Shoutbox

USB 3.0 is said to be released in 2008. It has backward compatibly and has a HUGE data transfer rate.

Here are some links:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070918-int...rates-usb-3-0.html


Thats a pic..

USB 3.0 can transfer 4.8GB a second but you need a pc that can cope with that. There not alot that can.  If you think about it you can  transfer a movie in a second That sounds a bit dodgy


Intel decides to do make something good for a change!

tid=55505
why do we need to transfer that fast?
when they now have external sATA ports??

I did contribute to the thread?

---

IDk but the faster the better i suppose

I'd be happy with 1/4 of that for net speed.
but I've never needed faster usb connections

(australia regional1 )
go OPEL

quote:

---

Originally posted by xen0h
I'd be happy with 1/4 of that for net speed.
but I've never needed faster usb connections

---

If its faster its better in a way say you were transferring a gig of files from a pen drive to your pc and it took about 10 minutes it would take about 30 seconds with usb 3.0. Also its a good thing that they have backward compatibility if the didn't it would be a very big problem.

Anyway.. its fiber-optic wires so its not copper. Just wanted to say that

quote:

---

Originally posted by john-t

quote:

---

Originally posted by xen0h
I'd be happy with 1/4 of that for net speed.
but I've never needed faster usb connections

---

If its faster its better in a way say you were transferring a gig of files from a pen drive to your pc and it took about 10 minutes it would take about 30 seconds with usb 3.0. Also its a good thing that they have backward compatibility if the didn't it would be a very big problem.

Anyway.. its fiber-optic wires so its not copper. Just wanted to say that

---

You'd need memory that fast. People with ATA drives won't be able to do it but I guess the DMA could get it up that much.
If anyone technical is reading, would the transfer using the DMAC be HDD -> RAM -> USB 3.0 -> Device or would it skip the RAM?

This sounds about right.. Flash based drives will be becoming the standard over the next few years, speeds like these will be needed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phillip
This sounds about right.. Flash based drives will be becoming the standard over the next few years, speeds like these will be needed.

---

Indeed, I'm already annoyed at the time it takes to copy over stuff to my memory stick (for example copying 1GB of small files).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vilkku

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phillip
This sounds about right.. Flash based drives will be becoming the standard over the next few years, speeds like these will be needed.

---

Indeed, I'm already annoyed at the time it takes to copy over stuff to my memory stick (for example copying 1GB of small files).

---

Also since the backward compatibility thing, that means a USB 2.0 via a USB 3.0 port will slow things even more down? Or will it just be the same?

Since 2.0 and 3.0 has to ne compatible that means there is copper and fire-optic in the wire, so it must be quite chunky

quote:

---

Originally posted by john-t
Also since the backward compatibility thing, that means a USB 2.0 via a USB 3.0 port will slow things even more down? Or will it just be the same?

---

a Device built on USB 2.0 technology shouldn't show any noticable improvement in a USB 3.0 port, its like pluging a fire hose in to your garden hose tap, sure the hose is wider(faster port) but the water(information) can only come out of the tab(USB 2.0 Device) so fast.