Usb4 40 gbps! What silicon are they using for USB4, is it maple ridge or is it AsMedia’s rendition of USB4 ?

both ports support dp-alt mode. Will the video output be from the iGPU or can they tunnel DP output from a dGPU?

NanochipUsb4 40 gbps! What silicon are they using for USB4, is it maple ridge or is it AsMedia’s rendition of USB4 ?

No idea, there was no mention of that.

NanochipUsb4 40 gbps! What silicon are they using for USB4, is it maple ridge or is it AsMedia’s rendition of USB4 ?

From what I have read AMD has partnered with AsMedia to create this on their chipset for X670.

So many USB logos so small so weirdly named.

From what I have seen of the X670 boards you will need at least a 850 Watt PSU with at least 3 8 pin CPU cables. 1000W will more likely be more feasible though. I counted up to 6 PSU connections on these boards. I like the concept of the Extreme allowing to use that DRAM like module. From what I can see it looks like it is connected to the CPU (Likely 4.0) which means you don't have to share 8 lanes with the GPU using that adapter card. Not that that is going to make a difference right now, but the bandwidth of the hardware is getting faster.

Oh intersting. The 2" OLED is gone even on the Extreme. Also the DIMM.2 slot has been modified. I wonder if people kept trying it insert memory lol

900$/1000€

kapone32From what I have read AMD has partnered with AsMedia to create this on their chipset for X670.

That's not enforced. Intel is ok as well, but you'll end up with lower performance, as the Intel chips are limited to 32 Gbps.

kapone32From what I have seen of the X670 boards you will need at least a 850 Watt PSU with at least 3 8 pin CPU cables. 1000W will more likely be more feasible though. I counted up to 6 PSU connections on these boards. I like the concept of the Extreme allowing to use that DRAM like module. From what I can see it looks like it is connected to the CPU (Likely 4.0) which means you don't have to share 8 lanes with the GPU using that adapter card. Not that that is going to make a difference right now, but the bandwidth of the hardware is getting faster.

That's only on high-end boards though.
The dual EPS connectors aren't really needed, one of them is enough.
The 6-pin connector by the 24-pin ATX connector is only if you want to use USB PD charging, so optional as well.

No 10Gbit LAN is a letdown to be honest.

TheLostSwedeThat's not enforced. Intel is ok as well, but you'll end up with lower performance, as the Intel chips are limited to 32 Gbps.


That's only on high-end boards though.
The dual EPS connectors aren't really needed, one of them is enough.
The 6-pin connector by the 24-pin ATX connector is only if you want to use USB PD charging, so optional as well.

I took this from Tom's Hardware: USB 4 also has the capability to work with Thunderbolt 3 devices thanks to the 40Gbps speeds, but integration is optional for manufacturers. I was just looking at the MSI board as well but did not see nearly as many USB-C ports.

In reference to above it does kind of suck though because budget boards are going to have paltry Pcie allocation for full adapter cards or capture cards.

EmanuleleNo 10Gbit LAN is a letdown to be honest.

The Extreme has it, but not the Hero.

Finally! No more PS/2 ports. Took long enough.

kapone32I took this from Tom's Hardware: USB 4 also has the capability to work with Thunderbolt 3 devices thanks to the 40Gbps speeds, but integration is optional for manufacturers. I was just looking at the MSI board as well but did not see nearly as many USB-C ports.

In reference to above it does kind of suck though because budget boards are going to have paltry Pcie allocation for full adapter cards or capture cards.

The problem with Intel is that their Thunderbolt chips are PCIe 3.0, not PCIe 4.0, like the ASMedia USB4 chipset.
As such, the Intel chips can only do 32 Gbps, while ASMedia can do 40 Gbps.

TheLostSwedeThe problem with Intel is that their Thunderbolt chips are PCIe 3.0, not PCIe 4.0, like the ASMedia USB4 chipset.
As such, the Intel chips can only do 32 Gbps, while ASMedia can do 40 Gbps.

So it really is a non issue then other than power draw (If you have 3 smart phones charging at the same time). That is good to know. I just hope the drivers are stable but 40GBs is external GPU speed.

I will probably be priced out of the Extreme, but I like the Hero..

TheLostSwedeThe problem with Intel is that their Thunderbolt chips are PCIe 3.0, not PCIe 4.0, like the ASMedia USB4 chipset.
As such, the Intel chips can only do 32 Gbps, while ASMedia can do 40 Gbps.

Thunderbolt 4 has a maximum bandwidth of 40 Gb/s. However, this is a bit misleading because not all of that bandwidth can be used for data transfer. Approximately 8 Gbp/s is reserved video-only data, leaving 32 Gb/s for non-video data (PCIe 3.0: 4 lanes x 8 Gb/s). Further accounting for PCIe 3.0’s 128b/130b encoding and TB4's own overhead, you arrive at a peak data throughput of approximately 22 Gb/s. Not 40 Gb/s but not slow either.

Since pcie tunelling by definition uses encoding and crc redundancy to correct errors, TB4 and USB4 will not use whole 40gbps (for pcie tunneling). There is overhead per the pcie standard.

Also 4 lanes of pcie4.0 translates into 64 Gbps data rate max… so even if AsMedia’s solution is pcie4.0, it’s not utilizing the entire available pcie4.0 bandwidth per port.

kapone32So it really is a non issue then other than power draw (If you have 3 smart phones charging at the same time). That is good to know. I just hope the drivers are stable but 40GBs is external GPU speed.

What does this have to do with power draw? Only the front USB-C ports supports USB PD.
A PCIe 4.0 x4 interface supports 64 Gbps, so you get one USB4 port that can do 40 Gbps of data and the second can still do 20 Gbps, whereas the Intel PCIe 3.0 Thunderbolt chips can only do 32 Gbps in total, so they're not even reaching full USB4 speeds.

NanochipThunderbolt 4 has a maximum bandwidth of 40 Gb/s. However, this is a bit misleading because not all of that bandwidth can be used for data transfer. Approximately 8 Gbp/s is reserved video-only data, leaving 32 Gb/s for non-video data (PCIe 3.0: 4 lanes x 8 Gb/s). Further accounting for PCIe 3.0’s 128b/130b encoding and TB4's own overhead, you arrive at a peak data throughput of approximately 22 Gb/s. Not 40 Gb/s but not slow either.

Since pcie tunelling by definition uses encoding and crc redundancy to correct errors, TB4 and USB4 will not use whole 40gbps (for pcie tunneling). There is overhead per the pcie standard.

Also 4 lanes of pcie4.0 translates into 64 Gbps data rate max… so even if AsMedia’s solution is pcie4.0, it’s not utilizing the entire available pcie4.0 bandwidth per port.

See above, but yes, you're not wrong.

TheLostSwedeWhat does this have to do with power draw? Only the front USB-C ports supports USB PD.
A PCIe 4.0 x4 interface supports 64 Gbps, so you get one USB4 port that can do 40 Gbps of data and the second can still do 20 Gbps, whereas the Intel PCIe 3.0 Thunderbolt chips can only do 32 Gbps in total, so they're not even reaching full USB4 speeds.


See above.

Usb4 is based on tb3 though, so even if the controller chip is a pcie4.0 host, the signaling on the wire will be based on tb3 signaling and the pcie tunneling on the wire will face the same limitations and overhead for tb3/tb4. So what I am saying is: I don’t expect AsMedia’s solution to be any faster than maple ridge for thunderbolt/pcie tunneling.

guess there’s only a matter of time before actual hardware makes its way to consumers so we can test.

NanochipUsb4 is based on tb3 though, so even if the controller chip is a pcie4.0 host, the signaling on the wire will be based on tb3 signaling and the pcie tunneling on the wire will face the same limitations and overhead for tb3/tb4. So what I am saying is: I don’t expect AsMedia’s solution to be any faster than maple ridge for thunderbolt/pcie tunneling.

guess there’s only a matter of time before actual hardware makes its way to consumers so we can test.

Not true. That would only be for Thunderbolt data. You can also transmit data using USB and then it can do 20 and 40 Gbps, minus overheads.
It will be, I talked to them. I know one of the founders and VP's of the company, as I've been covering them since they started. He could of course have been lying to me, but I doubt it.
I wrote a few pages long article about USB4, in case you missed it.
www.techpowerup.com/review/usb4-guide-info-technology-details/

TheLostSwedeNot true. That would only be for Thunderbolt data. You can also transmit data using USB and then it can do 20 and 40 Gbps, minus overheads.
It will be, I talked to them. I know one of the founders and VP's of the company, as I've been covering them since they started. He could of course have been lying to me, but I doubt it.
I wrote a few pages long article about USB4, in case you missed it.
www.techpowerup.com/review/usb4-guide-info-technology-details/

But there aren’t any native usb4 external devices on the market. For example, take nvme ssd enclosures. They are invariably currently all based on some form of tb3: either Titan ridge or alpine ridge (Jhl7440 or jhl6340). So connecting of those tb3 devices to an ASMedia usb4 port will result in thunderbolt signaling and pcie data transfer. So I don’t expect any change in max speed (22.4 Gbps) for such devices.

as far as pure usb4 devices, will be interesting to see how much or if they’re any faster than thunderbolt devices. But as I understand it,
USB4 by itself does not provide any generic data transfer mechanism or device classes like USB 3.x, but serves mostly as a way to tunnel other protocols like USB 3.2, DisplayPort, and optionally PCIe. While it does provide a native Host-to-Host protocol, as the name implies it is only available between two connected hosts; it is used to implement Host IP Networking. Therefore, when the host and device do not support optional PCIe tunneling, the maximum non-display bandwidth is limited to USB 3.2 20 Gbit/s, while only USB 3.2 10 Gbit/s is mandatory. Thus, to achieve faster than 20 Gbps speeds, usb4 will need to tunnel pcie … which as already stated has overhead due to encoding and crc.
Also the other consideration is usb4 and tb4 cables. We know they support pcie tunelling. But as I understand it, they only support pcie 3.0 tunneling. I could be wrong. But if I am correct, then even with a usb4 pcie4 host, the wire itself will gate the max data transfer.

We’ll be able to test soon

NanochipBut there aren’t any native usb4 external devices on the market. For example, take nvme ssd enclosures. They are invariably currently all based on some form of tb3: either Titan ridge or alpine ridge (Jhl7440 or jhl6340). So connecting of those tb3 devices to an ASMedia usb4 port will result in thunderbolt signaling and pcie data transfer. So I don’t expect any change in max speed (22.4 Gbps) for such devices.

Indeed, not yet, but if you'd read my article, you would've seen that ASMedia has one coming as well. And yes, a Thunderbolt device connected to a USB4 host would indeed drop down to TB3 speeds.

Nanochipas far as pure usb4 devices, will be interesting to see how much or if they’re any faster than thunderbolt devices. But as I understand it,
USB4 by itself does not provide any generic data transfer mechanism or device classes like USB 3.x, but serves mostly as a way to tunnel other protocols like USB 3.2, DisplayPort, and optionally PCIe. While it does provide a native Host-to-Host protocol, as the name implies it is only available between two connected hosts; it is used to implement Host IP Networking. Therefore, when the host and device do not support optional PCIe tunneling, the maximum non-display bandwidth is limited to USB 3.2 20 Gbit/s, while only USB 3.2 10 Gbit/s is mandatory. Thus, to achieve faster than 20 Gbps speeds, usb4 will need to tunnel pcie … which as already stated has overhead due to encoding and crc.

We’ll be able to test soon

Then I guess you've been misinformed. Tunneling isn't required for devices, only hosts and hubs. Just please read the article? I spent ages on it, trying to explain all these things.
USB4 doesn't support host IP networking like Thunderbolt, Intel made sure of that.

If you don't want to read the article, at least look at this table on Wikipedia?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB4#USB_3.x_%E2%80%93_4.x_data_transfer_modes

The usb4 controller is great but a dp in is missing. People are gonna use usb4 to place their computer in a different room.

Interesting. So should I replace my Asus X570 dark hero and 5950X with this board and a 7950X. Time will tell both performances, price wise and off cause depending on the economic shock the world is about to have and wake up to some possible serious Headache.

Damn Pr, f#@k that looks good though.

I'm not buying you git's stop showing me stuff.:p :D

TheLostSwedeWhat does this have to do with power draw? Only the front USB-C ports supports USB PD.
A PCIe 4.0 x4 interface supports 64 Gbps, so you get one USB4 port that can do 40 Gbps of data and the second can still do 20 Gbps, whereas the Intel PCIe 3.0 Thunderbolt chips can only do 32 Gbps in total, so they're not even reaching full USB4 speeds.


See above, but yes, you're not wrong.

Some of these boards report 60W charging for 2 or more of the rear USB C ports. There is one board that has 2 6 or 8 pins for the USB C ports at the back. If you have your Smartphone and your partner's Smartphone charging and an external GPU running it will suck board power. That can't be for the PCIe lanes as TRx40 has way more lanes and less 6 or 8 pin MB connectors.