10 Gbps USB specification finalized as USB 3.1

[Scorpus]

The USB 3.0 Promoter Group has announced today that the next generation of the USB specification is ready, and they've named it USB 3.1. The update brings double the bandwidth of standard USB 3.0, pulling it up to 10 Gbps from 5 Gbps, and bringing it in-line with the capabilities of Intel's first-generation Thunderbolt technology used mostly on Apple devices.

Alongside the speed improvements, USB 3.1 also brings new power delivery profiles (as previously reported) that allow for up to 100W to be sent through a USB cable. In theory this allows laptops to charge through new, "detectable" USB cables attached to high-powered hubs such as TVs or desktop PCs, and can remove the necessity to use power bricks for external 3.5-inch hard drives.

The specification was teased at the start of the year, and since then not much has changed, so the final specification remains largely the same. Unfortunately existing USB 3.0 devices can't be upgraded to USB 3.1, meaning it's up to manufacturers to produce new chipsets and devices supporting it. Still, like USB 3.0, the updated specification will remain backwards compatible with older variants.

Actual USB 3.1 products are expected in late 2014, with wider availability in 2015. Intel expects Thunderbolt 2 devices will be ready towards the end of this year, and although the specification brings speeds greater than USB 3.1 (up to 20 Gbps for Thunderbolt 2), USB will still most likely be the interface of choice. Companies such as Acer have already given their support to USB 3.0 over Thunderbolt, which could be a growing trend due to the higher cost of implementing Thunderbolt.

For developers interested in producing devices using USB 3.1, the USB Implementers Forum will be holding developer conferences in various countries starting on August 21. 

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/53457-10-gbps-usb-specification-finalized-as-usb-31.html

 

[Jad Chaar]

I wonder what the cost of USB is compared to thunderbolt.

 

[MonsterZero]

My guess is they have to pay royalties per device installed similar to HDMI, which is why most laptops now sport Display port and VGA over HDMI.

Apple or intel probably want a pretty penny for the technology, not surprising.

 

[Guest]

Pretty impressive and exciting stuff here. I've been using USB 3.0 for transferring files and I'm not super impressed with it. Don't get me wrong, it is fast but not quite blazing fast. I need to transfer an HD movie in less than 5 seconds. Yes, I know I'll never be happy.

 

[VitalyT]

Thunderbolt 2 will be the only interface capable of transferring data at high speed while streaming 12-bit 4K video at 60fps in parallel, which means using just one cable.

The "new" HDMI 2.0 won't even be able to stream such video, never mind any data transfers. And USB 3.1 also won't have enough throughput to come close, never mind it will be adopted a year later at the soonest, by which time Thunderbolt 3 at 40Gbit will be ready, if not faster.

After all, both USB and HDMI are cheap consumer products, is how they were intended primarily. And Thunderbolt will remain a premium product for some time.

 

[cliffordcooley]

I've been using USB 3.0 for transferring files and I'm not super impressed with it.

Then it is not USB 3.0 that you are not impressed with, it is more than likely the device that fails to utilize the potential of USB 3.0. Theoretically USB 3.0 is 80% as fast as SATA 3.0, which also means you would not be impressed with the performance of any HDD drives. Conclusion, the lack of being impressed is actually expectations being set too high. You should be happy with anything over SATA 2.0 (that includes USB 3.0), which is 3Gbit/s.

Theoretical

• USB 3.0 is 5Gbit/s (USB 3.1 revision double performance to 10Gbit/s)
• SATA 3.0 is 6Gbit/s
  

 

[Guest]

That sound you hear is the death rattle of Thunderbolt.

 

[Darth Shiv]

Thunderbolt just hasn't taken off with support. Hard to see why it would considering USB has so much of the device support in addition to being ubiquitous on computing platforms AND costing less for hardware manufacturers.

Not sure why Intel wouldn't subsidise Thunderbolt to get a foot in the door and get some momentum.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Not sure why Intel wouldn't subsidise Thunderbolt to get a foot in the door and get some momentum.

Maybe because Thunderbolt is an abomination from what it was initially designed for as Light Peak.

 

[VitalyT]

That sound you hear is the death rattle of Thunderbolt.

More like the smell of B.S. It is 20Gbit of Thunderbolt 2 for buying first products in September versus 10Gbit of USB 3.1 one year from now.

 

[Per Hansson]

I've been using USB 3.0 for transferring files and I'm not super impressed with it.

Then it is not USB 3.0 that you are not impressed with, it is more than likely the device that fails to utilize the potential of USB 3.0. Theoretically USB 3.0 is 80% as fast as SATA 3.0, which also means you would not be impressed with the performance of any HDD drives. Conclusion, the lack of being impressed is actually expectations being set too high. You should be happy with anything over SATA 2.0 (that includes USB 3.0), which is 3Gbit/s.

Theoretical being the word of the day, I think we all know that the max quoted speeds for USB transfer rates are laughable at best...
"The "SuperSpeed" bus provides for a transfer mode at a nominal rate of 5.0 Gbit/s, in addition to the three existing transfer modes. Accounting for encoding overhead, the raw data throughput is 4 Gbit/s, and the specification considers it reasonable to achieve 3.2 Gbit/s (0.4 GB/s or 400 MB/s) or more in practice."
Source: http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/usb_30_spec_122012.zip

 

[Guest]

"allow for up to 100W to be sent through a USB cable" ??? yikes am I missing something .. that would be 20 amps at 5 volts. is that a USB cable or a Jumper cable. a slip of the pen or just a misunderstanding . how about 10W that would make a lot of sense.

USB will probably win. we already have it and it works with all the stuff we already own. an improvement is welcome if it doesn't cost a bunch but keep it backwards compatible.

 

[cliffordcooley]

"allow for up to 100W to be sent through a USB cable" ??? yikes am I missing something .. that would be 20 amps at 5 volts. is that a USB cable or a Jumper cable. a slip of the pen or just a misunderstanding . how about 10W that would make a lot of sense.

USB will not be confined to only 5V in the future.

USB Power Delivery specification

In July 2012 the USB Promoters Group announced the finalization of the USB Power Delivery ("PD") specification, an extension that specifies using certified "PD aware" USB cables with standard USB type A/B connectors to deliver up to 100 W of power at 20 V. For PD-aware cables with USB-micro B/AB connectors the maximum power supported is up to 60 W at 20 V, 36 W at 12 V and 10 W at 5 V. In all cases, either host-to-device or device-to-host configurations are supported. The intent is to permit uniformly charging laptops, tablets, USB-powered disks and similarly higher power consumer electronics, as a natural extension of existing European and Chinese mobile telephone charging standards.

 

[Draconian]

They need to call it USB 4.0.

3.1 will be confused with 3.0 among casual users.

 

[cliffordcooley]

They need to call it USB 4.0.

3.1 will be confused with 3.0 among casual users.

I don't remember USB 1.1 being confused with USB 1.0, among casual users and that was 15 years ago.

 

[Guest]

Variable supply voltage capable of high power levels, multiple data streams, simultaneously bidirectional, more pins on the connector, much higher data rates ... wow this isn't a minor change .. its certainly a major change .. it should at least be 4.0. its nice that it remains compatible but will require many changes to computer and power supply designs. surely no one would expect a laptop to supply 20 volts at 5 amps to the outside world. typically the charging supply might be 20 volts or so but none have 5 amps to spare. and no present desktop computer that I know of has 20 volts available internally for that purpose. you would have to step up 12 volts at about 10 amps for retrofits. this does sound a lot like "gee I wish I had that" than "this is something we can build and sell" .. on the other hand it could open a whole new venue for computes. my ex always said "why is there so many wires". one good point doesn't make that brilliant, but wouldn't it be great to just plug in whatever you want and have it work with one wire. it seems more like a dream than reality but I hope the team can pull it off. it seems they always have.