. Is anyone using a thunderbolt 3 device on a MacBook pro that couldn't be handled by USB C?

5K displays, as was pointed out.

However, there are also mass storage devices that saturate the bus as well. You'll also see more and more multi-port hubs that have multiple video out too. There's also infant eGPU market.

Thunderbolt is also a peer-to-peer protocol, making it a different animal than USB. I don't think a lot of people realize (in addition to it being awesome on its own) it's the true successor to FireWire. It's external PCIe.

 

[deconstruct60]

......

Intel also revealed plans to integrate Thunderbolt 3 into its future CPUs, but it didn't provide a timeline as to when. The all-in-one design will take up less space on a Mac or PC's logic board, and reduce power consumption by eliminating the need for a standalone Thunderbolt controller.Intel said Thunderbolt 3 built into the processor could pave the way for thinner and lighter devices, although the current Thunderbolt 3 controller used in Apple's latest MacBook Pro has a package size of 10.7mm×10.7mm, so any logic board space saved would likely be negligible.

Integrating TB into the CPU package probably has more to do with the MacBook ( and single/duo port, very thin, Windows tablet models ) than with any MBP. There is a limit to how far the TB controller can be placed from the ports. An older, slower version of Thunderbolt is just a couple of inches.

"...The spec for max trace length between the Thunderbolt controller and port is two inches, compared to up to 10 inches for Intel's USB 3.0 controller. ..."
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5884/...s-part-2-intels-dz77rek75-asus-p8z77v-premium

Putting it inside the CPU package has a very strong likelihood of just coupling the CPU package with that exact same requirement. So the CPU package probably has to be moved closer to the port. That is fine for a Core-M class ( 5-10W class with passive cooling) CPU package. It doesn't drag along a cooling system when you move it around on the motherboard. If there is only 1 (maybe 2) ports on the device then don't need to connect to ports on either side.


The less space is more than just the TB controller. The current TBv3 controller also has a USB 3.1 gen controller built in also. If that was "shared" by simply just using the PCH controller the size can be dropped. Likewise if the GPU's DisplayPort output can be run drectly to the TB controller input that to could be all wrapped up on CPU package. For systems like Tablet and Macbooks that makes a different in space for RAM, Flash, or battery.

Thunderbolt 3 carries power, USB, DisplayPort, HDMI, and VGA over a single port that shares the USB-C connector design, creating one standard for connecting most accessories and peripherals. Apple's latest MacBook Pro has two or four Thunderbolt 3 ports depending on the model.

Thunderbolt 3 is one of the USB's Alternate Modes. Basically the Alternative Mode standard means you can put a switch behind the Type-C port and there are autoconfig protocols to switch the right output to the port. Since TB is in part a switching technology (inside the controllers) it was not hard for TB to expand to fill that role. However, TB itself technically doesn't carry most of these. PCI-e and DisplayPort are carried. Those can be realized into VGA, HDMI, or USB at the peripheral edge by more chips, but they aren't carried by TB.

The Intel article mentions:

"... In addition to Intel’s Thunderbolt silicon, next year Intel plans to make the Thunderbolt protocol specification available to the industry under a nonexclusive, royalty-free license. Releasing the Thunderbolt protocol specification in this manner is expected to greatly increase Thunderbolt adoption by encouraging third-party chip makers to build Thunderbolt-compatible chips. We expect industry chip development to accelerate a wide range of new devices and user experiences. .."

Royalty free is basically to get a open standard started. Otherwise folks tend to treat it as a potential bait and switch. ( include me in your standard and then crank the costs). There were particularly royalties now with TB. You have to pay Intel for the chips as the sole supplier.

This may help drive down the cost of some specialized TB devices. Someone could take TB logic and combine it with a USB/SATA controller to have singe chip implementation of a TB+USB+SATA. Similar to how USB and SATA are combined for relatively inexpensive USB drives.

Similar for certain sets of single port docks where the USB+ethernet+whatver are all combined into chip with the TB controller.


However for TB devices that will daisy chain though I'd be surprised if there was a huge drop in costs. ( unless the certification standards are hugely relaxed. ). An earlier message in this thread pegged TB controllers at $20. For a simples one is it more along the lines of $6-10

http://ark.intel.com/products/family/79641/Thunderbolt-Products

Expensive controllers are not the primary drivers of higher TB device costs. There are certainly additional costs with handling the alternate modes ( DisplayPort ) that TB implicitly requires for two port TB devices, but I highly doubt 3rd party chip makers are going to have a silver bullet for that.

 

[Macaholic868]

Sounds like progress to me. If it's built in and royality free why wouldn't more device manufacturers make use of it?

 

[JamesPDX]

Best tech news of the day by far. Thunderbolt devices have always carried an obnoxious premium (and I have a bunch too).

I think the USB-C standard is an utter mess. If it fits, it would work. But if you're rocking a Thunderbolt 3 device, fits = works is pretty much guaranteed.

Until Thunderbolt 4 comes along and the connector is changed once again.

"No one will ever need more than 40Gbps..." -Abraham Lincoln

 

[deconstruct60]

Wow, the internet just eats up spin like junk food - wake up people. Intel could reduce licence fees today if it wanted T3 adopted! This is the END of Thunderbolt, too little, years too late.

There is no "license fee". You have to pay for the controllers but there are in the $6-10 range. That isn't the primary driver of TB devices.

Part of the cost is being held to higher certification standards..... race-to-the-bottom quality cost savings and licensing fees are two different issues.
[doublepost=1495665425][/doublepost]

Until Thunderbolt 4 comes along and the connector is changed once again.

Extremely unlikely. Thunderbolt has never set out to create its own port. It has always piggybacked on some other port. TBv1-2 on mini-DisplayPort. TBv3 on USB Type-C. As along as the baseline Type-C port gets bumped up to faster speed then there is no reason for TB to "get off". Who else is doing a faster than Type-C port? DisplayPort? Probably not. HDMI? Probably not ( they have a bump coming for this standard port for HDMI 2.1 but doesn't really top Type-C's top end theoretical speeds). So what is this mystery port that is going to come along that allows TB significantly more headroom than Type-C?

Alternate mode is drawing folks into the fold because the baseline physical port work that needs to be done to crank ports higher is getting harder for plain-old-copper connections. This way they can share in the work.

The move to Type-C was (and still is) disruptive, but should settle down after a while. Levering a USB baseline means there is a bunch of race-to-the-bottom baggage that comes along with it, but also brings wider population too. A bit of a dual edge sword.

What TB is sorely lacking on is the "lower cost" optical connections that have been increasingly back burnered since the "LightPeak" days. This copper and power stuff isn't going work if want to crank up speeds and still keep distances.

 

[Macaholic868]

and eGPU
www.egpu.io
[doublepost=1495660365][/doublepost]
It had a very important role since the first one but it is not for everyone so most "low" users trolls like you're doing. Even Thunderbolt 1 was a bless for data transfer, high efficient devices... and now I'm posting this from an eGPU, yes my ultra light Mac have a ultra power Nvidia GTX 1070 thanks to Thunderbolt 3.

Can you provide some insight into how you setup the eGPU? I've been wanting to add one to my Mac to get a GPU with enough power for gaming and it sounds like you need to get an eGPU "case" (for lack of a better term), then get the graphics card and install it in the "case" and then install the drivers. Does the eGPU then provide output to the laptop's LCD or do you need to connect an external monitor to the eGPU? Any suggestions or links to sites that provide a How To would be awesome!

 

[davidmartindale]

Regret it how? Person buys brand new computer today, May 24th. A standard config with USB, HDMI, Display Port, SD Reader. Come 2020, the computer still works. So what's to regret? I bet you can find forum members with computers that are 2, 3, heck 5-7 years old (or older) running perfectly fine. I know my 2011 MBA is still humming along. It's pretty hard to regret something that doesn't exist yet, and it definitely isn't a confirmation that Apple was correct about anything. In fact, didn't Apple recently acknowledge some of their decisions weren't exactly spot on?

2007 MacBook Pro is my primary Mac and it runs great. Have to wait a minute for it to boot up and can't have more than 4-5 apps open at once due to only 4GB of RAM on El Cap. But still a darn good computer.

 

[Fancuku]

So AMD with TB3 then? Intel and Free licensing ?
What's next? MBP 15 for less then 1500$?

Only in our dreams.

 

[terraphantm]

The problem is that the MacBooks have very limited space for ports. That's why there are dongles for everything. Yeah, it's more money to spend, but it's either a bigger MacBook with old ports or a thinner MacBook with the fastest ports.

They could have had 2 TB3 ports and 2 USB3. Or really I'd be fine with a bigger MacBook too since that would make room for a larger battery.

 

[a.gomez]

Ryzen Workstation!... Woot!

 

[otternonsense]

That makes having to put up with this junk new MBP for almost half a year SO much better now. #not

 

[scoobydoo99]

I wonder how many thunderbolt capable Macs I'll have gone though before there is a sensibly priced thunderbolt peripheral. I am up to 3 so far and have yet to use the port. I had actually given up on it.

word. Thunderbolt 3 may be great, but Apple implemented way too early and took away useful ports while we sit around waiting for Thunderbolt to become ubiquitous. I'll be on my next computer (or maybe the one after that) before this move by Intel has any real effect.

 

[CartoonCat]

Great news, but should have happened 2 years ago.

 

[scoobydoo99]

... But until then, yes, I'm a bit jealous of people with older MBPs with their full array of ports. I don't hate my TB MBP, I just don't love it. Hindsight, yes, I wish I delayed upgrading but my previous MBP was getting up there and slow and hard to say what Apple's laptop upgrade schedule is anymore so I took the leap.

I was in the same boat (needing to upgrade), but as soon at the current MBP was announced, and I saw how crippled it was, I rushed to the Apple refurb store and bought the last generation MBP with maxed out specs. Soooo happy to have HDMI, SD card, magsafe, etc. We'll see what Apple is offering in 2 years when I buy again, but I'm not optimistic based upon their current trajectory.

 

[rowspaxe]

Huge nothing-burger. Half of this sight is arguing an ipad can replace a laptop. The speeds of thunderbolt will not effect 90% of users. While the potential for surface dock like powered hubs seems tantalizing, individual manufacturers will have different charging specifications. Surface dock is about 5 years ahead of its time.

 

[sudo1996]

This news just confirms that Apple was right in ditching all other ports. In 2/3 years, anyone who bought an expensive computer with old ports will regret it

By the time the standard has finished changing and is ubiquitous, I seriously doubt that the current Macs will support it. That'll be cause for regret. We've already been through TB 1, 2, 3.0, and 3.1. And now the connector and the protocol are decoupled, so there's even more variability. All this stuff is up in the air, and Apple is taking blind shots.

I'm just sitting back and waiting for the version that "Wintel" + Google settle on because that's going to be the absolute final version, like USB. If you rush to buy a TB3-equipped Mac now, every day that you go without actually using it for something that couldn't be done before is a waste.
[doublepost=1495678139][/doublepost]

I was in the same boat (needing to upgrade), but as soon at the current MBP was announced, and I saw how crippled it was, I rushed to the Apple refurb store and bought the last generation MBP with maxed out specs. Soooo happy to have HDMI, SD card, magsafe, etc. We'll see what Apple is offering in 2 years when I buy again, but I'm not optimistic based upon their current trajectory.

Same, but I bought from B&H because the refurb store was out of them. I have every port (including SD) filled at this moment except for one TB slot. True that I could buy the more expensive 2017 MBP and use a big, expensive, unreliable dongle to solve this, but...

 

[mabhatter]

Actually nothing stops AMD, or rather AMD partners, that are building MoBos with AMD chipsets, to buy the Alpine Ridge controller, and add it to the MoBo. The things is that Alpine Ridge Controllers costs 22$ alone, and it makes the cost of MoBo go up by at least 50$.

Opening up the spec of protocol makes everything much, much easier. Interesting actually. It right now makes 100% possible(pay attention to the word ), that we might see AMD based Mac in future, if Thunderbolt protocol is opened up. Possible, does not mean confirmed.

Current Ryzen processors don't have enough PCI-E lanes to feed Thunderbolt 3. Its equivalent to PCI-E 3.0 x 4 lanes... so you could have one if you removed every other PCI-E slot other than 1 for GPU. "Threadripper" has enough bandwidth for a Couple of TB3 ports and things like M.2 PCIE NVMe drives. Getting graphics and other protocols over the wire is ugly though. The one Asus TB3 card that does all the things is a pretty ugly setup of multiple internal and external jumper cables to attach the various things.. and you get ONE TB3 port.