NVIDIA and friends working on alternate USB 3.0 spec, SiS joins in, Intel uninvited from everybody's birthday parties

Remember middle school? These guys do. NVIDIA, AMD, VIA and now SiS (only two capital letters? Not trying hard enough) have all teamed up in a fight against Intel of truly pubescent proportions. Intel has denied accusations of hiding the USB 3.0 spec, since it's not their spec to hide, and claims it has no obligation to disclose its actual host controller specification before it's ready. This apparently has the other chip makers scrambling to make their own host controller, so they aren't beholden to Intel's schedule. That could cause problems for the end product -- if they don't build theirs exactly like Intel's, and with Intel's already being on the market by the time they're done, they'll have to return to the drawing board and possibly delay their release by nine months. They claim this could give Intel two years of zero competition in the USB 3.0 space, but Intel figures since it plans to release the spec for free, is investing heavily in its development, and isn't done yet anyways, it doesn't owe those companies a thing. This just gets better and better.

[Byzil Mystwing @ Jun 14th 2008 2:49PM]

Fight! Fight! Fight!

[The Dude @ Jun 14th 2008 3:40PM]

Flag pole, after-school, bring your posse.

[Nick K. @ Jun 14th 2008 3:44PM]

The REAL fight should be between Firewire800 and USB3.0

[tha-don @ Jun 14th 2008 3:54PM]

that's funny cause back in elementary school people really did meet at the flagpole to fight. i've always wondered if that happened at other schools too...now i know.

[Catsceo @ Jun 14th 2008 4:25PM]

@Nick K.

You mean FW3200

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jun 14th 2008 4:28PM]

FW800 didn't manage to beat USB 2.0, and it's had 2 years to do it.

Why do you think it can beat USB 3.0?

[pundit @ Jun 15th 2008 3:43AM]

In what sense do you mean "beat"? If you mean how many times has it been installed, then you're right. But if you mean "how fast it is", then USB2.0 has no chance, and FW800 is going to be competing decently with USB3.0, since USB never even comes close to approaching its theoretical speed, unlike Firewire.

[Daniel @ Jun 15th 2008 11:46AM]

I went to a Catholic school so the church front lawn was where all the action was...aww memories

[eggothewaffle @ Jun 14th 2008 2:55PM]

I can totally imagine Intel being that rich kid that no one likes and he's going "neener neener neener" to a rag tag but lovable bunch of poor multi billion dollar children who JUST WANT TO HAVE FUN AND WIN THE ANNUAL SOAP BOX DERBY.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jun 14th 2008 2:57PM]

USB 3.0 is just stupid anyway. The only things that are going to use that kind of speed are storage devices, and they can just use eSATA instead.

[eggothewaffle @ Jun 14th 2008 3:05PM]

What about multimedia conversion?

[A1 @ Jun 14th 2008 3:08PM]

exactly, Firewire & eSata piss all over USB. Why do they even bother with it!

[Toakley @ Jun 14th 2008 3:09PM]

Um.... what about hi-def webcams

[daniel @ Jun 14th 2008 3:10PM]

even though an iPod is a storage device, I would much rather transfer my 90 gigs of music and movie to it with USB 3.0 than 2.0

[Rik @ Jun 14th 2008 3:15PM]

Because USB is the 'frickin' standard interface...

Get it?

:-D

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jun 14th 2008 3:47PM]

Your iPod is limited by the speed of the storage in it. If you're lucky, it transfers 10MB/sec. That's 80mbit/sec, and only 1/5th the capacity of USB 2.0. Using USB 3.0 wouldn't make it any faster at all.

Toakley:
hi-def webcams? You think the camera is going to produce more than 400mb/sec of data? If it does, who is going to be able to view it? No one has an internet connection that is that fast.

[DESTOS @ Jun 14th 2008 4:25PM]

USB Multi monitor connections.

[Eli Gundry @ Jun 14th 2008 9:57PM]

One of the main goals of USB 3.0 is the introduction of monitors over the USB interface. In this way, the common consumer will have one less interface to mess with.

Though what will probably happen is that it will be the new HDCP for enforcement of copyrighted materials.

[monkfishbandana @ Jun 15th 2008 6:36AM]

@ why not the LS2LS7?

I understand the points you have been making, and I agree. However that attitude doesn't inspire creation and technological advancement.

Internet speeds are increasing, TV picture quality is increasing, standard device storage is increasing, and so on.

The idea is that USB 3.0 is created because we can. Then, when the products that support it arrive, the infrastructure is already in place.

[KarlW @ Jun 15th 2008 10:16AM]

Would you really want to have a load of USB 2.0 ports for your existing devices, and a load of eSata ports for new devices?

Or would you rather have one interface to connect both new and old devices? Yea, I thought so. If eSata was compatible with USB 2.0/1.1/1.0, then yes, it'd be a viable alternative. But it isn't. So it's not.

[Rayburn @ Jun 15th 2008 11:50AM]

I have a great idea. How about we develop a connector which is faster than either eSATA or FireWire, and this connector is backwards compatible with 99% of all relatively modern computer peripherals (within the last 10 years)?

Guess what, it's USB 3.0. So long as these idiots (intel/nvid) don't mess it up, say bye-bye to eSATA or FW.

[Paper Thin Bra @ Jun 15th 2008 5:31PM]

Cause usb supports lots of devices per bus, in all honesty tho how many do we need?

[Paper Thin Bra @ Jun 15th 2008 11:36PM]

plus long cable length and stuff, its meant for small gadget every day use

[retro77 @ Jun 14th 2008 2:59PM]

Interesting that the conductors extend over the end of the connector there.

[DragonTamer @ Jun 14th 2008 3:07PM]

What? So now USB has to be complicated also? Sigh, i'll stick to USB 2.0 then

[Sy @ Jun 14th 2008 3:08PM]

Firewire anyone?

[The Dude @ Jun 14th 2008 3:52PM]

Nobody, apparently.

[chickenator @ Jun 15th 2008 2:20AM]

me want

[IK84 @ Jun 14th 2008 3:13PM]

hmm.. I dont know the history on External Graphic cards, just some tid bits I read about a year ago or so. But I would think if 3.0 came into play it would really help push that market and people with laptops could have faster access speeds to external cards. I believer Asus had one that used 2.0. so 3.0 could be even better.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Jun 14th 2008 3:48PM]

What's the point of an external graphics card?

Your graphics card takes about 100W of power. So you're going to have an external box with a power supply larger than your laptop's?

[Catsceo @ Jun 14th 2008 4:28PM]

@why not the LS2LS7?

Some people don't want to have 2 computers.

[FTY @ Jun 14th 2008 6:33PM]

Well, in fact, if the trend continues and the graphics cards will still get bigger and bigger and dispense so much heat as an oven, I see the only solution in external graphics cards.

If this would be to happen, the industry would follow, making the standard in-case PSUs have solutions for the external cards, not really hard to make even now, just pull the cables out.

[Jimmy @ Jun 14th 2008 3:14PM]

Grrrr. Well so much for USB 3.0. No point in having a Universal Serial Bus if its not UNIVERSAL. Looking forward (very far in the future probably) to FW3200 in my next MBP ;)

[Rayburn @ Jun 15th 2008 11:47AM]

Except that USB 3.0 comes out at 4.8 Gbps, while your FW3200 only has exactly that, 3.2 Gbps.

With USB 3.0, FireWire becomes useless. It'll lose its bread and butter (FW won't be the fastest connector)

[haracas @ Jun 15th 2008 12:55PM]

I'm pretty sure FW3200's main marketing point is backward compatibility. I think they are claiming that current FW400/800 will be able to scale up to FW3200 with a software update. I'm not sure about USB. I have 2 external harddisks connected by USB (too lazy to pay extra for FW ports) and damn, transferring 300gb out took a loooong time.

[Andrew @ Jun 15th 2008 1:20PM]

@haracas

FW already broke their compatibility going FW800 over FW400... My MBP has 2 of these slots, which is annoying as hell, when one could easily have been used for a USB2 slot. I'm not so sure how they will make 2 non-backwards compatible ports into 1 'universal' port..

[Gabriel @ Jun 14th 2008 3:16PM]

Sorry to be ignorant, but, how come a "specification" needs to be developed for so long time? Do they have to do some hardware test? Work in new algorithms? I believed that the specs were written down somewhere with guidelines about how the communication should be perfomed and that's it, then the hardware manufacturers should do the real engineering and try to meet the spec's theoretical results.

[phanbouy @ Jun 14th 2008 3:17PM]

ITS TEH FORMAT WARZ!

[Chris Macdonald @ Jun 14th 2008 3:27PM]

A format war on the one thing that's "universal"


great

[The Dude @ Jun 14th 2008 3:48PM]

USB 3.0 I vs. USB 3.0 N.A.V.S.

Format blood will be shed, someone will come out on top, the public won't really care, and instead create a demand for high-quality USB controllers to get fast and sustained 2.0 speeds.

It's nothing like the preceding format warz though, where people are buying upscaling DVD players in spite of Blu-Ray's victory. Nothing like it all!

[Chris Macdonald @ Jun 14th 2008 4:06PM]

Hey, Maybe someone should start working on a data cable format that's universal and isn't plagued by all these companies little feuds.....


Oh wait

[Jherez @ Jun 14th 2008 7:14PM]

Off topic but from since when did highest ranked come back?

[Montusama @ Jun 14th 2008 3:20PM]

A new soap opera is starting its called USB and her 3 Friends (NVIDIA, AMD and VIA)

SiS doesn't count as its against the rules of a soap opera....at least for now

Sorry if its a repost

[black @ Jun 14th 2008 6:02PM]

and they all use her on a daily basis to plug their peripherals in

[ethana2 @ Jun 14th 2008 3:22PM]

I'm tired of HDMI, SATA, DVI, Firewire, bluetooth, all that...
it's ridiculous.

Make one thing that's good enough for general use so people can stick to it.
I hope USB 3 is it. It needs to scale speeds without needing new specs drawn up. Give it a theoretical throughput of petabits at the highest tier or something.

Remember AGP? Thank goodness we've moved onto PCIe now.

[thethirdmoose @ Jun 15th 2008 2:23PM]

How are you comparing USB and bluetooth?

[L.Rawlins @ Jun 14th 2008 3:30PM]

Yes, because yet another format that ends up doing the exact same thing as the first one is always a great business idea...

What's the rush for USB 3 anyway?

[The Dude @ Jun 14th 2008 3:33PM]

"...Intel uninvited from everybody's birthday parties"

You forgot "blocked on AIM" and "removed from top friends on MySpace."

[SchmuckyTheCat @ Jun 14th 2008 3:43PM]

Is this the USB3.0 spec, or is it the USB3 HOST CONTROLLER INTERFACE spec?

In usb1 times (1995), there was UHCI (from Intel, which wanted royalties, only VIA licensed it and they broke it, so two versions of UHCI) and then there was OHCI (from NEC, and copied by everyone else in Taiwan, SiS, Opti, ALI, etc, and a few of these had variations that made driver writing tricky as well). If you have ever seen a USB device which works on one chipset, but not another, this was why. Anyone making a device had to test against all this crap, which broke the promise from the USB-IF: one bus, one physical interface, and no need to test against multiple implementations. The same promise came from Microsoft with the Windows Driver Model (WDM), one driver for Win9x, and what would become Win2000, and every OS going forward - but they had to make two USB HCI drivers just like everybody else, which meant everybody else had to test their drivers against these hardware differences too.

Then with USB2 this got straightened out. One Host Controller Interface: EHCI. Everybody did EHCI, but Intel did most of the work, and got no royalties. Only one implementation that most everybody got right, yay if you were a hardware or driver developer!

Now we have USB3. The USB-IF publishes the bus specification and is totally open. So, I imagine what everyone is in a tizzy about is the HCI, and Intel again wants a single HCI implementation. It is unsaid in all these one paragraph entries that it is the HCI that everyone is complaining about. If that is the case, then I'm rooting for Intel. Writing, testing, and tracking errata from multiple implementations of the same specification is for chumps. If Nvidia, et al, make their own HCI spec then they can DIAF - I won't develop my devices on it, and as a consumer, I won't buy hardware based on their chips.

[SchmuckyTheCat @ Jun 14th 2008 3:49PM]

Yes, reading the actual article, it is the HCI they are bitching about. Nvidia can choke on it. It won't take them two years to clone a design Intel is giving away for free.

It's not like anybody is shut out, Intel has documentation and prototype hardware on what they are doing.