OWC's Upcoming Thunderbolt Hub Adds More Thunderbolt 3 Ports to Your Mac

[repoman27]

Apple also won’t be using Intel VT/d for DMA protection, so they might not ever apply for the TB 4 designation. But they seem to adhere to all the other specs in their existing Intel Macs, and all but the 2 4K display requirement and VT/d for the M1 Macs.

According to Rene Ritchie, Intel clarified that Thunderbolt 4 certification will be available for machines that do not feature Intel silicon or VT-d as long as they implement equivalent DMA protections.

Existing Intel Macs with Thunderbolt are already certified Thunderbolt products, but none of them can ever be certified as Thunderbolt 4 because they do not support USB4. (Although technically, the Thunderbolt controllers integrated into Ice Lake CPUs are capable of the required signaling, but I don’t expect Intel or any vendor to ever expose that functionality in shipping products.)

 

[ChromeAce]

Uh, you only get 2 additional Thunderbolt ports after you’re done connecting this thing to the port you already have. Also that wonky power connector is prone to damage.

 

[xpaulso]

Finally. This is awesome. Hopefully iFixit will do a teardown so we can see how OWC is bridging the 3 downstream ports. Odds are its just a standard PCIe Bridge to 3 port TB controller. But it would be awesome if it was something else. Something I don't even know about. Either way I'll be waiting for the full dock version. That includes some dedicated Video, Ethernet and Audio Output.

 

[xpaulso]

Uh, you only get 2 additional Thunderbolt ports after you’re done connecting this thing to the port you already have. Also that wonky power connector is prone to damage.

Those two extra ports could make all the difference. I also get the sense you can daisy chain these. So In theory you could daisy chain 3 of theses into 1 of these.

 

[joevt]

They could have at least bothered to give more than 1 USB-A port. Pretty stupid.

I guess you get the first USB port for free from the Thunderbolt 4 peripheral chip they are using. Additional USB ports would require an USB hub.

Finally. This is awesome. Hopefully iFixit will do a teardown so we can see how OWC is bridging the 3 downstream ports. Odds are its just a standard PCIe Bridge to 3 port TB controller. But it would be awesome if it was something else. Something I don't even know about. Either way I'll be waiting for the full dock version. That includes some dedicated Video, Ethernet and Audio Output.

The bridging is probably internal to the Thunderbolt controller just as it's been in every Thunderbolt device before this. Instead of one PCIe downstream bridge for a Thunderbolt port, there will by three PCIe downstream bridges for three Thunderbolt ports.
I guess the JHL8440 configured as a peripheral chip has the following:
1) four Thunderbolt ports
1a) one is setup as the upstream port - a PCIe upstream bridge will be connected to this via PCI Up Adapter.
1b) three downstream ports - a PCIe downstream bridge exists for each
2) one USB port - for Thunderbolt hosts I suppose there's a PCIe downstream bridge with a XHCI controller built into the Thunderbolt controller to do USB for this port and the three downstream Thunderbolt ports. And for USB4 hosts, there might be a USB hub to do USB for this port and the three Thunderbolt ports.
3) one PCIe downstream connection - four lanes of PCIe 3.0 can be used to connect one, two, three, or four PCIe devices using x1x1x1x1, x2x1x1, x2x2, or x4 lanes. Each PCIe device gets a PCIe downstream bridge.
4) two DisplayPort inputs (not sure about this since it's not used in the OWC hub - if this Thunderbolt 4 controller is only for peripherals and not for hosts then it might not have DisplayPort inputs)
5) one DisplayPort output (this exists in Thunderbolt 3 controllers for peripherals to allow two DisplayPort outputs where the second output would be the downstream Thunderbolt port - but the Thunderbolt 4 chip has 3 downstream ports so this might not exist in this Thunderbolt 4 controller)

 

[xpaulso]

I guess you get the first USB port for free from the Thunderbolt 4 peripheral chip they are using. Additional USB ports would require an USB hub.

The bridging is probably internal to the Thunderbolt controller just as it's been in every Thunderbolt device before this. Instead of one PCIe downstream bridge for a Thunderbolt port, there will by three PCIe downstream bridges for three Thunderbolt ports.
I guess the JHL8440 configured as a peripheral chip has the following:
1) four Thunderbolt ports
1a) one is setup as the upstream port - a PCIe upstream bridge will be connected to this via PCI Up Adapter.
1b) three downstream ports - a PCIe downstream bridge exists for each
2) one USB port - for Thunderbolt hosts I suppose there's a PCIe downstream bridge with a XHCI controller built into the Thunderbolt controller to do USB for this port and the three downstream Thunderbolt ports. And for USB4 hosts, there might be a USB hub to do USB for this port and the three Thunderbolt ports.
3) one PCIe downstream connection - four lanes of PCIe 3.0 can be used to connect one, two, three, or four PCIe devices using x1x1x1x1, x2x1x1, x2x2, or x4 lanes. Each PCIe device gets a PCIe downstream bridge.
4) two DisplayPort inputs (not sure about this since it's not used in the OWC hub - if this Thunderbolt 4 controller is only for peripherals and not for hosts then it might not have DisplayPort inputs)
5) one DisplayPort output (this exists in Thunderbolt 3 controllers for peripherals to allow two DisplayPort outputs where the second output would be the downstream Thunderbolt port - but the Thunderbolt 4 chip has 3 downstream ports so this might not exist in this Thunderbolt 4 controller)

Interesting the lack of dual display port would be unfortunate. This would mean I'd still need to run another root chain for your displays. I was hoping you'd be able to hang the "OWC THUNDERBOLT 3 MINI DOCK" off of one of the three ports.

How does the PCIe lane negotiation work. If you have 2 devices that request 2 lanes each and a third that request 4, will it the TB controller negotiate this to the "best case" scenario?

 

[jettredmont]

There's one upstream facing port and three downstream facing ports. It gives you three additional ports. It uses a 4-port controller internally.

The point is, you start with two ports open. Then you plug this in and now you have four ports open (one on your Mac, and the three in the back of this).

That said, your interpretation is in line with how hubs are always marketed, not as a net (subtracting the port they plug into) but as the addition. Nothing out of line with the OWC marketing here IMHO.

 

[jettredmont]

Maybe it's just me, but it seems they went the extra step of making it look nice (aluminum exterior shell matched to your silver Mac presumably), but then messed it up by putting the upstream TB port and arguably the USB-A port on the front. These aren't ports you need to be plugging/unplugging all the time (again, arguably the USB-A for thumbdrive, but def not the computer one). If you have a setup where you are docking a laptop, you won't be plugging/unplugging at the hub, but rather leaving the TB cord plugged in and plug the other end into your MBP/MBA.

That TB port belongs on the back, physically slightly separated from the others assuming it is indeed "special". The USB port can be on the front, or relegated to the back as well. That would leave the front nice and clean, and in line with the nice brushed Al finish.

 

[KPOM]

The point is, you start with two ports open. Then you plug this in and now you have four ports open (one on your Mac, and the three in the back of this).

That said, your interpretation is in line with how hubs are always marketed, not as a net (subtracting the port they plug into) but as the addition. Nothing out of line with the OWC marketing here IMHO.

But it does provide power, which ordinarily would also take up a port. So you wind up with 4 data-capable ports vs 1. Granted, the M1 MacBook Airs and Pros get good battery life, but it is still necessary to plug them once in a while.

 

[nicho]

Question: the ports call themselves Thunderbolt (USB-C)... but USB-C is a connector rather than a protocol.

What happens if I plug in a USB-C thumb drive to one of these thunderbolt ports, or a USB-C to USB-C data cable linked up to my iPad pro. Will it work, since some cables are Thunderbolt 3-only... and the macs have TB3 ports rather than TB4 ports that encompass the USB spec?

If I were to pick up an M1 mac mini, I probably have more need/use for splitting one of the TB ports between 4 USB ports capable of 10gbps (with the added bonus here of the occasional "burst" higher for my Samsung X5, compared to buying a TB expansion box and a PCI-e card with 4 USB3.2 ports on it) than being able to connect multiple Thunderbolt devices. The only TB device I actually have is the aforementioned X5

 

[mpainesyd]

They screwed up by not using USB C to power it.

The power input is 5.5 amps at 20V - that is way beyond USB specs. Maybe there is a built in room heater that they haven't revealed!

 

[joevt]

Interesting the lack of dual display port would be unfortunate. This would mean I'd still need to run another root chain for your displays. I was hoping you'd be able to hang the "OWC THUNDERBOLT 3 MINI DOCK" off of one of the three ports.

I didn't say it lacked dual display port. I said (or meant to say) it probably doesn't have a dedicated DisplayPort output port because it has three USB-C ports that can do DisplayPort output. The USB-C ports of the Thunderbolt 4 hub can be used for DisplayPort output to USB-C displays or to DisplayPort/HDMI/VGA/DVI displays with appropriate USB-C or Thunderbolt docks, hubs, or adapters.

In a Thunderbolt 3 device, you only have one USB-C port to do DisplayPort output, so Intel added an extra DisplayPort port to the Thunderbolt 3 controller for a second display option. See the OWC Mercury Helios S3 for an example of a Thunderbolt device that has a downstream Thunderbolt port and a DisplayPort port. It can do two displays using the DisplayPort port and the downstream Thunderbolt port. Another example is a Thunderbolt 3 to Dual DisplayPort adapter - in that case, you have two DisplayPort outputs (one comes from the downstream Thunderbolt port). The OWC Thunderbolt 3 Mini Dock is similar to the Dual DisplayPort adapter: it has two HDMI ports - one must come from the DisplayPort port of the Thunderbolt controller in the Mini Dock, and the other must come from the downstream Thunderbolt port of the Thunderbolt controller in the Mini Dock, therefore the Mini Dock does not have a second Thunderbolt port.

A chain or tree of Thunderbolt devices is like a network. Packets are sent through the network from the host to the endpoint. The host (computer) can take multiple DisplayPort inputs (usually two) and transmit DisplayPort across the Thunderbolt network as Thunderbolt DisplayPort packets. Those packets are converted to DisplayPort at one of the nodes in the tree where a display is connected.

A Thunderbolt device doesn't need DisplayPort output functionality to pass Thunderbolt DisplayPort packets down the chain from the host to the OWC Thunderbolt 3 Mini Dock.

I believe Thunderbolt 2 is limited to one display per Thunderbolt 2 controller so you need two Thunderbolt 2 devices in a chain to output two displays.

How does the PCIe lane negotiation work. If you have 2 devices that request 2 lanes each and a third that request 4, will it the TB controller negotiate this to the "best case" scenario?

The PCIe bus acts like a tree network also. A PCIe device is connected to the Thunderbolt controller via 1, 2, or 4 lanes. In the case of the Sonnet Echo Express III-D, the PCIe device is a PCIe bridge with 4 upstream lanes connected to the Thunderbolt controller and 16 downstream lanes connected to PCIe slots (x8, x4 x4). Maybe think of the PCIe bus as a series of pipes, some are wide (x16) and some are narrow (x1), some are fast (8 GT/s) and some are slow (2.5 GT/s). The PCIe bridges (and Thunderbolt controllers) act like network switches to connect the different pipes.

Question: the ports call themselves Thunderbolt (USB-C)... but USB-C is a connector rather than a protocol.

What happens if I plug in a USB-C thumb drive to one of these thunderbolt ports, or a USB-C to USB-C data cable linked up to my iPad pro. Will it work, since some cables are Thunderbolt 3-only... and the macs have TB3 ports rather than TB4 ports that encompass the USB spec?

If I were to pick up an M1 mac mini, I probably have more need/use for splitting one of the TB ports between 4 USB ports capable of 10gbps (with the added bonus here of the occasional "burst" higher for my Samsung X5, compared to buying a TB expansion box and a PCI-e card with 4 USB3.2 ports on it) than being able to connect multiple Thunderbolt devices. The only TB device I actually have is the aforementioned X5

A Thunderbolt port can do USB-C (non-Thunderbolt) stuff like USB 3.x, USB 2.0, DisplayPort Alt Mode, or a mix of USB and DisplayPort Alt Mode.
Thumb drives, USB-C hubs, USB-A hubs, USB devices, displays, can all be connected to a Thunderbolt port.
Don't use a Thunderbolt 3 only cable to connect a non-thunderbolt USB-C device.
Apple makes a Thunderbolt 3 Pro cable that can connect anything (but it's expensive) - I'm not sure why they don't call it a Thunderbolt 4 cable.
The OWC Thunderbolt 4 Hub has four ports that can all do 10 Gbps.

The power input is 5.5 amps at 20V - that is way beyond USB specs. Maybe there is a built in room heater that they haven't revealed!

5.5A x 20V = 110W - USB-C maxes out at 100W which is one reason they don't use a USB-C power input.

60W PD to laptop, 15W x 3 USB-C power, 1.5A x 5V for USB-A power
= 112.5W

Looks like they are 2.5W short but it's unlikely that you'll fully load the USB-C and USB-A ports.

 

[hzadeh]

i use apple's 27" thunderbolt display. does no one really have mini displayport connections on hubs and will i always be relegated to using adapters? looking for a hub for when using the 13" m1 macbook pro in clamshell mode w/the monitor. thanks in advance for the feedback.

 

[saulinpa]

deleted

 

[joevt]

i use apple's 27" thunderbolt display. does no one really have mini displayport connections on hubs and will i always be relegated to using adapters? looking for a hub for when using the 13" m1 macbook pro in clamshell mode w/the monitor. thanks in advance for the feedback.

Thunderbolt display uses Thunderbolt, not DisplayPort. It will always require a Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter unless you connect it to a Thunderbolt 2 dock, which still requires a Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter if you're using a Thunderbolt 3 Mac.

 

[repoman27]

[A bunch of very good answers...]

5.5A x 20V = 110W - USB-C maxes out at 100W which is one reason they don't use a USB-C power input.

60W PD to laptop, 15W x 3 USB-C power, 1.5A x 5V for USB-A power
= 112.5W

Looks like they are 2.5W short but it's unlikely that you'll fully load the USB-C and USB-A ports.

The VBUS requirement for a USB3 Type-A port is only 900 mA @ 5 V, or 4.5 W, so they're more or less right on the money for hitting the minimum power budget. Until you factor in the JHL8440, which probably draws ~5 W on its own.

 

[hzadeh]

Thunderbolt display uses Thunderbolt, not DisplayPort. It will always require a Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter unless you connect it to a Thunderbolt 2 dock, which still requires a Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter if you're using a Thunderbolt 3 Mac.

thanks for clarifying, i was confusing the two. so while i use this monitor, it's basically best to have the latest dock to match the m1 mac and use the adapter for the monitor.

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

I'd rather hope the M1 based laptops actually support DisplayPort MST and can use any industry standard USB-C dock.
Because that was the whole idea. To not need propreitary stuff...

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

Finally. Having an iMac with only 2 TB3 ports, I could never figure out why there were no TB hubs in existence since not all TB devices have a chain port on them. It's pricey, but definitely something I'm looking at.

Related: I wish USB-A to USB-C hubs were a thing. I've started to amass a collection of USB-C peripherals, but with a lot of TB devices and only two ports, being able to easily plug in some not-speed-sensitive C stuff to an A port would sure be convenient.

Buy an USB-A Hub and plug in those: https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Female-Adapter-Charging-Airpods-Samsung/dp/B082D19GR6/ref=sr_1_5
This solution will ONLY support the USB protocol and thus only native USB devices. Anything using USB-C ALT mode will NOT work.

 

[joevt]

The VBUS requirement for a USB3 Type-A port is only 900 mA @ 5 V, or 4.5 W, so they're more or less right on the money for hitting the minimum power budget. Until you factor in the JHL8440, which probably draws ~5 W on its own.

The 1.5A comes from their product description page. It's from battery charging spec. Yes, need to factor in power for the chips inside the hub as well.

I'd rather hope the M1 based laptops actually support DisplayPort MST and can use any industry standard USB-C dock.
Because that was the whole idea. To not need propreitary stuff...

Apple has never enabled MST for multiple displays. They allow MST for the original 4K displays that used two streams over a single DisplayPort 1.2 connection to do two tiles of 1920x2160. I wonder if those old 4K displays work with the M1 Macs?

Buy an USB-A Hub and plug in those: https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Female-Adapter-Charging-Airpods-Samsung/dp/B082D19GR6/ref=sr_1_5
This solution will ONLY support the USB protocol and thus only native USB devices. Anything using USB-C ALT mode will NOT work.

Those USB-A (male) to USB-C (female) adapters are against the USB spec. The ones you linked only do USB 2.0 (480 Mb/s).

Why are there no USB-C Receptacle to USB-B plug or USB-A plug adapters?

Dec 3, 2015

medium.com

Benson Leung – Medium

Read writing from Benson Leung on Medium.

medium.com

https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/cable-and-adapter-tips-and-tricks?tmpl=%2Fsystem%2Fapp%2Ftemplates%2Fprint%2F&showPrintDialog=1

This one seems interesting:

Basesailor USB C Female to USB 3.0 Male Cable Adapter 2Pack,5Gbps GEN 1 Type A Connector for MagSafe Charger,Apple Watch iWatch 10,iPhone 16 15 14 13 12 Pro Max Mini SE,iPad 8 9 10 Air 4 5,Airpods,24

Basesailor USB C Female to USB 3.0 Male Cable Adapter 2Pack,5Gbps GEN 1 Type A Connector for MagSafe Charger,Apple Watch iWatch 10,iPhone 16 15 14 13 12 Pro Max Mini SE,iPad 8 9 10 Air 4 5,Airpods,24

www.amazon.com

It works up to 5 Gbps. The USB chip might make it conform to USB 3.1 spec if it acts like a USB 3.1 hub? I'm not sure how they get USB-C power from USB-A port though. I'm not a USB spec expert. If you can have two of these connected together with a USB-C cable and connected to two USB-A ports of a computer and the computer doesn't blow up, then maybe it's safe.

 

[Tech198]

For some reason, i called them "under" world computing - UNC

Whatever works...

When Apple closes a door, someone opens a window... Now we'll have a flood of gizmos on the market, and more

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

@joevt I'm aware that's not really a clean solution. Neither is it fast. However, the latter was explicitly not requested by OP. The ones you linked are certainly the better solution, but also more expensive.
At least on USB-A Ports the spec is rarely implemented 1:1. E.g. most USB-ports out of the box deliver >>1A which at at time of USB 2.0 was way above what was permitted. As such for simple slow devices (e.g. charging/using the input devices on the desk) it might be sufficient to just try the adapters I linked. If not, not much money is wasted...
The overall prefered solution would be using e.g. a CN-385 or CN-386 and connect them to a free USB-C port but those seem to only work fine on iOS and Android acc. review.

As for MST afaik it was only not supported on intel GPUs due to a major driver f*ckup. It works when using AMD GPUs as per my info. Nevertheless it should be supported on the M1 as that as designed by Apple in first place -and designing a GPU for your own OS that doesn't do something that basic would be an epic fail...

 

[joevt]

It works when using AMD GPUs as per my info.

As per what info? Please describe a setup that has working MST for a version of macOS.

 

[CYB3RBYTE]

Okay, sorry if I'm not the first person to call this out, and if I sound annoyed, but what the hell third party dock makers? WHY CAN'T YOU MAKE A 96W CAPABLE DOCK? Almost none of the current TB3 docks will actually charge a 16" at the rate it's supposed to. It's a total fail on their parts, they're creating a dock specifically for Macs and it won't support all of the Mac portables that are designed to take advantage of it.

I'm sick and tired of having to plug in my 16" WHILE having it connected to my current OWC TB3 dock. I want a one wire solution, what's so difficult about that?

Alright, off the box. (I do like that it's not as pricy as previous docks)

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

As per what info? Please describe a setup that has working MST for a version of macOS.

You're right. Sorry. I will make corrections to my previous postings to avoid confusion of people finding this thread with google.
Apparently Apple is "misusing" the abbreviation MST e.g. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208366 (however, that wasn't the article I originally read)