USB 3.0 SuperSpeed gone wild at CES 2010, trumps even your new SSD
Just in case you didn't notice the arrow, that's a USB 3.0 cable up there, plugged into a USB 3.0 port, running in a Fujitsu laptop that is the first to pack integrated support for USB 3.0. How fast was it? On the other end of this one was a Buffalo external enclosure stuffed with an old-fashioned, platter-based hard disk, which still delivered perfectly absurd transfer rates of about 135MB/sec. When another, similar setup ran with an Intel SSD what happened the results were even more impressive: a few ticks over 200MB/sec. Yes, we're about to enter another dimension. A time when external drives are as fast as internal ones. Where the speed at which you can fill up your MP3 player is limited only by the speed of the storage on that device itself. You are about to enter... the SuperSpeed zone.
If you're unfamiliar with USB 3.0 we can't really blame you. Surely you know it's going to be faster than 2.0, but there's been plenty of confusion and dismay surrounding the standard's long and arduous trip to ratification, so here's a quick refresher. The first confusing thing? It's also called SuperSpeed, and the vibe we're getting is that the 3.0 moniker is going to be downplayed quite a bit once this tech starts to go mainstream. Given the new name and the notably chubbier cables it's easy to think that perhaps this new standard isn't backwards compatible, but fear not: It'll to work just fine with older cables and devices, so you can plug that scratched-up thumb drive into a SuperSpeed port if you like -- just don't expect any speed improvement.

That said, your chances of actually plugging something in to one of those ports are still fairly slim at this point. While more and more motherboards are showing up with the technology, with Gigabyte seemingly having the broadest support right now, most feature just a few blue-colored USB 3.0 ports next to the usual expansive stack of 2.0 openings. The controllers we looked at from companies like NEC typically provided just two and, given that we're expecting those controllers are considerably more expensive than 2.0 ones right now, manufacturers aren't generally opting to replace all the old-school ports wholesale just yet.
That's partly thanks to a competing standard: Light Peak, which has been championed by Intel and Apple quite strongly, leading neither of the two to throw their support behind USB 3.0. Indeed Microsoft hasn't yet either, and the story we got from representatives at MCCI is that it probably won't until Windows 8. Who is MCCI? Well, among other things it makes foundational elements of USB 3.0 drivers, meaning that lack of support is somewhat good for them. Overall, though, it's not exactly good news for the standard

Again, we saw multiple benchmarks showing that SuperSpeed can easily pass more than enough data to max out whatever was tethered to it. There was plenty of bandwidth for uncompressed 1080p60 video, and DisplayLink showed off a USB 3.0 external display adapter that easily enabled the streaming of 1080p video over USB before being converted into an HDMI signal. Do you need enough bandwidth to be able to completely fill a 32GB PMP in less than two minutes? Heck yeah you do, and given the choice between doing it with a backwards-compatible port like this or instead shifting everything over to a completely new one, we know which we'd prefer.



























fast...
@007
That's what she said James ;)
@Seven xD
though usb 3.0 is fast i dont understand why the industry doesnt move to esata as the standard. with esata the max transfer rate is 6gb/s i believe thats even faster than light peak.
last wtf microsoft why no usb 3.0 support.
@saturnblackhole It's not, and I believe eSata is meant only for data storage (i.e., it's not general purpose).
@saturnblackhole
Light Peak begins at 10Gbps and will go up from there.
@saturnblackhole Actually, esata is "only" 3 gigabit / sec.
@chabig
I hope Light Peak goes mainstream in 2010 so I never have to bother with USB 3.0.
@saturnblackhole The better question is why use eSATA when today's drives won't bottleneck on USB 3.0 and can also deliver power to the drive without a separate cable?
I'll be replacing my Sony Z laptop as soon as Sony offers a Z model with a USB 3.0 port.
How much will this RAPE consumers wallet?
$30 bucks can get a you a card with 2 usb ports and 2 sata ports
Arrg, damn you Apple and Intel, messing up standardization. On a lighter note, do they have PCI-E adapter cards for USB 3.0 yet?
@bluemajik
They're coming. ASUS should have one coming out soon. Two USB 3.0 and two SATA 6GB/s ports PCI-E x4 for about $30.
@Sneakz Thas good news then. I can just stick with my current AMD rig then.
*thats
Doo doo doo doo doo doo doo doo~
@Mr Passion
To the tune of the Twilight Zone theme? Because I came here to say that.
i bet apple adopt usb 3.0 before blu ray
@appleboy I would take that bet. You see Mr. Jobs is also involved in Pixar, which has been pushing Blu-ray hard lately. You could buy the movie "Up" in a DVD/Blu-ray combo for cheaper than the DVD by itself, as method of getting people to invest in a Blu-ray library before committing to a player.
Whereas Apple has invested a lot of effort into lightpeek, and are probably going to be reluctant to give up any ground to USB3 anytime soon. Just look at how long Firewire stuck around.
@appleboy Why are you Highly Ranked? Did you read the article?
So, what's the biggest treat to mankind? The LHC or USB 3.0? :P
We've had "external drives as fast as internal ones" for quite some time. ~15 years ago when Firewire was released, and PATA was the hard drive interface of the day, externals were as fast as internals. This happened again with FW800, and several flavors of eSATA. There was probably another period where this happened with SCSI, but I'm too young to remember.
@ludwigk SCSI has always been available as fast externally as internally. Some might argue that Fiber Channel drives make for faster external storage than what is available internally as well.
it seems the writers at woot just got snapped up and highered by engadget..
200 mb/s? Do seriously want. Would be nice when you're doing a backup.
Whatever happened to FireWire? Hasn't that been 'super speedy' for years now?
In fact, why isn't FireWire used more? Compared to USB its clearly superior.
@Alex R Because Firewire was mostly about storage, while USB was about a "universal" port. You don't see firewire keyboards, or network adapters, etc. USB 2 also did wonders for catching up in speed to firewire and was more flexible (and cheaper to license if I am not mistaken). That and Apple was really the only PC company pushing Firewire. The video cameras adopted it because Apple computers were used more for video editing than Windows.
@Alex R
Firewire was intended for everything. The problem wasn't really licensing, as it was registered through IEEE (the official name of Firewire is IEEE1394). The problem was really two problems.
(huge breath) Disclaimer: if you do not want a lengthy explanation, feel free to dodge the rest of this massive and potentially boring explanation. If you like incessantly long explanations, please continue.
First of all, Firewire needed a seperate chipset or card, and second, the first generation, Firewire 400 or IEEE 1394a was a completely different-looking and attaching port. The first was the size of USB, the second was a bit bigger than a standard headphone jack. The signal was still compatible, but no one could care anyway.
Anyway, that was the deal killer, leaving us with the easy-to-implement USB, which just evolved to the same implementation requirements as IEEE 1394, which, as of revision C or D, both of which use the same port and only need a driver update for the controller, have better throughput than USB 3.0. How lovely. Superspeed indeed.
By the way, ESata (the commonly found one, at least) is 3 Gb/s but has nearly perfect throughput (or real data stream capabilities). The trick is, it is basically a SATA 3 Gb/s stuck on the outside of the box, and morphed enough to merit a new standard and support plug-and-play. It would work for flash drives, but not for microphones or keyboards or other such things. It, too, needs an individual controller or the functionality built into the system sata controller. (usually there are two sata controllers in such machines: One sata-only with about 6 sata ports, and another with two-three, linked to the esata porst on the back of the computer, and possible a header (if the motherboard manufacturer is nice). Naturally, a PCI board with the controller skips on the SATA part, again, unless they're nice.
its a revolution!
Faster than current commercially available SSD? Not exactly difficult. ::shrug::
USB 3 NOW!
While USB 3.0 speeds are impressive, I use my usb ports with mini cables to charge my phone and my headset when I travel so I can charge each with just little 6" cables instead of AC plugs wherever I go and I can charge them at my desk when visiting a client. USB 3.0 offers much more power for charging devices so it would be a big bonus for me if the next laptop I purchase has USB 3.0 ports.
@boe
3.0 wont "recharge" your device any faster,
and you wouldn't want it to!, unless you like to see something errupt into flames.
woah... that's fast
Yeah I agree with what some of what you guys are saying...
I personally don't understand what's the big deal with usb 3.0 and external hard drives and this artical talking about externals being as fast as internals when using this interface. Did everyone forget about eSATa? I wellcome 3.0 usb, but for harddrives I'm good with eSATa...
@GTRJay
esata has no power supply.
@yejun
I guess you have a point...
@yejun
The new eSATA ports has power... it uses a eSATA/USB combo port, so that it can use the power pin of USB to power the device. Not only you can fit a USB and the traditional eSATA device on the very same port, but you can also use the new powered eSATA standard.
Already they are USB memory keys that have that port (as well as a USB port so that you can plug-it on non-compatible systems).
Like this one: http://www.trustedreviews.com/storage/review/2009/12/03/Verbatim-eSATA-USB-Combo-SSD-32GB/p2
The BIG problem with USB standard for usage with device storage, is that it's only 1 direction at a time. If you read and write at the same time, the process speed will be MUCH slower, as read and write calls fight to get access to the device. If you decide to compress a file ON the external device powered by USB, it will also be much slower than just transfer the file on your system, compress it, and send it back to the device (of course, on very large compression job, I am talking about... assuming that you have a script done to perform the process, and that read and write speed is the same and good).
This is why Firewire storage device, despite slower than USB 2.0... ends up to be faster at the end of the day. Firewire flash drive don't exists as Firewire cost more to implement, and that it's rarely used bidirectional on a flash drive.. people usage put some file in or out, and that is all.. As now capacity allows to have more data on such device it gets more and more interesting to have bi-directional transfer ability... well now he have powered eSATA so no use for Firewire.
Today, right now. Going to my PC shop to get some hot USB 3.0 lovin!
I understand the benefits of the added speed for large data transfer, but surely for most devices such as mice, keyboards, headsets, web cams etc aren't you just as ok with USB 2.0?
And FireWire is so 1999. And dead.
@ktcochran
And USB 3.0 could very well die off before it see's daylight with Light Peak coming out and having 3x the speed of USB 3.0.
That is awesome hopefully it comes out soon also hoping that it'll easy to install into the PC
Look like a winner but by the time usb 3.0 was widely adopted, I doubt it can beat SSD.
Its hard for USB to die just as it is for MP3 to die. there are so many devices using USB that it will take at least 10-12 years to change them all. so even if light peak becomes main stream, USB's going nowhere.
Which upcoming Gaming Laptops will have USB 3.0 ?
& when ???
Anyone know what the max thoroughput is on the 30pin connector side of Apple's iPod /iPhone? Could they just stick a USB 3.0 connector on and get faster speeds, or is that side maxed?