USB's stated speed is burst speed and never gives you the real speed which is sustained. TB is capable of doing quite a bit more than USB can also. Though the jury is out if it will become FW2...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
USB Finalizes 10Gbps SuperSpeed+ Standard as USB 3.1
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
USB's stated speed is burst speed and never gives you the real speed which is sustained. TB is capable of doing quite a bit more than USB can also. Though the jury is out if it will become FW2...
Let me know when USB also carries a video signal from my GPU and then I will consider Thunderbolt dead. Until then, I like the idea of one connection to rule them all (i.e. Thunderbolt).
Thunderbolt 1 already supports 20Gbps bidirectionally, it's just split into two channels. Thunderbolt 2 is 20Gbps total on a single channel in each direction.
Mac Pro is supposed to have three Thunderbolt 2 controllers across its six ports, not 2.
Where do we buy these USB driven displays? - or - computers that output video via USB using the computer's hardware?
Read my post please. It's theoretical. Where did I ever say 'you can do it because X company has already made X hardware to do this'. As it stands there are USB 2 and USB 3 video cards. No reason to assume there wont be USB 3.1 ones that can get you better performance.
USB 3.0 connectors and ports are commonly blue. Only time I've run across a USB 3.0 port that is not blue or have any additional markings like "SS" are on the macbooks.
Its probably because they only come with USB 3 ports so you don't really have to worry. A windows desktop comes with both USB2 and USB3 ports so the USB3 ports tend to be colored blue.
Nice to know....
nicer will be seeing attaching the speeds promised in real world operation, with an affordable price tag.....
nicer will be seeing attaching the speeds promised in real world operation, with an affordable price tag.....
Ethernet may be much quicker than current internet speeds, but that additional performance is still put to use moving stuff around a home or office network.
Faster USB might outpace current uses, but it is still too slow for other options that could become viable with more pace. External top end GPUs for example.
the problem with your logic breaks down like this...
thunderbolt 1.0 = exists in reality.
usb 3.1 = theoretical, and only exists in a lab.
thunderbolt 2.0 would be on the same phantom existence scale as usb 3.1 for now, but we are pretty much guaranteed its arrival in the next coming months.
as far as your other points, you obviously have no experience with fibre channel, 10gb ethernet, etc. all of which have fancy connectors along with "chips inside". an active twinax cable is about on par with a thunderbolt cable for comparability. other technologies have the same paradigm for high bandwidth connectivity. apple creating a cable with chips in it is not new, and they didn't do it to piss people off. they wouldn't be in business if that was their goal.
as others have mentioned, it's all about use case. i mean why are you not bagging on dvi and how much better hdmi is? now that 4k is becoming readily available for consumers, 1080p must be garbage too. bottom line, someone has to come up with a technology first. i think the crux to everyone's beef with thunderbolt is the exclusivity apple is putting on it. if it was available on mainstream "pc" systems, everyone would be using it. firewire was a perfect example, where usb 1.x did not cut the mustard for connectivity for certain devices, mainly for high i/o storage & streaming. so "firewire" as we all know and love it now, was born. then usb 2.0 came out (which still is trumped by fw400), then the next evolution of firewire (fw800) was developed and so on. at what point in time do we all wait around for one single organization to develop or improve on technology? some people aren't content with the current environment and opt to inject their own ideas to improve things. cisco is a great example of this. they are another "evil tech giant" that gets a lot of guff for expensive & proprietary technology. but what people fail to realize in that industry, is that big bad giant created the majority of the "standard" technologies (mpls, trunking, etc) for the sake that they just didn't exist, and then allowed others to adapt "open" or standards versions of the same technology. the way i see it, apple saw a lull and got on board with intel to help bring light peak / thunderbolt to market. i think at this point, that thunderbolt has leap frogged the industry and we ended up with a cool technology no one knows quite sure what to do with it yet to make it truly essential.
I wrote nothing about speed. Of course Thunderbolt is faster and can do more BUT my point is that for me and most other regular (non-pro) users thunderbolt is useless because very few devices use it and those that do cost substantially more than USB equivalents. Frankly, it does not matter how much faster or better Thunderbolt is, if all of its devices are very expensive I do not care.
Rmbp mid 2014 with 3.1 please
Not likely...
If the standard is only ratified today, and standalone support chips not due till 2014. You might see desktop mobo's with 3.1 in 2014. I doubt you'll see any laptop with 3.1 till 2015.
my problem is i dont even consider thunderbolt a pro interface - its a sad marketing gimmick for something that should be used in addition to internal interface ability, not in replacement of. Pretty much any graphics card in a thunderbolt enclosure will instantly saturate a TB connection with a lot of data to spare. same for a high-end SSD-based RAID array.
just check the specs -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)
Protocol 4× PCI Express 2.0,[4] DisplayPort 1.1a[3]
2.0 may double that, but you're still stuck with the same problem - a high end graphics card will still be crippled on a thunderbolt connection. best you're ever gonna get out of the current iteration is 2.5GB/sec.
its a convenient format for sure, no doubt there. but i'll stick to my real PCIe slots if possible.
just check the specs -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)
Protocol 4× PCI Express 2.0,[4] DisplayPort 1.1a[3]
2.0 may double that, but you're still stuck with the same problem - a high end graphics card will still be crippled on a thunderbolt connection. best you're ever gonna get out of the current iteration is 2.5GB/sec.
its a convenient format for sure, no doubt there. but i'll stick to my real PCIe slots if possible.
Are you serious. Intel only an ally to LightPeak. Who the hell do you think did all the hard work. The only reason Apple had it, is because of the nice bit of cash they sent Intel for exclusivity. Which is why it'll never take off. It should have been to the whole PC market from the off.
Glad something has come along that is more consumer friendly. Although Apple will probably wait until 2016 before adding it to any machines.
Same place where you have this vast variety of TB connected displays.
Btw, we have 10G atto Ethernet cards connected to iMacs via TB at my workplace's edit rooms and they use EVS's SAN for storage and we are seeing beachball all the time. So like in so many other things, marketing numbers don't mean s***.
I rather things that don't need more than 40mb per second to use USB 2 (won't go into it, but it's better that way). Most devices with USB 3 are things like USB keys and hard drives that actually use the extra bandwidth (and USB 3 is more than enough). You can't look at life in terms of status were you would put out a USB 3 mouse just because it's USB 3.
Now my point is that if very little devices are using USB 3 because USB 2 is fast enough, then imagine Thunder Bolt.
----------
You probably know this because of your careful wording, but there have been USB to HDMI adapter since before the USB 3 days. I know you're specifically asking for for a monitor that instead of a HDMI connection, it uses a USB connection. But that's like ESPN putting out all these criteria to have a player's latest accomplishment sound more incredible.
Like, "The only player in the last 17 years to score 35 points, while shooting 60%, at home, on a Saturday night." I mean that's just how your post came off to me.
My point is that you should be arguing about what's capable (Macrumors showed a video in January with USB 3.1 daisy chaining 2 monitors from a laptop), than putting criterias.
I walked into Fry's 2 weeks ago and their USB 2.0 selection of external HDs is so much larger than USB 3.0s. Pricewise it's only difference of $10 it seemed like. If 3.0 is better and backward compatible AND at a decently low price, why are people creating USB 2.0 stuff? This way it seems like it will never be adopted.
Giving people choice = low adoption rate = slower price drops. If everyone adopts thunderbolt or USB 3.0, then manufacturers will focus on creating the better product for cheaper.
Yes, I'm a firm believer on giving people as little or no choice at all. People are stupid for the most part
. Not saying you, or anyone on these forums are, but the average person walking into frys, or any other store, is most likely stupid. Us forum users are at least somewhat computer literate.I prefer thunderbolt to USB 3.0, but Intel is hurting thunderbolt big time. If AMD was behind thunderbolt, we'd actually have some decent thunderbolt accessories.
I don't think anyone is arguing that TB is better than PCIe.... It's a solution for laptops that need to use a PCI-e card. Sure it's not as great as a PCIe slot but you don't have the option. That's like saying a laptop is a convenient format for a computer, but you'll stick to a desktop because it's faster -.-.
Last edited:
I walked into Fry's 2 weeks ago and their USB 2.0 selection of external HDs is so much larger than USB 3.0s. Pricewise it's only difference of $10 it seemed like. If 3.0 is better and backward compatible AND at a decently low price, why are people creating USB 2.0 stuff? This way it seems like it will never be adopted.
Giving people choice = low adoption rate = slower price drops. If everyone adopts thunderbolt or USB 3.0, then manufacturers will focus on creating the better product for cheaper.
Yes, I'm a firm believer on giving people as little or no choice at all. People are stupid for the most part
I prefer thunderbolt to USB 3.0, but Intel is hurting thunderbolt big time. If AMD was behind thunderbolt, we'd actually have some decent thunderbolt accessories.
I don't think anyone is arguing that TB is better than PCIe.... It's a solution for laptops that need to use a PCI-e card. Sure it's not as great as a PCIe slot but you don't have the option. That's like saying a laptop is a convenient format for a computer, but you'll stick to a desktop because it's faster -.-.
I'm checking the new external hard drives on newegg and 15 out the 18 new hard drives are USB 3. Good thing I counted because I was going to say 70% of the new hard drives, but it's 15/18.
Most people are stupid, and that includes most people on every computer forum. But it's not nice to think that most people are stupid just because they have little interest in computers. It just means they care about other things. Most might be stupid, but that's just because they're human.
Newegg is for computer fanatics, of course they'd be carrying the good stuff. However, I'm sure Fry's gets much more business than Newegg because anyone can walk into Fry's asking one of their workers, which isn't always the best person to ask, and walk out thinking they have the best thing.
For Newegg, you know what you're looking for.. most likely
.People on computer forums aren't stupid. They just don't know things yet, which is most likely why they're on the forums. They want to learn, a person walking into Fry's doesn't care for the most part. The employee doesn't care enough to teach them, so they just sell the most expensive thing they can get the person to buy so they can get the commission. There's a difference between not yet knowing and not wanting to put work into learning something.
It works for these people, but in the end it hurts us more knowledgeable people. We want the best, they just want something that works. Which allows them to continue to make cheaper stuff.
Firstly, i never get the 100% backwards compatible line. Since my rMBP I've had audio interfaces and hard disks not work on USB 3. I still can't see my Lacie d2 in the startup manager over USB 3, only when using Thunderbolt. (anyone found this?) USB 3 is 'mostly' backwards compatible - at best.
Second, if you don't need/appreciate firewire or thunderbolt then don't worry about it. Firewire 800 is miles better than USB 2 in both sustained speed and the ability to daisy chain, thunderbolt continues this trend.
Apple get a lot of stick for leaving the pros wanting, but thunderbolt is squarely aimed at the (at least semi) professional. I don't agree with everything apple does but thunderbolt is much appreciated
Second, if you don't need/appreciate firewire or thunderbolt then don't worry about it. Firewire 800 is miles better than USB 2 in both sustained speed and the ability to daisy chain, thunderbolt continues this trend.
Apple get a lot of stick for leaving the pros wanting, but thunderbolt is squarely aimed at the (at least semi) professional. I don't agree with everything apple does but thunderbolt is much appreciated
So that would make thunderbolt either an overly expensive solution to one that's already been sorted, cheaply, by USB, or an overly expensive video output cable that's already been solved cheaply, by HDMI.. OR it makes thunderbolt an expensive way to connect a disk array that could just be cheaply stuck into eSata or even network attached without performance suffering.
and the point of thunderbolt again is ?
and the point of thunderbolt again is ?