Too bad hard drives probably won't keep up.
http://www.everythingusb.com/superspeed-usb.html
Printable View
Too bad hard drives probably won't keep up.
http://www.everythingusb.com/superspeed-usb.html
Looking at that transfer speed of that movie they listed, that shit will be fast. Pretty much will put Firewire to the curb unless it releases a new version.
SSDQuote:
Originally Posted by wanabedriver
Nothing short of a RAID will sustain 360 MB/s.
You beat me to it. I'm sure better storage technology is in our not-so-distant future.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Scarf
Last time I checked, SSDs were having a hard time sustaining transfers, although their seek time is pretty much non-existent.
Imagine if USB became THE way to connect shit. No SATA, no SCSI/SAS, no ethernet, etc etc.
That would be nice. It really would be the universal connection.Quote:
Originally Posted by wanabedriver
Pfft, where's my WUSB? I already have eSATA for externals.
You'll never hit the max theoretical limit anyway. I haven't really kept up with the USB3 spec, but I know USB2 varied greatly due to the controller and having to offload to the CPU - real world speeds were only about ~25MB/s, often far less.Quote:
Originally Posted by wanabedriver
I haven't heard anything about WUSB. What speeds were people expecting?Quote:
Originally Posted by ephekt
Just going off the numbers the article provided from their experiment of copying a 25GB file:Quote:
Originally Posted by ephekt
USB 1.0: 9.3 hours = 0.76 MB/s
USB 2.0: 13.9 minutes = 30.7 MB/s
USB 3.0: 70 seconds = 365 MB/s
IF the technology for 3.0 is similar to 2.0 , and 3.0 is still about 12 times faster than 2.0, I would think 'real' speeds would be 200+ MB/s. Not shabby me thinks.
...I'm just salty my PCMCIA eSATA card sucks a nut.
Well as for drives and such if the speed is up to par there wouldn't be a problem with having a universal connector. Ethernet is an entirely different story. USB is quiet limited by distance and even speed with the newest of USB and the newest of Ethernet specs. If USB 3.0 will sustain 365 MB/s thats around 3.5 Gbps, while most people are only at 1Gbps on local area networks, CAT6 cable will support up to 10Gbps, and obviously fiber optic can go even faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by wanabedriver
Also most people don't realize that Ethernet is very wide spread across many different mediums from the old coax thicknet up to the newest snazziest multi mode fiber technology, and even wireless. Ethernet is going to be here for a very long time, maybe not as the most common Cat5 cables of today and such but as a standard.
From what I've read the intent is to provide USB 2 speeds wirelessly, which would be perfectly fine for most uses. Just think of using your thumb drive without taking it out of your pocket/wallet.Quote:
Originally Posted by wanabedriver
Oh, I have no doubt that it will be faster than 2.0, I'm just questioning the real world throughput. USB has always done worse than Firewire due to lacking a dedicated controller. I'm just wondering if 3.0 can actually provide a real world throughput in the 200MB/s+ realm.Quote:
Just going off the numbers the article provided from their experiment of copying a 25GB file:
USB 1.0: 9.3 hours = 0.76 MB/s
USB 2.0: 13.9 minutes = 30.7 MB/s
USB 3.0: 70 seconds = 365 MB/s
IF the technology for 3.0 is similar to 2.0 , and 3.0 is still about 12 times faster than 2.0, I would think 'real' speeds would be 200+ MB/s. Not shabby me thinks.
As an aside, I'm pretty sure PCMCIA lacks the bandwidth to support SATA speeds. I believe ExpressCard does, though.
Also, signed on Ethernet's ubiquity. It's an amazing transport technology that is really only now being realized on a large scale. Ethernet is > ATM in many ways. With 10GE and 100GE on the horizon, as well as MPLSoE, I don't really see it going anywhere any time soon.