USB 3.0 data transfer demonstrated at IDF

Now that you know everything there is to know about the forthcoming rendition of your favorite port, there's just one little question left to be answered: how does it perform in the real world? Fresco Logic demonstrated a data transfer using the newfangled technology at IDF 2008 via a "self-developed software development platform." The results? Just over 350MBps. Not bad for a dry run, huh?

[Crayola @ Aug 21st 2008 8:54AM]

What is that in real world terms, 350 mega byte per second? Faster than SATA? Faster than Firewire 1600? Fast enough to reverse time?

[Kamokazi @ Aug 21st 2008 9:07AM]

Yes, faster than SATA. Your average SATA hard drive stays around 60MBps read speed (which can vary quite a bit depending on several factors). USB 2.0 flash drives typically run anywhere from 10MBps to 30MBps (usually closer to 10 unless you put some cash down for a nicer drive).

This is a little better than half of the rated speed of USB 3.0....350MBps=2.8Gbps.

[zyren @ Aug 21st 2008 9:11AM]

yes, 350 megabytes per second. That is very fast, as fast as SATAII and faster than firewire 1600.

Things are looking good for USB 3.0

[rock99rock @ Aug 21st 2008 10:53AM]

Anything is possible when your USB card is larger than your motherboard.

[loosely_coupled @ Aug 22nd 2008 2:21AM]

That IS IN real world terms. 350 MB/sec. And to "Kamokazi" up there, he's talking about the SATA interconnect, not an average SATA HDD.

USB 2.0 = ~30-35MB/sec (real-world)
Firewire 400 = 35-45MB/sec (real-world
Firewire 800 = 60-70MB/sec (real-world)
SATA I aka SATA 150 = 150MB/sec
SATA II aka SATA 300 = 300MB/sec (current and eSATA)
USB 3.0 = 350MB/sec
Firewire 3200 = ? (will most likely be real close to 350MB/sec max)
SATA III aka SATA 600 = 600MB/sec

[linuxamp @ Aug 21st 2008 8:56AM]

I can't wait to see a modder get that huge rig into an Eee.

[avester @ Aug 21st 2008 9:11AM]

Yeah, since you absolutely need 350MBps for a subnotebook

[Kizorblade @ Aug 21st 2008 9:51AM]

You don't ask modders if they "Need" something
It's a question of "Can"

And if they can. They will.

[Pr3dict @ Aug 21st 2008 9:13AM]

"11. Is there a plan for USB 3.0 or a faster USB 2.1?
No, but you've probably heard about the news already. Wired USB has come to an end with the introduction of the Certified Wireless USB 1.0 approved in May 2005. Everything will start to go wireless when wireless USB hub & USB dongles begin appearing in Q2 2006"

dreams... but then again this is a fine example of Moore's law.

[andres @ Aug 21st 2008 9:48AM]

of twice as many transistors in a processor?

[Pr3dict @ Aug 21st 2008 10:27AM]

yes, in other words technology doubles every two years, and two years ago wireless usb was finally certified and that was the technological factor that was supposed to free us of wires. but like i said in my post. those were dreams lol

[andres @ Aug 21st 2008 1:46PM]

no no no, thats not how it works. the number of transistors doubles. not the technology doubles.

[poached @ Aug 21st 2008 2:34PM]

unless they solve the problem of requiring power adapters for each "wireless" usb device, it's not really a win.

[Wolfticket @ Aug 21st 2008 9:15AM]

Hopefully high speed SSDs will mean that storage will be fast enough to take advantage of all that bandwidth.

[kevin @ Aug 21st 2008 9:24AM]

So...if someone were to make a CF card capable of that speed, we'd be talking about transferring a 2gb card in about six seconds?

[teetdogs @ Aug 21st 2008 9:27AM]

Can somebody tell me why my old account cant post anymore? I had to create a new one using a different email to get comments to work...Was I banned for some reason? if so I cant figure out why.

[Tim @ Aug 21st 2008 10:29AM]

@teetdogs You were banned for posting off topic messages about account support.

I have one of those cheap USB drives. Now I know why I could not find a mbps rating for it. I guess it will do for backing up, but it is annoyingly slow for normal use, especially if you are getting to it via a Share on the LAN. Must be 10 mbps. Yes it is on a 2.0 port. Tried it on another machine with a usb 1 port; that truly bogged down to near useless.

[Stiv @ Aug 21st 2008 11:21AM]

Was your first account called "iluvdogteets"?

[Up Yours @ Aug 21st 2008 9:29AM]

You think so ?

[Eric @ Aug 21st 2008 10:43AM]

So, it's faster than Firewire 1600. Considering Firewire 3200 just got certified, that would qualify as a straw man now, wouldn't it? :-D

As for SATA, didn't SATA 3 just get certified too? Nobody is standing still.

And is USB 3 free of the problems that made USB 2 so much slower than its rated speed that Firewire 400 continually proved the faster way to go in spite of being rated at 400 while USB 2 was 480? The problems I'm referring to is the fact that you had to have a port for each peripheral, and that the processor has to be involved with moving data, whereas in Firewire the processor was left alone. Streaming is clearly better than packet-based data transfer for anything other than a bunch of tiny files.

[Jon Doe. @ Aug 21st 2008 11:02AM]

Price will always trump features. Having a discrete processor, like FW400/800 does, offloads the workload but go take a look at prices of FW800 vs USB2 HD cages. The price difference is huge. And as for 3200. The max real world throughput was a hell of a lot less then advertised. (Still fast as ****. You can have my external SATA FW800 drive when you pry it out of my cold dead hands or give me a USB3 cage.) My guess is that 3200 will be the same and it will end up being a toss up.

[Jon Doe. @ Aug 21st 2008 10:57AM]

The question I have is how hard will this impact the CPU. Since the processing isn't done on a discrete processor its going to end up sucking down more juice then if the controller had a dedicated processor. I see how this makes it cheaper, but from a laptop user's perspective it kinda blows.

[Vidikron (FU) @ Aug 21st 2008 11:27AM]

Maybe on laptops there will be minor issues, but it's virtually a gaurantee that any PC with USB 3.0 will also be sporting multi-core CPUs. Most of the time the other cores are sitting around doing nothing much. Surely today's CPUs have the extra processing power to handle some simple data transfers. I'm more concerned about having drives capable of maximizing these speeds than I am about having disposable CPU cylces.

[Ty Johnson @ Aug 21st 2008 11:20AM]

didn't you see the Virtex FPGA on the top board?
that's a 500Mhz powerpc core + gate array
the're thinking waaay ahead of us.
then again, that makes battery life waaay worse.

[SaDudE @ Aug 21st 2008 1:21PM]

Isn't the new sata going to be 6 Gps or 6000 Mbps...the speeds just keep going on up

[Mr. E @ Aug 21st 2008 1:36PM]

Yes. Now if only we actually had devices that could come close to taking advantage of all this great bandwidth!

[Schwinn @ Aug 21st 2008 1:44PM]

The most important question for USB still isn't answered - what is the overhead required for this speed? USB was crippled because it required the CPU to do all the work, making the rest of the system horribly slow. That's why you can't use USB for video-transfer (FW doesn't have this problem.)

So, anyone know what the CPU usage was for this 350MBps stream?

[joe blow @ Aug 21st 2008 1:51PM]

OK, newbie question, but will the MB have to provide support for 3.0 or can you just add a 3.0 PC card to an existing board?

[max @ Aug 21st 2008 11:35PM]

whats all this i'm hearing about the israel defense forces?


man, this USB 3 stuff is pretty wicked....

[Static @ Aug 21st 2008 11:35PM]

Total dreams.
People said that CAT 5 cable was going to go the way of the dodo, and that all future networks would be wireless... That hasn't happened yet, and people are now talking about residential fiber optic installations (I live adjacent to a pretty wealthy neighborhood that seems to get some bizarre installation requests for new houses).

You'll still see advances in wired standards to send and receive data.

[Kraken @ Aug 22nd 2008 2:51PM]

I will need a cubed chassis. XD

[mike @ Aug 25th 2008 6:42PM]

you think well have a motherboard with usb 3.0, sata rev. 3, and that sweet sounding lucid technolgy gpu scaler by the end of next year?