Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    26,062
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,401 times in 524 posts

    USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    Incremental update defines multi-lane operation for up to 2GBps transfers.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    I'm special azrael-'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    705
    Thanks
    42
    Thanked
    57 times in 50 posts
    • azrael-'s system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8C-WS
      • CPU:
      • Intel Xeon E3-1245v2 3.4 GHz
      • Memory:
      • 16 GB ECC DDR3 1333 MHz
      • Storage:
      • 256 GB Samsung 830, 1 TB Samsung 850 EVO, 6 TB WD HDDs
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ASUS GTX 970 TurboOC 4 GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic X-Series 560W
      • Case:
      • Corsair Obsidian 550D
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2209WA
      • Internet:
      • VDSL 55/12 Mbit/s

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 Gen 1 is exactly the same thing or protocol, to be precise. Thanks for that confusion, USB IF!

    Not confusing, on the other hand is USB Type C, which is a connector and enables fun stuff like the DisplayPort and ThunderBolt alternate modes. AFAIK, when it comes to "goold old" USB data transfer USB Type A, which still the most common connector, can do USB 3.1 Gen 2 just as well.

    Oh, and I almost forgot USB PD for power delivery.

    As I see it the main boon of USB 3.2 is that it does away with the USB Type A connector. And the added speed, of course.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    996
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked
    42 times in 36 posts

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    Oh how we all love .x updates to specifications..... I really wish the people responsible for specs would look a little more to the future of what it might need rather than having to do these tiny incremental updates that should have been there to start with....

  4. #4
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    7,687
    Thanks
    292
    Thanked
    721 times in 623 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • M5A-97 EVO R2.0
      • CPU:
      • FX-8350
      • Memory:
      • 16GB ECC 1333
      • Storage:
      • 660GB Linux, 500GB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Nitro R9 380 4GB
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 24 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    Oh how we all love .x updates to specifications..... I really wish the people responsible for specs would look a little more to the future of what it might need rather than having to do these tiny incremental updates that should have been there to start with....
    That would be the way to make sure that specifications never get released as they are never good enough and the world evolves as fast as the spec can try and track it so the spec can never catch up.

    "The best is the enemy of the good", Voltaire worked out that chasing perfection is seldom worth it, some things are unchanging across the centuries.

  5. #5
    King of the Juice Platinum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Chesterfield
    Posts
    3,698
    Thanks
    664
    Thanked
    78 times in 65 posts
    • Platinum's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X99 Deluxue
      • CPU:
      • Core i7 5930k @ 4GHz
      • Memory:
      • 32gb Crucial 2400MHz
      • Storage:
      • 256gb Samsung SP941, 1tb MX500 Crucial SSD, 240gb Intel 730 SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 Fury OC
      • PSU:
      • 750 Watt Corsair HX
      • Case:
      • Corsiar 750D
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2408WFP
      • Internet:
      • 18Mb

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    Type C only, nice hopefully this will push board manufacturers to add more Type C ports.
    Salazaar : <Touching wood as I write this...>


  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    996
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked
    42 times in 36 posts

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    That would be the way to make sure that specifications never get released as they are never good enough and the world evolves as fast as the spec can try and track it so the spec can never catch up.
    I'd personally rather have a delay than have 3 different 3.x specs floating around at the same time.... and it's not like anything they're adding couldn't have been foreseen with a small bit of thinking ahead.... it's not hard to realise that more speed is always useful so 'over spec that' to start with and arguably the same goes for 'multi lane operation' which is kind of way everything is going on the pc at the moment when trying to get more performance etc.

  7. #7
    Cinnamon Roll
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Norfolk (Nowhereland)
    Posts
    268
    Thanks
    24
    Thanked
    6 times in 6 posts
    • Ozaron's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI Z170 SLI Plus
      • CPU:
      • i5-6600K @ 4.3GHz
      • Memory:
      • 16GB HyperX DDR4 2666MHz CL15
      • Storage:
      • Toshiba X300 4TB, Samsung 850 Evo 500GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12-II 620w
      • Case:
      • In Win 707 ATX
      • Operating System:
      • W10 Enterprise 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • BenQ GW2765HT
      • Internet:
      • 150KB/s ↓ 50KB/s ↑ ~35ms

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    I'd personally rather have a delay than have 3 different 3.x specs floating around at the same time.... and it's not like anything they're adding couldn't have been foreseen with a small bit of thinking ahead.... it's not hard to realise that more speed is always useful so 'over spec that' to start with and arguably the same goes for 'multi lane operation' which is kind of way everything is going on the pc at the moment when trying to get more performance etc.
    Agreed here, the point of USB is to have a universal solution for everyone, releasing many variants of the same thing does not equal universal (backwards compatibility ignored for a minute) since people won't all be getting the same thing even when their motherboard maker lists "3.1". Adoption would be much easier if the changes came much less often, with more foresight. I'm sure there's an economies of scale manufacturing argument here too.

  8. #8
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    53
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked
    8 times in 7 posts

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    To all those complaining about USB being implemented incrementally:
    The alternative is to spec out an interface that is ahead of it's time to such an extent that only a small minority will need the speed it provides and everyone else can't afford it. Then the cost to manufacture doesn't come down because it's not made in sufficient quantities... AKA thunderbolt!

    I do agree that they could do much better with the naming conventions though.

  9. Received thanks from:

    Platinum (29-09-2017)

  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    809
    Thanks
    134
    Thanked
    44 times in 41 posts
    • Xlucine's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z97MX Gaming 5
      • CPU:
      • i5 4690K @stock, until I upgrade my graphics
      • Memory:
      • 8GB @2133 11-11-11-27
      • Storage:
      • Crucial MX500 512GB, 2TB storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte 750ti OC
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic S12G-550
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ08-E

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    I'd personally rather have a delay than have 3 different 3.x specs floating around at the same time.... and it's not like anything they're adding couldn't have been foreseen with a small bit of thinking ahead.... it's not hard to realise that more speed is always useful so 'over spec that' to start with and arguably the same goes for 'multi lane operation' which is kind of way everything is going on the pc at the moment when trying to get more performance etc.
    USB 3.0 was released in 2008. Delaying USB 3 until the 3.2 improvements were ready would have meant everyone running USB 2.0 for 9 years extra.

    ETA: in 2008, the very first i7 processors were launched. Predicting eGPU is just a small bit of thinking ahead, though!

  11. Received thanks from:

    DanceswithUnix (29-09-2017)

  12. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    218
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    6 times in 5 posts

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    Yay ANOTHER new cable to buy.

  13. #11
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    7,687
    Thanks
    292
    Thanked
    721 times in 623 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • M5A-97 EVO R2.0
      • CPU:
      • FX-8350
      • Memory:
      • 16GB ECC 1333
      • Storage:
      • 660GB Linux, 500GB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Nitro R9 380 4GB
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 24 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: USB 3.2 specs published by USB Implementers Forum

    Quote Originally Posted by Ozaron View Post
    (backwards compatibility ignored for a minute)
    How can you ignore that even for a minute? I am typing this on a Gateway early USB keyboard and Gateway went out of business decades ago, yet it is plugged into the USB3 hub of a monitor which is plugged into a USB2 PC port and IT ALL JUST WORKS.

    As long as they can keep up the backwards compatibility then it is all good, the alternative to keeping the standard up to date is stagnation not some clean utopia.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •