USB 3.2 specification Announced Goes 2 GB/s

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jul 26, 2017.

  1. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    42,454
    Likes Received:
    10,269
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    The SB 3.0 Promoter Group, thus Apple, HP, Intel, Microsoft, Texas Instruments, and others announced another USB-C specification: USB 3.2. It will support “multi-lane operation” th...

    USB 3.2 specification Announced Goes 2 GB/s
     
  2. Silva

    Silva Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,650
    Likes Received:
    805
    GPU:
    Asus RX560 4G
    Wile this sounds great, all my devices are 2.0 and most gadgets still come with the old boring 2.0 port. Only high spec phones have adopted the better tech, everything else we have to look carefully to buy the right stuff.
     
  3. wavetrex

    wavetrex Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,443
    Likes Received:
    1,097
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX1080 AMP!
    Such speeds are only needed by stuff which involves data storage or communication
    - Mobile computers (phone/tablet/etc.)
    - USB sticks
    - External HDD/SSD enclosures
    - Flash Card readers
    - Wireless/Network adapters for USB
    (And it just happense that those are migrating to newer standards first)

    I don't really see anything else that would require these huge bandwidths. Why would you need 2 GB/s for a mouse, keyboard or even printers/scanners (which are limited by their mechanical parts, can't "work faster"). Even USB 2.0 is TOO MUCH for them.
     
  4. XP-200

    XP-200 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,725
    Likes Received:
    1,146
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX 1080 Mini
    ^^VR could use that extra bandwidth, would be great if it mean't the number of USB ports required at present could be consolidated into say just the one.
     

  5. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,203
    Likes Received:
    2,516
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Much like PCIe, USB seems to be evolving faster than anyone is demanding. There's hardly anything out there that take advantage of USB 3.1 (gen2). I don't really understand why the specs keep getting pushed, because all this does is alienate lower-end devices that may not be able to keep up (like ARM devices, for example). It's nice that they're all backward compatible, but I would MUCH rather them focus on efficiency.

    In another perspective, the more complicated you make USB hosts, the fewer host controllers you get. For example, I would take 4x USB 3.0 host controllers over 2x USB 3.1 hosts hubbed into 4 ports any day. But if USB keeps getting more complicated, chipsets are going to involve fewer host controllers, which means worse latency and potential bandwidth issues.

    VR inputs don't need more bandwidth; USB 3.0 is definitely enough. What VR needs is better latency.
     
  6. XP-200

    XP-200 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,725
    Likes Received:
    1,146
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX 1080 Mini
    ^^I mean more cutting down on the USB ports required, would love to see this all done in one port, i am at three sensors on 3.0 with the rift at present for 360 tracking. ;)
     
  7. WhiteLightning

    WhiteLightning Don Illuminati Staff Member

    Messages:
    29,172
    Likes Received:
    2,004
    GPU:
    GTX1070 iChillx4
    usb just became more awesome then awesome. wish mini-usb would die though.
     
  8. tsunami231

    tsunami231 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,332
    Likes Received:
    989
    GPU:
    EVGA 1070Ti Black
    because it was needed?!
     
  9. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,190
    Likes Received:
    1,286
    GPU:
    -
    I think, though i could be wrong, that USB is trying to become the "end all" device.

    By that i mean:

    Keyboard/mouse/usb drive/etc.? Already USB, but:

    Video cable? Why not USB (if bandwidth keeps evolving)

    3.5mm connection? Why not USB.

    5.1/7.1 speakers? Why not USB.

    Microphone? Why not USB.

    Power connections for devices (such as monitors even?)? Why not USB?

    I'm not saying i necessarily agree with all of this, but it does seem to be the way USB is going, many of those items already have USB versions of them, but they aren't controlling 100% of the market. But imagine a world where the only ports on your PC were USB, and that's the world i think USB wants.

    It would be kinda cool if a USB cable could send a GOOD video signal to my monitor and power it at the same time....lol
     
  10. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,793
    Likes Received:
    1,148
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    USB is limited to 5V currently, no? I'm not sure you could operate monitors on that voltage. However the rest of your statement I'm all for. A unified port that can do everything sounds great. Though it has a way to go to match DP and HDMI on bandwidth.
     

  11. Aura89

    Aura89 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,190
    Likes Received:
    1,286
    GPU:
    -
    Currently it's 5 volts, i believe, but i wouldn't be surprised if they try and change that at some point.

    However, there are currently monitors that do what i suggest:

    https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...re=usb_powered_monitor-_-24-236-598-_-Product

    Just, you know, no monitors we generally would want for a desktop...lol

    Technically, i believe USB has a 20v max, but that's for power delivery devices.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2017
  12. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,203
    Likes Received:
    2,516
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Part of the new USB spec is to allow it to go up to 100W which I personally am extremely opposed to, particularly because one of the ways it can reach that wattage is by outputting 20V.

    You are completely correct: USB is trying to become literally universal. But it's like communism - it's a nice thought, but it isn't practical and it won't work. When you have something so diverse and so dynamic, quality control and development becomes a complete nightmare.

    USB 2.0 was great because it was extremely simple. It was limited to 5v, 500mA, and it would down-scale its bandwidth among simple devices like mice and keyboards, in order for high-demand devices (like flash drives and webcams) to get the speed they need. Sometimes you might be lucky and get a 1A port, but otherwise USB 2.0 was consistent. What this means is whether you bought the cheapest or the most expensive part on the market, it would suit your needs and it worked on EVERYTHING.

    USB 3.0 came out as a necessary and natural upgrade. It gave a reasonable increase in amperage, it became bi-directional, and it had a healthy amount of bandwidth to suit the needs of most people, while not being so fast that it became a luxury.

    USB 3.1 though, that's where things got out of hand. Cheap and/or low-power devices can't keep up with the bandwidth. The Type C connector is nice, but even many USB 3.1-compatible devices don't have it. As stated earlier, the spec allows for up to 100W. All of this makes USB less universal. There are too many caveats

    Here's a solid example of how bad things could get:
    Let's say you have a USB 3.1 Gen2 operated 2K monitor. If you try using that on a USB 3.1 Gen 1 port, you might see a loss in refresh rate, or stuttering. Its advertised as 3.1, but there's not enough bandwidth. That's confusing for those who don't know the small details.
    Thanks to the 100W USB could offer, the monitor could be powered and operated via just one single USB cord. But wait - you plug it into a laptop, which doesn't offer enough amps. So, now the user needs to buy a separate wall adapter. How inconvenient. What's the point of offering 100W if it can't be guaranteed? Surely, this will result in frustrated customers who claim "false advertising".
    But let's say the user was using this monitor on a desktop PC that could supply enough power. Surely, any USB type C cord will work, right? They all fit. But no - the user might have some cheap data cable (that is perfectly fine for charging phones), but pumping 100W through that could be a fire hazard.
    Even if the USB cord wasn't a fire hazard, one of the devices could still be damaged. There has to be logic chips involved in order for the USB port to supply enough power. If anything goes wrong with this logic, the device might not receive enough power. Or in some cases, a device could receive too much power, and it gets burnt up. The probability of this happening is way too high. I have seen "smart" USB 3.0 ports that had power-saving features and could fail to supply enough power to even USB 2.0 devices. After turning the feature off, the USB ports worked fine. This was an Intel-specific problem. If not even Intel can get a simple power feature to work properly, how can we trust some no-name Chinese brand to do the same?

    </rant>
     

Share This Page