Nice.
[TechReport] A quick first look at USB 3.0 performance
Quote:
source
Very good numbers. Now we just have to wait for the hardware to become more standard and pricing to be where USB 2.0 products are now...
| USB 2.0 is so last millennium. No, seriously. We've had the specification since the year 2000, which is technically the previous millennium. Given how quickly the PC industry moves, though, it might as well have been a full millennium ago. Back in 2000, Intel was pushing Pentium III CPUs, 3dfx was still selling graphics processors, and Windows XP was a year away. Things have certainly changed since the so-called Hi-Speed USB spec was released, and its 480Mbps peak data rate has been grossly inadequate for quite some time now. ...
|
Very good numbers. Now we just have to wait for the hardware to become more standard and pricing to be where USB 2.0 products are now...
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
2
Quote:
480mb/s is peak, that means you will almost never see that performance. Look at the graph in the OP, it was running at 37Mb/s.
So this is basically as fast as e-sata, I don't know why devices just didn't adopt that?
![]()
EDIT: Just googled e-sata and found that it doesn't have the ability of powering the devices its using, that would be why.
Originally Posted by Stewart=B yeah nice but... is 480mb/s inadequate, really? i understand USB need in HDs, but id rather not bother with anythings else, like cameras, or ipods. Until prices come down to USB 2.o levels, im not interested. Except for Hds that is. Really looking forward to that |
So this is basically as fast as e-sata, I don't know why devices just didn't adopt that?
EDIT: Just googled e-sata and found that it doesn't have the ability of powering the devices its using, that would be why.
2
Quote:
e-sata doesnt supply power?
Originally Posted by Craiga35 480mb/s is peak, that means you will almost never see that performance. Look at the graph in the OP, it was running at 37Mb/s. So this is basically as fast as e-sata, I don't know why devices just didn't adopt that?
|
Quote:
boom shakalaka
USB 3.0 is going to be great once it is standard on everything.
Originally Posted by jpw007 e-sata doesnt supply power? |
USB 3.0 is going to be great once it is standard on everything.
4
Quote:
Because of SATA 6.0Gbps.
![]()
Quote:
SATA 6Gbps supports power over eSATA, it's all a matter of implementing it.
Originally Posted by Craiga35 So this is basically as fast as e-sata, I don't know why devices just didn't adopt that?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craiga35 EDIT: Just googled e-sata and found that it doesn't have the ability of powering the devices its using, that would be why. |
USB 3.0 has a tech spec speed of 4.8gbps, or 600MB/s. If we follow that it has about the same efficiencies as USB 2.0, we could expect a real-world maximum speed of 370MB/s.
That should be sufficient for quite some time, I do believe.
![]()
All I have to say is, IT'S ABOUT TIME!
That should be sufficient for quite some time, I do believe.
2
Quote:
USB 2.0 is 480 megabits per second, not bytes. 480Mbps is equal to 60MB/s.
Originally Posted by Craiga35 480mb/s is peak, that means you will almost never see that performance. Look at the graph in the OP, it was running at 37Mb/s. So this is basically as fast as e-sata, I don't know why devices just didn't adopt that?
EDIT: Just googled e-sata and found that it doesn't have the ability of powering the devices its using, that would be why. |
3
Quote:
Quote:
some motherboards do support "power-over-eSATA". But most externals use either a power brick, or an additional USB cabl purely for power.
Originally Posted by Craiga35 480mb/s is peak, that means you will almost never see that performance. Look at the graph in the OP, it was running at 37Mb/s. So this is basically as fast as e-sata, I don't know why devices just didn't adopt that?
EDIT: Just googled e-sata and found that it doesn't have the ability of powering the devices its using, that would be why. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpw007 e-sata doesnt supply power? |
Quote:
Thank you. I thought most people on this forum knew the difference between Mbps and MB/s. Obviously not.
Originally Posted by ThePath 480Mb/s = 60MB/s (1 Byte (B) = 8 bit (b)) The graph shows that it was running at 37MB/s (Megabyte not Megabit ) |
2
Quote:
External HDDs are already bottlenecked by their own speeds.
That's why SSDs are around.
![]()
Originally Posted by Cryptedvick FINALLY USB wont bottleneck external HDDs (that support USB3 that is). |
That's why SSDs are around.
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
