XFX Radeon RX 5600 XT THICC 3 review
Fractal Design Define 7 XL review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - January 2020
Palit GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER GamingPro review
Team Group T-Force DarkZα 3600 MHz DDR4 review
Corsair Scimitar Elite RGB gaming mouse review
Cougar 700K Evo keyboard review
Aorus Liquid Cooler 360 review
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X review
Corsair A500 CPU air cooler review
USB 3.2 specification Announced Goes 2 GB/s
The USB 3.0 Promoter Group announced another USB-C specification: USB 3.2. It will support “multi-lane operation”. Put simply: it’s faster than regular USB 3.0, allowing up to two lanes of 5Gbps or two lanes of 10Gbps operation.
The USB 3.0 Promoter Group today announced the pending release of the USB 3.2 specification, an incremental update that defines multi-lane operation for new USB 3.2 hosts and devices. USB Developer Days 2017 will include detailed technical training covering USB 3.2, fast charging advancements in USB Power Delivery, and other exciting topics.
While USB hosts and devices were originally designed as single-lane solutions, USB Type-C cables were designed to support multi-lane operation to ensure a path for scalable performance. New USB 3.2 hosts and devices can now be designed as multi-lane solutions, allowing for up to two lanes of 5 Gbps or two lanes of 10 Gbps operation. This enables platform developers to continue advancing USB products to fit their customers' needs by effectively doubling the performance across existing cables. For example, a USB 3.2 host connected to a USB 3.2 storage device will now be capable of realizing over 2 GB/s data transfer performance over an existing USB Type-C cable that is certified for SuperSpeed USB 10 Gbps.
"When we introduced USB Type-C to the market, we intended to assure that USB Type-C cables and connectors certified for SuperSpeed USB or SuperSpeed USB 10 Gbps would, as produced, support higher performance USB as newer generations of USB 3.0 were developed," said Brad Saunders, USB 3.0 Promoter Group Chairman. "The USB 3.2 update delivers the next level of performance."
"With increased performance and seamless compatibility, the new USB 3.2 specification brings even more speed and bandwidth benefits to new USB 3.2 devices, while remaining compatible with USB 3.0 and earlier devices," said Roanne Sones, General Manager, Strategy and Ecosystem for Windows and Devices, Microsoft. "We're excited to work with our partners in the USB 3.0 Promoter Group to help showcase these benefits to users around the world."
Key characteristics of the USB 3.2 solution include:
- Two-lane operation using existing USB Type-C cables
- Continued use of existing SuperSpeed USB physical layer data rates and encoding techniques
- Minor update to hub specification to address increased performance and assure seamless transitions between single and two-lane operation
For users to obtain the full benefit of this performance increase, a new USB 3.2 host must be used with a new USB 3.2 device and the appropriate certified USB Type-C cable. This update is part of the USB performance roadmap and is specifically targeted to developers at this time. Branding and marketing guidelines will be established after the final specification is published. The USB 3.2 specification is now in a final draft review phase with a planned formal release in time for the USB Developer Days North America event in September 2017.
wavetrex
Senior Member
Posts: 772
Joined: 2008-07-16
Senior Member
Posts: 772
Joined: 2008-07-16
#5455715 Posted on: 07/26/2017 01:04 PM
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.
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.
XP-200
Senior Member
Posts: 5082
Joined: 2003-04-05
Senior Member
Posts: 5082
Joined: 2003-04-05
#5455723 Posted on: 07/26/2017 01:18 PM
^^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.
^^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.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4702
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4702
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5455776 Posted on: 07/26/2017 03:37 PM
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.
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 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.
VR inputs don't need more bandwidth; USB 3.0 is definitely enough. What VR needs is better latency.
XP-200
Senior Member
Posts: 5082
Joined: 2003-04-05
Senior Member
Posts: 5082
Joined: 2003-04-05
#5455804 Posted on: 07/26/2017 05:02 PM
^^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.
^^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.
WhiteLightning
Moderator
Posts: 28214
Joined: 2007-09-19
Moderator
Posts: 28214
Joined: 2007-09-19
#5455809 Posted on: 07/26/2017 05:28 PM
usb just became more awesome then awesome. wish mini-usb would die though.
usb just became more awesome then awesome. wish mini-usb would die though.
tsunami231
Senior Member
Posts: 9945
Joined: 2003-05-24
Senior Member
Posts: 9945
Joined: 2003-05-24
#5455810 Posted on: 07/26/2017 05:42 PM
because it was needed?!
because it was needed?!
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 7748
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 7748
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5456093 Posted on: 07/27/2017 01:06 PM
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
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.
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
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9508
Joined: 2011-09-21
Senior Member
Posts: 9508
Joined: 2011-09-21
#5456097 Posted on: 07/27/2017 01:13 PM
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
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.
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
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.
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 7748
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 7748
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5456101 Posted on: 07/27/2017 01:18 PM
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/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236598&cm-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.
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.
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/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236598&cm-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.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4702
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4702
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5456144 Posted on: 07/27/2017 02:41 PM
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.
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.
I think, though i could be wrong, that USB is trying to become the "end all" device.
...
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
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?
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.
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.
I think, though i could be wrong, that USB is trying to become the "end all" device.
...
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
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?
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: 2013-06-04
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.