Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Nov 2008 19:18 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems Unveiled on Monday by the USB Implementers Forum, the USB 3.0 spec can theoretically support data-transfer speeds of up to 4.8Gbps - 10 times the speed provided by USB 2.0. The new standard, also known as SuperSpeed USB, is also expected to be more power-efficient than its predecessor. "SuperSpeed USB is the next advancement in ubiquitous technology," Jeff Ravencraft, the president of the USB Implementers Forum (USB-IF), the industry group that promotes USB technology, said in a statement on Monday. "Today's consumers are using rich media and large digital files that need to be easily and quickly transferred from PCs to devices and vice versa. SuperSpeed USB meets the needs of everyone, from the tech-savvy executive to the average home user."
Thread beginning with comment 337465
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Macrat
by foldingstock on Mon 17th Nov 2008 20:30 UTC in reply to "Comment by Macrat"
foldingstock
Member since:
2008-10-30

USB 2.0 can support 400MBps, but most hardware manufacturers are incredibly cheap in product design. I see 12MBps out of most modern usb devices, save for some relatively expensive devices.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by Macrat
by mtzmtulivu on Mon 17th Nov 2008 21:06 in reply to "RE: Comment by Macrat"
mtzmtulivu Member since:
2006-11-14

the speed in reality will also depends on how fast the data can be read and written to ..hard drives rps will matter, under what stress the os is under will matter, how much fragmented the hard drive will matter ..

as they say, "you are as fast as your slowest component" ..to total speed will depends on a lot than just what the spec says ..

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Macrat
by red_devel on Mon 17th Nov 2008 21:15 in reply to "RE: Comment by Macrat"
red_devel Member since:
2006-03-30

USB 2.0 can support 400MBps, but most hardware manufacturers are incredibly cheap in product design. I see 12MBps out of most modern usb devices, save for some relatively expensive devices.



Hold the train for a second. I think we're getting seriously confused on terminology. Whether or not the B is capitalized makes a factor of 8 difference! bps is bits per second. Bps is Bytes per second. There are 8 bits to a Byte. USB 2.0 supports a theoretical 400 Mbps, therefore a theoretical 50 MBps. So, if you're seeing 12 MBps this is on the order of 25% of the theoretical maximum, and makes good sense.

USB 3.0, if we are to believe the titlepage is correct, will support 4.8Gbps, so in other words, somewhere around 600MBps range.

Please note, this is further confused by the fact that 1 GB != 1000 MB, but rather 1024 MB, so please realize all these numbers are approximate. To be honest, I'm not sure if the manufacturers report using 1000 bits/Kbit to make things look faster, the same way hardrive manufacturers do to make drives look bigger.

edit: typos!

Edited 2008-11-17 21:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE[3]: Comment by Macrat
by tyrione on Tue 18th Nov 2008 00:00 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Macrat"
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

No one is confusing Bits for Bytes. We're pragmatic in pointing out the lie that is "Theoretical" vs. "Actual" throughput.

I'm looking forward to seeing the sustained [non-burstable] throughput of USB 3.0 versus Firewire 3200. I know FW's peer-to-peer model is superior to the master-slave and I'm not expecting USB 3.0 to surpass FW3200.

That however doesn't change the fact that USB is the standard due to INTEL owning and controlling this particular market with their USB standard.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Macrat
by umccullough on Tue 18th Nov 2008 00:06 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Macrat"
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

Whether or not the B is capitalized makes a factor of 8 difference! bps is bits per second. Bps is Bytes per second. There are 8 bits to a Byte. USB 2.0 supports a theoretical 400 Mbps, therefore a theoretical 50 MBps. So, if you're seeing 12 MBps this is on the order of 25% of the theoretical maximum, and makes good sense.


Realistically though, with overhead of the protocol (control bits, etc.) a serial bus throughput usually boils down to a fraction of 10 anyhow.

Thus, 480Mbps (the actual alleged throughput of USB2, not 400 as was indicated) usually ends up with ~48MB/sec maximum... I'm not sure I've ever seen it hit this amount anyway ;)

Reply Parent Score: 3