Thunderbolt Cable Teardown Reveals Electronics and Firmware

[AidenShaw]

20Gbps aggregate bandwidth is a LOT of bandwidth for an external cable which is getting up there in numbers to rival the amount of memory bandwidth most commodity computer chipsets have (I think two-channel X68 is 21.6Gbps),

Dual channel DDR3-1600 is 25.6 GBps (Bytes per second, not bits per second). The Core i* chips connect the memory to the CPU package, not the chipset - so mentioning X68 is inaccurate (I assumed that you meant "CPUs that use X68").

So new optical cables connected into existing TB devices will increase the speed/data transfer rate? Or not.

Same data rate - but optical will increase the maximum TBolt cable length to 100m from 3m or so. Just in case you want to put your TBolt RAID array in the server room. (Of course, you'll need two optical cables to route back to your desk if you want to daisy chain your monitor.)

...so in that case even USB3 would be overkill BUT as soon as you start talking about more complex systems, like RAID enclosure or SSDs you can easily be over the available throughput of USB3.

Actually just having a couple of simple, single drives on the same USB hub would benefit if they're in use at the same time.

 

[chameleon81]

Those chips are going to get cheap really soon. Also one has to remember Apple takes some premium over production cost so that the cost to produce those things is probably closer to $30 as of now.

In a year or so $8 could be a reasonable target (those cables would lack some of the quality though)

I wonder based on what you make these claims/assumptions?

 

[manu chao]

Actually the 10Gb/s are only for TB communications (devices), the display port information passes through separated channels (max 17Gb/s in the 4 channel implementation of DisplayPort, good for 3840×2160 @ 30bpp @ 60 Hz or over 2 27inch display at 60Hz).

The thing is there were rumors of the DisplayPort bandwidth being impacted to offer the 10Gb/s for TB, but I can't find a definite answer. If it is the case maybe Apple / Intel restricted the display port channel to 2 only achieving then 8Gb/s or 2560×1600 @ 30bpp @ 60 Hz.

I thought to remember that the DP information only passes over separate channels when there is no TB device in the chain, ie, when you connect a display directly to the combo mDP/TB port. As soon as any TB device is in the chain, everything passes over TB and only at the end, in the display, the DP signal is extracted from the TB signal.

But it naturally would be great if it worked as you described it.

 

[Thunderhawks]

People - this is NOT a USB replacement. It is a PCIE wire tap, not unlike the Expresscard, which means you can externalize video cards, network cards (e.g., 10GbE), and whatever else is made for the PCIE bus. It is basically a PCIE "slot" with an external port. Future macs should have either

1) 1+ Thunderbolt ports and available 3rd party TB switches (hubs) with more TB ports and "legacy" ports such as USB

or

2) 1+ TB ports and 1+ USB ports

Personally, I lament the loss of the Ethernet port on the Airs, but I hope to recover it with a TB switch.

Separately, the whole idea of TB daisy chaining is BAD. It's seriously a compounded failure risk, especially when each device on this chain is expected to be high-value on all counts. A TB switch is the right way to go, and I hope we'll see them soon.

+1

Can't understand the moaning about missing TB products or pricing.
TB is still new technology and will take a while to spread out.

When widely implemented we will see

TB switches
USB 3 adapters that can run both

and whatever else is missing.

 

[toke lahti]

Future macs should have either

1) 1+ Thunderbolt ports and available 3rd party TB switches (hubs) with more TB ports and "legacy" ports such as USB

or

2) 1+ TB ports and 1+ USB ports

If Apple would want to do it right, they would correct their mistake of crippling the DP with TB.
They should do like Sony did eg. put the TB to the same connector than usb3 and let DP have it's own port.
That way you need only 2 kind of ports (DP & usb3+TB) and could use usb3 or TB devices without dongles and wouldn't need TB hub for using usb3 hub.

P.S. : I for one I would be ready to spend 1000$ on a RAID5 capable enclosure that wouldn't be limited by the connecting port if my machine supported it...

Usually speed of these boxes are limited by raid5 processor's speed.
Even usb3 port speed would be good enough for these new Promise's TB boxes.

Actually just having a couple of simple, single drives on the same USB hub would benefit if they're in use at the same time.

Yes they would benefit.
You need more than one "simple usb drive" to saturate usb3 line.

 

[manu chao]

If Apple would want to do it right, they would correct their mistake of crippling the DP with TB.
They should do like Sony did eg. put the TB to the same connector than usb3 and let DP have it's own port.
That way you need only 2 kind of ports (DP & usb3+TB) and could use usb3 or TB devices without dongles and wouldn't need TB hub for using usb3 hub.

What is the difference between having three combo TB/USB ports + one mDP port and having three combo TB/mDP ports + one USB port?
In both cases you only have two kinds of ports, could use USB 3 without a dongle or a hub.

Don't be fooled by the current ratio of mDP/TB combo ports to USB ports, this is already shifting with the iMac.

Of course, much more likely is two mDP/TB combo ports and two USB ports (as USB devices will be around in great number for a long time).

Think of it, would you rather have a MBA with one USB3/TB combo port plus one mDP port or one USB3 port plus one mDP/TB combo port?
- One display + one USB device -> both configurations are fine
- One display + Ethernet -> both configurations are fine (though both need a dongle)
- One USB device + Ethernet -> suddenly the USB3/TB solution looks bad (I don't know whether the USB-Ethernet dongle works via a USB hub with the hub still being able to serve other USB devices)
- One USB device + one TB device (external disk, video camera) -> again, the USB3/TB solution needs a hub

 

[Torrijos]

Usually speed of these boxes are limited by raid5 processor's speed.
Even usb3 port speed would be good enough for these new Promise's TB boxes.

Actually it wouldn't, since the Promise box has been measured capable of sustaining 600MB/s rate in RAID5, 200MB/s over the specified real throughput of the USB3 port.

 

[gorgeousninja]

I'm still not convince that this is worth $50! Look at the iPod Shuffle it has more chips and has a memory inside. Those chips are probably added to make us believe that Apple should sell this for $50. That Intel Light Peak demo showed on IDF back in 2009 is just a regular cable as far as I could remember.

Yeah my microwave oven has chips and electronics in it, so no way can a cable be any different. It's all the same isn't it?
Just because this is a breakthrough technology aimed initially at the professional market because normal consumers dont need it,
and because I have absolutely no idea of the engineering that went into making this thing, means I absolutely know 100% that this cable is not worth $50.

 

[Torrijos]

Actually just having a couple of simple, single drives on the same USB hub would benefit if they're in use at the same time.

They would be OK, up to 3 1/2 (at 115MB/s sustained data rate per disk with the port specification real data rate of 400MB/s), a fourth disk (or other high bandwidth device) and you're underperforming. There is also the question of CPU utilization by USB which isn't nice... My machine is quite old but copying a file between 2 USB 3 drives and my core 2 duo MBPro slows to a crawl.

 

[darkplanets]

At least we have a justification for the price... this time.

I'm curious as to why people are such staunch proponents of USB3.0-- I would much prefer this. I can daisy chain everything, including a monitor. It has more available bandwidth. The only con is price.

For RAID setups this is the clear winner-- look at the promise rigs speed on either cabling.

 

[fattire357]

Can't understand the moaning about missing TB products or pricing.
TB is still new technology and will take a while to spread out.

As a fellow moaner I can explain.

It is totally reasonable that thunderbolt as a new technology will be expensive and difficult to find products for.

Which is exactly why it wasn't a wise move for Apple to chose Thunderbolt over USB 3.0.

 

[KnightWRX]

As a fellow moaner I can explain.

It is totally reasonable that thunderbolt as a new technology will be expensive and difficult to find products for.

Which is exactly why it wasn't a wise move for Apple to chose Thunderbolt over USB 3.0.

There's also very much the chance that Thunderbolt will end up being a niche technology that will never filter down to consumer level products, only offering these high-end products to choose from for a more advanced market (prosumer, SMBs). Hence why leaving up USB3 at the price of Thunderbolt is regarded as another choice limiting move by Apple.

But that is Apple for you. They are pigheaded when it comes to this stuff.

 

[milo]

I guess this should put an end to the posts insisting that apple should dump all other ports and just include TB. Yeah, using this would make a LOT of sense for cheap things like keyboard and mouse. At some point I assume they could get all that circuitry down to one chip and lower costs a bit, but this is never going to be as cheap as other cables.

That said, this is HUGE for high end pro users. It makes some pro work possible on iMac and laptops that wasn't before. And I could definitely see many consumers getting one big/fast external drive to add to their iMac or laptop.

 

[Ulf1103]

Any ideas on how much an external drive of 1TB @7200 rpm with TB cable is gonna cost and when we may expect them?
'cause aparently it's much fatser then using it with FireWire.

I wonted to buy the 750Gb HD @ 7200 rmp with FireWire
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/on-the-go

85MB/Sec is nice,
but USB3.0 is nicer:

115GB/Sec
(this is ofcourse the cheaper version with usb3.0 HD @ 7200 rpm)
And with TB i's gonna be like 200GB/sec or even much more...

 

[Ulf1103]

Have no problem with the 49 price point, BUT! come on Apple since when does $49 translate to 49 euros! at todays exchange rate that is almost $71 we all know the cables are not made in the USA so there is no logical reason for changing the $ to € symbol and calling it a day

It only means I will purchase one in the US, and avoid the EuroTax that so many companies feel justified charging.

Where did you findthat it's only gonna cost 49€?
I like that fact, 'cause I'm from Europe
(finely an advantage for Europe)

 

[Ulf1103]

Any ideas on how much an external drive of 1TB @7200 rpm with TB cable is gonna cost and when we may expect them?
'cause aparently it's much fatser then using it with FireWire.

I wanted to buy the 750Gb HD @ 7200 rmp with FireWire
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/on-the-go

85MB/Sec is nice,
but USB3.0 is nicer:

115GB/Sec
(this is ofcourse the cheaper version with usb3.0 HD @ 7200 rpm)
And with TB i's gonna be like 200GB/sec or even much more...

 

[Ulf1103]

You do realize that this is a Bad thing!....49 euros is more expensive than what the cable costs in the States

Damn, you're wright.
If I buy it for 49€ I would be ripped of...
Why does it cost so much to import it

I'll buy it in the US with a lot of other stuff, and then it will chip for free to me and I'll save 14€ or 24$

 

[doctor-don]

Cables will be found in stores by some well-known electronics manufacturers that will sell for $39 and more, just as the HDMI and Toslink cables are over-priced. Shoppers will still be able to order through stores like Amazon for a fraction of the cost.

 

[Ulf1103]

You should wait until you need a MacBook pro or something larger, as the price difference Europe/USA will allow you to visit the States free of charge

I'm gonna need a MBP, but I need it with an ssd and warranty and stuf.
That, I can't order in the US and let it ship to Belgium. I think. I'll try it in a minute

If I could order it in the US, I would save 675€ or 964$ damn...
Only problem, I can't

I'll need to find someone who knows someone in the US or so who can order it for me etc.

does anyone knows if the AppleCare Protection Plan is valid when you buy it in the US and you're in Europe and something is wrong with it?

 

[mdatwood]

There's also very much the chance that Thunderbolt will end up being a niche technology that will never filter down to consumer level products, only offering these high-end products to choose from for a more advanced market (prosumer, SMBs). Hence why leaving up USB3 at the price of Thunderbolt is regarded as another choice limiting move by Apple.

But that is Apple for you. They are pigheaded when it comes to this stuff.

With prices this high the chance of a niche product continue to rise.

 

[Thunderhawks]

As a fellow moaner I can explain.

It is totally reasonable that thunderbolt as a new technology will be expensive and difficult to find products for.

Which is exactly why it wasn't a wise move for Apple to chose Thunderbolt over USB 3.0.

Well, the jury isn't out yet whether USB 3 or TB will be more successful.

To me releasing TB early is a statement that Apple believes in this technology. (Let's not forget there is already a stage 2 development to this)

Hopefully the infrastructure will be created to make optimal use for whoever likes it.
Obviously that believe will only last until the next better thing comes out.

 

[bmturney]

Great... another component to troubleshoot...

Now with these "smart" cables the problem could be with the host, the peripheral... and now it is increasingly likely it could be the cable.. no more just straitening out the tip with a pair of needle nose pliers when you roll over it with your chair...

 

[pubwvj]

Makes sense

"...the port you'll find in new MacBook Pros and storage devices can actually take an optical cable when those are cost-effective enough to roll out, because Intel will eventually bake the optical transceivers into the cables themselves."

This makes sense and is not actually new. A decade ago I was using long runs of optical cable with tiny transceivers built into either end of the cable. The new Thunderbolt ones are smaller, more miniaturization, but that is just evolution, not revolution. I'm glad to see it. I liked that method.

 

[mattraehl]

Any ideas on how much an external drive of 1TB @7200 rpm with TB cable is gonna cost and when we may expect them?
'cause aparently it's much fatser then using it with FireWire.

I wanted to buy the 750Gb HD @ 7200 rmp with FireWire
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/on-the-go
Image
85MB/Sec is nice,
but USB3.0 is nicer:
Image
115GB/Sec
(this is ofcourse the cheaper version with usb3.0 HD @ 7200 rpm)
And with TB i's gonna be like 200GB/sec or even much more...

I think you mean 115MB/sec. Anyways, 115MB/sec is almost certainly as fast as the disk itself can go. OWC sells an external SSD in USB 3 enclosure that they clocked at 250MB/sec.

Single-SSD enclosures will probably be able to saturate TB in just a couple generations, the latest OWC and OCZ gear is already hitting 500MB/s in sequential read and write.

 

[dernhelm]

Separately, the whole idea of TB daisy chaining is BAD. It's seriously a compounded failure risk, especially when each device on this chain is expected to be high-value on all counts. A TB switch is the right way to go, and I hope we'll see them soon.

Depends on what you are trying to do. The fact that you can daisy chain the devices together means two things. 1) The devices can potentially talk to each other without needing a computer in the middle to mitigate, and 2) any device can act as a TB hub. Both of these are good things. They are what separated FW from USB in the early days (even now to a degree).

Of course, TB hubs (switches, whatever you want to call them) will be a good thing once they emerge. Not sure if I myself would ever expect to need one, but for anyone expecting to hook up 3 or more devices, I can see it as being valuable.