Discussion on:

10 things you should know about USB 2.0 and 3.0

I almost didn't do it. I knew a fair amount about USB but I hesitated sending the '10 things' article idea to Jody. I knew it would be a difficult subject to tackle but it was even more difficult than I had imagined. Looking back on it now perhaps I shouldn't have pressed the Send button.

But I wanted to know all about USB 3.0 and so I did press that Send button. I have learned a lot about USB 3.0 SuperSpeed. I learned the hard way that I actually knew very little about how USB really works.

No article like this gets written without help from others. I am grateful for their help especially the helpful information I received from Microsoft.

If you would like to see a diagram showing how USB ports are shared by both the UHCI host controllers and the EHCI host controllers for motherboards using the Intel ICH9R I/O Controller Hub see page 222, section 5.19.8.1 figure 5-14 and 5-15 (PDF 6.6MB).

http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/datasheet/316972.pdf

I had preconceptions that a group that develops and promotes USB SuperSpeed and USB 3.0 would want to help spread the word. So I was surprised when they turned down my request to use some of their diagrams in the article. I list these diagrams at the end of the article. They explain simply in one or two images what is difficult to explain in words. You might want to look a few of them up if you have further interest in USB 3.0.

The name SuperSpeed is rather interesting. Who comes up with these names? With the progression of names I can't help but wondering what name we will see next. SuperDuperSpeed? RammingSpeed? LudicrousSpeed anybody?

I welcome all feedback. Even after all of my research I still can't claim to be a USB expert. I will be available to try to answer those USB questions that I can and participate in the discussion when I have something to add.

Edit: Formatting

You can tell this article isn't the deadline-driven, market-hype-of-the-moment that is interesting to read but quickly forgotten. It is well-researched, precise, and full of facts likely never read before by a highly technical audience.

I'm sure it was a lot of work, but it is a work you can be proud of.

I have the same reaction to the ridiculous marketing names of technical features, by the way. Have you ever ridden the Himalaya ride at a state fair? The one with the DJ who says, "Do you want to go FAST? Do you want to REAL FAST? Do you want to go REAL REAL FAST?" Maybe that's how we can name them in the future - Fast, Real Fast, Real Real Fast, etc.

It was a lot of work. Sometime during the research and writing I began to wonder if the article was ever going to get done to my satisfaction. It became more and more difficult to sit down and tackle it. But I kept plugging away and somehow it did get done.

An engineer at Microsoft was a big help with item 7 - Limitations. He gets much of the credit for the information in that section. For example, I have done extensive research but never read that USB devices using Bulk transfer like flash drives would not be listed on the Advanced tab in the Device Manager

It was a very humbling experience attempting to understand the 650 pages of the USB 2.0 spec and 482 pages of the USB 3.0 spec.

Ha ha! I have never ridden the Himalaya ride but I remember those carny voices extolling the virtues of their products and rides. The USB-IF have sort of painted themselves into a corner. They are running out of names.

Thank you for the kind words.

Very, very well done Mr. Norton. Hats off to you!

As for naming the next speedier version, how about turbo-speed.

Thanks

Peter Wall

Thanks Peter.

I certainly like Turbo-Speed better than SuperSpeed.

I just got a new external hard drive! Only goes to show that oomputers are like comedy, timing is everything.

Good article.

Alan,

Thanks so much for your efforts in putting together this article and especially for all the bibliography references you included.

USB can be a royal pain in the posterior at times, expecially when you have 10+ devices hooked to the same PC (which is not unusual these days) and any better understanding we can glean is helpful.

I'm more than a bit disturbed about the attitude of the USB-IF regarding you use of diagrams. What is their attitude problem - you'd think they would be happy to have someone helping them out to spread the word about and understanding of their technology?

Just a file in a memory chip.

speed of USB 3.0 in the near future will get it via PCI-E plug in card. I also suspect few need it it at the moment.

Personally, I think USB is the way of the future and expect to see some internal USB 3.0 hard drives and RAM expansion units in the near future too. I recently saw a new desktop computer that had six internal SATA drive connectors, two IDE connectors (for optical drives only - according to the paperwork), a built in graphic processor with a graphics port, built in sound processor with plugs for a 6+1 system, two PCI-E slots, and eighteen USB ports.

Eighteen of the suckers, it astounded me, so I started checking off what USB devices I could find around my house used by my son and I - keyboard, mouse, scanner, printer, external hard drive, web cam, digital camera, cell phone data transfer cable, link to notebook cable, USB / modem link, USB / network cable, USB TV wand, data cable for e-book reader, game pad, media storage unit (my son's not sure exactly what it does, but that's on the case), data link to UPS, and three other USB cables for devices I can't find - sheet, everything connects by USB now, except the graphics and sound, but give them time.

If you want to spend the bucks for a new motherboard or computer, motherboard manufacturers are implementing USB 3.0 via a NEC 720200 chip or a Fujitsu MB86C30A chip. This is similar to how USB 2.0 first became implemented.

You are right. Until USB 3.0 SuperSpeed devices become widely available there will be little need for a USB 3.0 add-in card.

The best way to connect a music keyboard or other MIDI (Music Industry Digital Interface) instrument to a computer is with a USB-MIDI cable. I use a Roland UM-1 cable to connect my Technics keyboard and Yamaha organ to my laptop. I downloaded the free Miditzer program (www.miditzer.com) which emulates a Wurltizer 2 manual theater organ to get the great sounds of the silent screen days.

One of the description headers for a device is "power." This is the information that the OS is displaying in Figure D. This is an optional field in the spec. That being the case, most devices do not report their actual power requirements.

This also means, the chipset is not actually measuring the current consumption either.

This article is well written and I enjoyed reading it. Thank you for the detailed explanation.

Very good article Mr. Norton! Great read! Thanks! Happy New Year!

Will it be possible (or advantageous) to "double up", which is sometimes currently done for devices that draw more power than a single cable supports?
Would the data rate increase?

One thing that has bugged me about USB is using the info in figure A and relating it to an actual port on the PC.

if i use pendrive 3.0 in usb 2.0 slot, will it do?

Hi! I have been searching forums and can't find anyone to answer my usb 3.0 question. I have an HP Elite 460z with the H-RS880-uATX: 1.02 Aloe motherboard. I am running Win 7 pro 64 bit. I have a NEC/Renesas PCI Express USB 3.0 card installed in one of the x1 slots. The slots show PCI version 2.0 according to PC Wizard. I am definitely getting better transfer speeds than usb 2.0 ... A regular windows file copy of large files gets about 58mb/sec. However, in Device manager, my usb 3.0 ports show that they are running at "High Speed" rather than "Super Speed." My usb 2.0 ports show "Full Speed." I have the latest firmware and drivers...after MUCH searching. Firmware 3027 and Renesas driver 2.0.34.0.

What must I do to obtain "Super Speed" instead of "High Speed" on my usb 3.0 ports?

So basically from reading the article i could get speeds of usb3.0 by changing the cable on my portable usb2.0 drive to a usb3.0 standard a cable?

Like Alan I have 8 usb hubs, all 2.0, 6 being low or full with 2 being high.
My problem is in identifying which of my hubs are infact running at high speed. I see no meaningful identifiers to help me disseminate between them all. The two hubs I am searching for each list a unique controller and if I click on the properties for that controller and plug in a usb stick it gets listed in that controllers list of bandwidth-consuming devices. Is this an effective way to identify which hub is which? I think yes.

for the article.
After reading I found myself not knowing nearly as much as I thought and has demystified much of the USB issues I have had and will really help understand how to use USB going forward.
And I am supposed to be an Electronics Engineer, would think I would have known more, just goes to prove can't know it all

I think the data throughput rates for USB ports and drives are nearly always given in "mega bits per second" by manufacturers and pretty much everyone else. The author seems to have rightly followed this convention but the shorthand is Mb/s for this measure, not MB/s which would actually mean "mega bytes per second" which is eight times "mega bits per second".