Jump to content

USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Rebranding

Gymnastboatman
 Share
Posted
4 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

fun fact: USB-C 2.0 cables exist!

cause USB-C is a port form factor and not a protocol

USB-C doesn't inherently mean USB 3.x

Which is why it's a clusterfuck of a port, we are seeing it with audio over USB on phones, it will just keep getting worse

One day I will be able to play Monster Hunter Frontier in French/Italian/English on my PC, it's just a matter of time... 4 5 6 7 8 9 years later: It's finally coming!!!

Phones: iPhone 4S/SE | LG V10 | Lumia 920 | Samsung S24 Ultra

Laptops: Macbook Pro 15" (mid-2012) | Compaq Presario V6000

Other: Steam Deck

<>EVs are bad, they kill the planet and remove freedoms too some/<>

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
7 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

fun fact: USB-C 2.0 cables exist!

source: I bought one to power a camera with a portable battery

well yah, almost all of my USB C to A cables are 2.0, only have one 3.idfkanymore 

I spent $2500 on building my PC and all i do with it is play no games atm & watch anime at 1080p(finally) watch YT and write essays...  nothing, it just sits there collecting dust...

Builds:

The Toaster Project! Northern Bee!

 

The original LAN PC build log! (Old, dead and replaced by The Toaster Project & 5.0)

Spoiler

"Here is some advice that might have gotten lost somewhere along the way in your life. 

 

#1. Treat others as you would like to be treated.

#2. It's best to keep your mouth shut; and appear to be stupid, rather than open it and remove all doubt.

#3. There is nothing "wrong" with being wrong. Learning from a mistake can be more valuable than not making one in the first place.

 

Follow these simple rules in life, and I promise you, things magically get easier. " - MageTank 31-10-2016

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Can someone explain why my data transfer rate nowhere near those speeds is? I receive at most 70 MB/s on my USB 3.0 stick and port.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Am I the only one who literally doesn't care? Black ports are USB 2.0, blue one are "the fast ones". That's basically all I care about lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
50 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Am I the only one who literally doesn't care? Black ports are USB 2.0, blue one are "the fast ones". That's basically all I care about lol.

Mine USB 3.x ports are black so? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Sooo are they just going to keep retroactively renaming things to higher numbers as they go?
Is the naming convention something like: " 3. (whatever the current highest generation is) Gen (The actual generation of the standard) "? - If so thats... really dumb, I bet companies ether hate this, or love this... Ether you gotta update your packaging, or if your going to release a new product it will look more attractive because its USB 3.2 Gen1! Its gotta be faster then the older USB 3.0, and USB 3.1 Gen 2 devices on the shelf!

I get that Technical terms are often different then marketing/public speak. Like how internally a piece of software can be "Build 1439" but just presents itself to the public as "version 1.6". Because one is a lot easier to keep track of for consumers, and less confusing.  Nobody would be confused if they released a flat out USB 3.2. It just sounds like its a revision based off of USB 3.0 .
And based on how it works... I totally get the _x2 naming for use in the technical name.

But geeze just have the 'public name' be something easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Oh dear.

Can't they just name it comprehensible for the average joe?!

 

Why do they have to make it even more complicated?!

No "normal user" understands this shit no more...

 

But honestly, who needs all that bandwith?!
We're here in territory of external Graphics cards.

Potentially external NVMe SSDs.


But other than that??

 

And why can't they name it:

3.2/ 5G

3.2/10G

3.2 /20G

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

OH MY GAWD! It's bloody hard enough at work explaining to clients the differences in USB types, as they just don't get it!

Thanks for this...thanks...

5950X | NH D15S | 64GB 3200Mhz | RTX 3090 | ASUS PG348Q+MG278Q

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
24 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

 

And why can't they name it:

3.2/ 5G

3.2/10G

3.2 /20G

giphy.gif

With your logic!

5950X | NH D15S | 64GB 3200Mhz | RTX 3090 | ASUS PG348Q+MG278Q

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Whoever is in charge of the USB naming needs to be taken out and sh... wait, I could get in trouble for saying that. Taken out and given a very harsh talking to. *nods*

 

USB naming has sucked from early on. Remember FullSpeed vs SuperSpeed. There's some marketing idiot there who can't have any name sound less than the best.

Gaming system: R7 7800X3D, Asus ROG Strix B650E-F Gaming Wifi, Thermalright Phantom Spirit 120 SE ARGB, Corsair Vengeance 2x 32GB 6000C30, RTX 4070, MSI MPG A850G, Fractal Design North, Samsung 990 Pro 2TB, Acer Predator XB241YU 24" 1440p 144Hz G-Sync + HP LP2475w 24" 1200p 60Hz wide gamut
Productivity system: i9-7980XE, Asus X299 TUF mark 2, Noctua D15, 64GB ram (mixed), RTX 3070, NZXT E850, GameMax Abyss, Samsung 980 Pro 2TB, random 1080p + 720p displays.
Gaming laptop: Lenovo Legion 5, 5800H, RTX 3070, Kingston DDR4 3200C22 2x16GB 2Rx8, Kingston Fury Renegade 1TB + Crucial P1 1TB SSD, 165 Hz IPS 1080p G-Sync Compatible

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

fun fact: USB-C 2.0 cables exist!

source: I bought one to power a camera with a portable battery

It's still extremely prolific. There are so many USB 2 cables and devices still everywhere.

5950X | NH D15S | 64GB 3200Mhz | RTX 3090 | ASUS PG348Q+MG278Q

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Why not call it "USB 4.0 Megaspeed"?

CPU:AMD Ryzen 5 5600 3.5 GHz Processor | CPU Air Cooler:Thermalright Assassin X 120 Refined SE | Motherboard:MSI B450M GAMING PLUS MATX AM4

Memory:G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2x16GB)  DDR4-3200 | GPU:PowerColor Fighter Radeon RX 7600 8 GB Video Card

Storage #1:Silicon Power A55 512GB SSD (OS driver) | Storage #2: Silicon Power A60 1TB M.2-2280 PCIe 3.0 X4 NVMe (Anything else)

Case:Cooler Master MasterBox Q300L | Case Fan: 3x Thermalright TL-C12C (2x intake fans, 1x exhaust fan)

Power Supply:Corsair CXM (2015) 450W Bronze 80 Plus |OS:MS Windows10 (64-bit) | Monitor: ASUS VG275 27” 1080p 75 Hz FreeSync

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

This is a bunch of crap, I'll wait for USB version 4

CPU i7 4960x Ivy Bridge Extreme | 64GB Quad DDR-3 RAM | MBD Asus x79-Deluxe | RTX 2080 ti FE 11GB |
Thermaltake 850w PWS | ASUS ROG 27" IPS 1440p | | Win 7 pro x64 |

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I can understand them not jumping to 4.0 because it's not an order of magnitude faster than base 3.0 was, but you have enough digits between 3.0 & 4.0 to do it ffs...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Great, confuse me even more ?

You can take a look at all of the Tech that I own and have owned over the years in my About Me section and on my Profile.

 

I'm Swiss and my Mother language is Swiss German of course, I speak the Aargauer dialect. If you want to watch a great video about Swiss German which explains the language and outlines the Basics, then click here.

 

If I could just play Videogames and consume Cool Content all day long for the rest of my life, then that would be sick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
5 hours ago, Dylanc1500 said:

Yep, but it would actually secretly be 1.5" x 1.5".

It's called overhead, your analogy is apt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
8 hours ago, BobVonBob said:

Where's my Core i9x9

Or Core i9x2, so the core counts have been doubled up lol

DAC/AMPs:

Klipsch Heritage Headphone Amplifier

Headphones: Klipsch Heritage HP-3 Walnut, Meze 109 Pro, Beyerdynamic Amiron Home, Amiron Wireless Copper, Tygr 300R, DT880 600ohm Manufaktur, T90, Fidelio X2HR

CPU: Intel 4770, GPU: Asus RTX3080 TUF Gaming OC, Mobo: MSI Z87-G45, RAM: DDR3 16GB G.Skill, PC Case: Fractal Design R4 Black non-iglass, Monitor: BenQ GW2280

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
9 hours ago, Gymnastboatman said:

Macrumors article

 

USB 3.2 (20Gbps) has been rebranded to USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, while also rebranding USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10Gbps) to USB 3.2 Gen 2, and rebranding USB 3.1 Gen 1 (Which was USB 3 prior to the EARLIER rebrand) into USB 3.2 Gen 1. 

 

(Table in description might make that make more sense. Originally from Tom’s Hardware, shown in MacRumors article.)

 

Who put George Lucas in charge of the naming department?

 

Boy, I can’t wait to see this explanation on the WAN show. 

52641406-80A8-427F-854C-3F206683F947.jpeg

 

8 hours ago, Nowak said:

What in the hell is with the names for USB 3.x?

 

5 hours ago, MadDuke said:

Here's a thought for the intelligent ones developing this.

USB  3.2 Gen 1. -  USB 3 

USB  3.2 Gen 2. -  USB 4

USB  3.2 Gen 2x2. -  USB 5

 

Now when buying something it's sometimes Plug and Pray as to what speed it's going to run. 

 

 

3 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Oh dear.

Can't they just name it comprehensible for the average joe?!

 

Why do they have to make it even more complicated?!

No "normal user" understands this shit no more...

 

But honestly, who needs all that bandwith?!
We're here in territory of external Graphics cards.

Potentially external NVMe SSDs.


But other than that??

 

And why can't they name it:

3.2/ 5G

3.2/10G

3.2 /20G

Why does everyone struggle to get that the numbers of USB is the chipset standard REVISION in all of engineering X.0 means BIG changes, 0.X means SMALL changes.

 

USB IF determines speed based on generation.

 

The CONSUMER MARKETING terms are, the industry just like to conveniently ignore this, Its even in the picture in the OP.

USB = 500~ Mbps

SuperSpeed USB (SS USB) = 5Gbps

SuperSpeed 10 USB (SS+) = 10Gbps

SuperSpeed 20 USB (SS++) = 20Gbps

 

 

if you want to annoy me, then join my teamspeak server ts.benja.cc

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

USB needs to take a page out of the firewire book.

 

Firewire200 was 200 mbps

Firewire400 was 400 mbps

Firewire800 was... GUESS WHAT? 800mbps

 

And they were all compatible.

PLEASE QUOTE ME IF YOU ARE REPLYING TO ME

Desktop Build: Ryzen 7 2700X @ 4.0GHz, AsRock Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming, 48GB Corsair DDR4 @ 3000MHz, RX5700 XT 8GB Sapphire Nitro+, Benq XL2730 1440p 144Hz FS

Retro Build: Intel Pentium III @ 500 MHz, Dell Optiplex G1 Full AT Tower, 768MB SDRAM @ 133MHz, Integrated Graphics, Generic 1024x768 60Hz Monitor


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 minute ago, rcmaehl said:

USB needs to take a page out of the firewire book.

 

Firewire200 was 200 mbps

Firewire400 was 400 mbps

Firewire800 was... GUESS WHAT? 800mbps

 

And they were all compatible.

How is this different then this?

 

SuperSpeed USB (SS USB) = 5Gbps

SuperSpeed 10 USB (SS+) = 10Gbps

SuperSpeed 20 USB (SS++) = 20Gbps

if you want to annoy me, then join my teamspeak server ts.benja.cc

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 minute ago, The Benjamins said:

Why does everyone struggle to get that the numbers of USB is the chipset standard REVISION in all of engineering X.0 means BIG changes, 0.X means SMALL changes.

That ain't no Problem.

But tell me this:
Why call USB 3.0 now USB 3.2?

Why not stick with

USB3.0 -> 5G

USB3.1 -> 10G

USB3.2 -> 20G

 

That would be fine

 

BUT every time they increased the minor revision, they carried everything over and renamed it.

 

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 minute ago, Stefan Payne said:

That ain't no Problem.

But tell me this:
Why call USB 3.0 now USB 3.2?

Why not stick with

USB3.0 -> 5G

USB3.1 -> 10G

USB3.2 -> 20G

 

That would be fine

 

BUT every time they increased the minor revision, they carried everything over and renamed it.

 

Again its a standard revision, all 0.X 100% replace everything of the previous version. that is how the engineering revisioning system works, that in itself is a standard.

 

The Numbers are not created by marketing AT ALL.

 

3.0 means the clock/bandwidth per channel is 1 set speed, 3.1 allows for 2 different speeds per channel, 3.2 allows for USB Type C to use all 4 available physical channels over Type A/B having only 2

 

If it was

USB3.0 -> 5G

USB3.1 -> 10G

USB3.2 -> 20G

Then it would mean USB 3.1 would not work in USB 3.0 and so on.

if you want to annoy me, then join my teamspeak server ts.benja.cc

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
3 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

Then it would mean USB 3.1 would not work in USB 3.0 and so on.

Your logic is totally flawd.

 

Because USB 1.x <-> 2.x is compatible

Because USB 2.x <-> 3.x is compatible.

There has never been a break in compatibility with USB (yet).

Neither has there been with PCI, PCIe.

"Hell is full of good meanings, but Heaven is full of good works"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
1 minute ago, VegetableStu said:

(on a separate note) personally I don't know what went wrong where because I (and probably most people) call it USB 3 and some form. rarely superspeed or hi-speed o_o

In the start it was simpler with one set speed per revision, people (OEMs, media, ect) all just used the number which is the more complicated tracking on a engineering level.

But if you ever look at a product they don't mark ports with number but USB, SS USB and so on.

if you want to annoy me, then join my teamspeak server ts.benja.cc

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
4 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Your logic is just bullshit.

 

Because USB 1.x <-> 2.x is compatible

Because USB 2.x <-> 3.x is compatible.

There has never been a break in compatibility with USB (yet).

Neither has there been with PCI, PCIe.

if you would ever look at the standards you would KNOW that they specifically state in the USB 2.X,3.x; PCIe 2.x, 3.x, 4.x state that they are able to step down to the older version.

 

1.x and 2.x are NOT required to be backwards or forwards compatible, the standards them selves state that because it was PLANNED.

if you want to annoy me, then join my teamspeak server ts.benja.cc

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing General Discussion

×