What do you think of USB-C?

[KE2012]

43 minutes ago, potoooooooo said:

I don't believe you. If they were cheap knockoffs, they weren't USB-C.

 

It was when it was new out and USB C was the new thing to have. It was a cheap grab to stand out from the crowd. I bought them for camping in good ol Blighty so when it inevitably rained, i didnt care about them getting too wet. 

[Bananasplit_00]

i really like USB-C, mainly for the fact that its reversible. but that dosent mean i want laptops with just 4 USB-C ports, 6 or so if its going to be used for everything id say

[System Error Message]

some thoughts i should say about usb-c. Its nicer than your standard usb as it works regardless of orientation. It can provide more power and can do various things.

 

What usb-c shouldnt be is a dongle happy world. Those ethernet slots, display slots and so on should still be there. It should however allow for IO that is less common.

 

Thunderbolt should be a standard for usb-c. Perhaps the power over thunderbolt may not need to be there but that PCIe connection however is a lot better to have always. Many devices can benefit using PCIe over usb both in latency and overhead such as your ethernet dongle or perhaps your 40Gb/s NICs..

[Sniperfox47]

12 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Actually, Apple's first party adapters, and Belkin's 'made for the Apple store' adapters, at least in Idaho, are either the same price, or cheaper than any and every equivalent in quality. Only way I got male C to female A cheaper than Apple's asking price is just straoght using the adapters that came with my S8 twins, or thr HD500 that I got with my Lumia 950XL.

$19 Apple adapter: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJ1M2AM/A/usb-c-to-usb-adapter?fnode=8b

 

$15 2-pack from aukey that are properly compliant: https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01AUKU1OO

 

And that's with a 2-second search on Amazon. If I went digging I could probably find cheaper options that are still compliant.

 

I mean, I was exaggerating a bit. Their prices aren't completely ridiculous, but they've still got quite a substantial markup on them for what they are. Part of the reason why it was so hard to find adapters at reasonable prices when the MacBook Pro Late 2016s came out is because everybody jacked their prices up to match Apple's.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Sniperfox47 said:

$19 Apple adapter: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJ1M2AM/A/usb-c-to-usb-adapter?fnode=8b

 

$15 2-pack from aukey that are properly compliant: https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01AUKU1OO

 

And that's with a 2-second search on Amazon. If I went digging I could probably find cheaper options that are still compliant.

 

I mean, I was exaggerating a bit. Their prices aren't completely ridiculous, but they've still got quite a substantial markup on them for what they are. Part of the reason why it was so hard to find adapters at reasonable prices when the MacBook Pro Late 2016s came out is because everybody jacked their prices up to match Apple's.

Not really familiar with Aukey's overall quality. I know that at one point, I wanted something and they made a version of it, but it didn't hold up.

[Sniperfox47]

9 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Not really familiar with Aukey's overall quality. I know that at one point, I wanted something and they made a version of it, but it didn't hold up.

It's literally a passive adapter with a BOM cost of like not even 50¢. It uses the correct resistor so unless you're leaving it plugged into your laptop when you throw your laptop in a backpack and it prys off, there's not much to go wrong with it. 

[Mira Yurizaki]

On the surface it looks good. A reversible connector that can do lots of things

 

On the flip side I don't like how it can do a lot of things that are optional. People will scratch their heads at why one USB C Port does some things while another doesn't.

 

It's the same problem I have with M.2, but at least it's more easily discernible what works with it and what doesn't

[Emmien]

5 hours ago, intender said:

 Who still uses vga???

A lot of people still use VGA. If you use your laptop to give presentations in different places, then no doubt you will encounter VGA almost every day. People who do this will often have VGA as one of their priorities when buying a laptop. They don't want dongles, which could potentially go wrong, disconnect, or not work in a particular configuration, stopping them from making a presentation.

 

A huge amount of people still use VGA to connect laptops and computers to screens. It works absolutely fine.

 

I do however quite like USB type C. It is incredibly fast for transfer, each to use as it can carry video, audio, and data several different ways, and it can pass a higher voltages and current to make charging faster. I have a G5 and it is nice to be able to easily connect screens, network interfaces, storage devices, keyboards and more. USB type C has meant that it is now possible to connect more types of devices to a phone. Before, only some phones supported video output, and there were several different standards for connecting through microUSB, such as MHL and Slimport. USB C has made this much, much easier.

But with computers, there still is the same types of devices to connect, just they can now all use a common port. This can be good and bad. It is easy to use these devices on a computer, phone, tablet or maybe even a screen, but as they all use the same connector, then you can easily run out of ports.

The 2012 MacBook had 8 ports (9 if you include the CD drive). One was reserved for power, one for video out, and more for Ethernet, SD cards, audio (in/out) and two USB ports and a Thunderbolt port. Most ports are reserved for a specific function, so when you want to plug that thing in, it is guaranteed that the port is empty, unlike with USB C.

I am trying to find an affordable USB C to HDMI and USB dongle, which actually charged my G5 at a good speed. My current one charges at such a low amperage that it will just about keep the charge the same without any apps running and the display connected. Annoying because my phone supports quick charge and so does my charger.

 

I do like USB-C though. With enough ports, then it is a good thing.

[intender]

9 minutes ago, Emmien said:

A lot of people still use VGA. If you use your laptop to give presentations in different places, then no doubt you will encounter VGA almost every day. People who do this will often have VGA as one of their priorities when buying a laptop. They don't want dongles, which could potentially go wrong, disconnect, or not work in a particular configuration, stopping them from making a presentation.

 

As usual sarcasm fails on the internet.  I was trying to prove my point about getting rid of everything except for usb-c

[Emmien]

Just now, intender said:

As usual sarcasm fails on the internet.  I was trying to prove my point about getting rid of everything except for usb-c

I didn't notice the sarcasm. I thought that you meant that people don't use VGA anymore. 

[Drak3]

6 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Try putting it in any kind of budget device.

Forgo Type-C. They can get a type-A to type-C cable.

 

6 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

You need to use a core-i series processor,

Thunderbolt is only currently limited to Intel processors. Manufacturers aren't wasting time with anything less than Core i/m. But Intel is also supposedly intending to open up Thunderbolt as something that any CPU manufacturer can adopt.

 

6 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

It's not even just the added cost of the controller

That's one thing that can be integrated into the CPU or compatible chipsets.

 

6 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Except that's the issue... If you have a GPU that supports DisplayPort 1.3 or 1.4 you can't use that over USB-C if you're using a Thunderbolt controller. You're limited to DisplayPort 1.2..

It also provides 2 DP1.2 streams per controller, and can drive 1 4K/30bit/120Hz panel, 1 5K/30bit/60Hz panel, or 2 4K/30bit/60hz panels. I can tell you that no GPU can drive 4K120 for any task that benefits from 120FPS. By the time we have that, Thunderbolt can be updated to support a newer DP standard.

 

6 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

Except that's just one of the many issues with adopting it across devices. If you're building a product around it you can compensate, but that also means cutting out other things.

Only if you plan ahead or those other things aren't important to the goal. I'm not saying throw TB3 on every device under the sun. I'm saying that USB should not be used on certain form factors for the sake of consistency and function.

 

2 hours ago, Sniperfox47 said:

It's literally a passive adapter with a BOM cost of like not even 50¢. It uses the correct resistor so unless you're leaving it plugged into your laptop when you throw your laptop in a backpack and it prys off, there's not much to go wrong with it. 

I work in a field that requires simplistic pieces of metal, screws, that are made by injection molding. Extremely basic. And there are companies that make these extremely basic things, that don't do what they're made to do that well. So I can see a Type-C being able to be low quality.

[iThirzty]

[deleted]

[TheRandomness]

-Thread moved to Peripherals.

[Sniperfox47]

7 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Forgo Type-C. They can get a type-A to type-C cable..

The idea is to transition everything to type-C... How does that work if you keep 60% of systems people buy as A/B?

 

7 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Thunderbolt is only currently limited to Intel processors. Manufacturers aren't wasting time with anything less than Core i/m. But Intel is also supposedly intending to open up Thunderbolt as something that any CPU manufacturer can adopt.

Yeah. That's my point. The vast majority of current CPUs can't even support TB3, and won't be able to for at least 2 years. Spec releases next year, a year to design the controllers, and a year to roll them out on devices. And that's assuming they don't *require* deeper chipset integrations.

 

Even then, what are the chances you'll see it in a Celeron based Windows laptop or Mediatek based Chromebook? These are applications where thunderbolt doesn't make sense for the USB-C controller.

 

7 hours ago, Drak3 said:

It also provides 2 DP1.2 streams per controller, and can drive 1 4K/30bit/120Hz panel, 1 5K/30bit/60Hz panel, or 2 4K/30bit/60hz panels. I can tell you that no GPU can drive 4K120 for any task that benefits from 120FPS. By the time we have that, Thunderbolt can be updated to support a newer DP standard.

Umm...

HDMI2.0 and HDCP 2.2 comparability?

HDR10 support?

FEC and DSC?

There are other things that newer DisplayPort protocols enable that aren't available on 1.2. It's not just about bandwidth...

 

7 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Only if you plan ahead or those other things aren't important to the goal. I'm not saying throw TB3 on every device under the sun. I'm saying that USB should not be used on certain form factors for the sake of consistency and function.

Except that would defeat the whole purpose of moving to USB-C... >.> The whole point of pushing to it as fast as possible is to cut down on the types of different cables a user needs, to make all their devices physically compatible.

 

What incentive is there for a company to make a USB-C version of their mouse if you keep USB-A ports on most devices?

 

There's also the fact that the *VAST* majority of users don't need anything that Thunderbolt 3 provides. And for those that don't, it's a waste of 4 perfectly good PCIe lanes that could go to something else.

[Drak3]

Just now, Sniperfox47 said:

The idea is to transition everything to type-C... How does that work if you keep 60% of systems people buy as A/B?

That idea is fairly stupid. Make it a supplimentary port, don't try to fix a nonissue.

 

2 minutes ago, Sniperfox47 said:

There's also the fact that the *VAST* majority of users don't need anything that Thunderbolt 3 provides. And for those that don't, it's a waste of 4 perfectly good PCIe lanes that could go to something else.

On laptops, the only thing worth pursuing is SLI/Xfire, which nukes battery life. On desktops, it'd be more motivation for Intel to add a few more lanes.

And again, SUPPLIMENT, NOT REPLACE.

[Sniperfox47]

6 hours ago, Drak3 said:

That idea is fairly stupid. Make it a supplimentary port, don't try to fix a nonissue.

Except needing as many as 18 different cable types to hook up to USB accessories isn't sustainable. That's the issue that USB-C solves... I don't get why people don't see that. Adding it as a supplementary port just compounds that issue, nearly doubling the number of types of cables you need, just for USB data.

 

USB A - USB B

USB A - USB Mini-B

USB A - USB Micro-B

USB A - USB B 3.0

USB A - USB Micro-B 3.0

USB Mini-A - USB B

USB Mini-A - USB Mini-B

USB Mini-B OTG - USB A

USB Micro-A - Micro-B

USB Micro-B OTG - USB A

 

And that's not even including all the nonstandard versions like USB A- USB A for programming certain devices...

 

A little user confusion is *well* worth the reduction in backend complication, especially since the confusion people are worried still happens anyways even with physically distinct connectors...

 

6 hours ago, Drak3 said:

On laptops, the only thing worth pursuing is SLI/Xfire, which nukes battery life. On desktops, it'd be more motivation for Intel to add a few more lanes.

And again, SUPPLIMENT, NOT REPLACE.

Umm... The i7-7700U (or 8550u) have 12 PCIe lanes. That means you can have your choice of two of:

• 4x/4x NVMe RAID
• 2x PCIe Wireless networking (wifi/Bluetooth)
• 4x single Thunderbolt 3 controller.

But not all three.

 

You can have the other two and still have thunderbolt 3 but then it's limited to 2 PCIe lanes which will kill it's usefulness for anything you'd actually need it for.

 

You can have NVMe RAID and thunderbolt 3 but then you'll have to connect wifi through USB.

 

And even then, if you have one of these setups you wind up bottlenecking because at most 6 of the 12 PCIe lanes can be used at once.

 

That's also assuming that you don't have any high performance USB devices like say a Realsense camera or sensor array, which need to get multiplexed into your PCIe lanes, cutting into performance.

 

You guys are making this out to be a way simpler issue than it is. Thunderbolt 3 is by no means a perfect solution...

 

This is a big part of the issue with even doing eGPU over Thunderbolt 3 in the first place, at least on ULV processors (U- and Y-series). Even if you give it 4 full lanes which not all manufacturers do, you can't guarantee the full speed of those lanes if you ever need to access storage, connect via WiFi, use a USB device, etc.