The USB-IF needs to be taken to pasture. The only explanation for asinine naming, and even the plethora of different implementations all under the same name, is insanity.

USB4 2.0... I thought they were using the 'Gen2x#' moniker?
Guess I'll just pedantically memorize the latest USB-IF nomenclature :rolleyes:

The biggest missed opportunity in the past 8 years of USB is not being able to link and daisy chain fans and RGB devices together with USB.

48V at 5amps :D in Usb port :D
Not gonna use that from my PC obviously.
I only use external charger for my phone or whatever i use.
Speed should be only maintained not power delivery if u ask me.

I hope they name the next version 4.1 and it's gonna be better than 4-2.0

Does anybody know if that 80Gbps can be fully used? For example, with Thunderbolt3/4, they advertise 40Gbps, but in reality if you hook up an external SSD or an eGPU, it is only using 32Gbps....that other 8Gbps is used by things like Displayport protocol, but cannot be accessed by the devices I mentioned above. Is it the same way with USB4 and USB4 2.0? If you hook up an eGPU to a USB 4 2.0 port, is that eGPU going to have access to the full 80Gbps or will it only have 64Gbps or something lesser?

Current: USB4 Gen3x2 cable (40 Gbps)

But now USB4 2.0 Gen1x1.. or is it USB4 2.0 Gen3x2? Gen4x1?

Why USB version 4 2.0 Generation 3 ??

Universal Serial Bus 4 version 2.0 Generation3x2 Power Delivery 3.1 240 watt.... Even the Welsh are laughing.

LabRat 891USB4 2.0... I thought they were using the 'Gen2x#' moniker?
Guess I'll just pedantically memorize the latest USB-IF nomenclature :rolleyes:

They changed that with USB4 2.0, we now have:

A Computer GuyThe biggest missed opportunity in the past 8 years of USB is not being able to link and daisy chain fans and RGB devices together with USB.

The USB-C connectors are too expensive to do that.
All the other connectors are only allowed on one end of the cable to be allowed to be called USB.
That said, there's no-one stopping you from doing it, it just wouldn't be something approved by the USB-IF.

AnarchoPrimitivDoes anybody know if that 80Gbps can be fully used? For example, with Thunderbolt3/4, they advertise 40Gbps, but in reality if you hook up an external SSD or an eGPU, it is only using 32Gbps....that other 8Gbps is used by things like Displayport protocol, but cannot be accessed by the devices I mentioned above. Is it the same way with USB4 and USB4 2.0? If you hook up an eGPU to a USB 4 2.0 port, is that eGPU going to have access to the full 80Gbps or will it only have 64Gbps or something lesser?

USB4 already allows for the full 40 Gbps to be used.
I wrote about this over two years ago, but clearly no-one that is a regular TPU reader, read my article.
www.techpowerup.com/review/usb4-guide-info-technology-details/
USB4 1.0 and 2.0 also uses tunnelling for all the protocols, but DP is the one being prioritised when in use.

forman313Current: USB4 Gen3x2 cable (40 Gbps)

But now USB4 2.0 Gen1x1.. or is it USB4 2.0 Gen3x2? Gen4x1?

Why USB version 4 2.0 Generation 3 ??

Universal Serial Bus 4 version 2.0 Generation3x2 Power Delivery 3.1 240 watt.... Even the Welsh are laughing.

No, see above.

USB PD is a separate standard, USB4 only has a minimum requirement of 7.5 Watts (as I**** didn't want it to compete with T**********) but it seems like most motherboards do at least 15 W.

bobsledThe USB-IF needs to be taken to pasture. The only explanation for asinine naming, and even the plethora of different implementations all under the same name, is insanity.

Indeed. I was shocked on the first read thinking "How can USB 2.0 ports all the sudden support that speed?"

I missed the "4" snuck in there.

More nonsense nomenclature

This is the only system we need:


etc...

If they do PD, then that should be clearly stated on the ports and cables in Watts, not hidden behind some bullshit lookup tables of USB version, sub-version, and bogus caveats* or using the words "up to" everywhere. I can type at "up to" 300 words a minute and my monitor's pixel response is 1ms*



Why is that so hard?

USB 420

NaterIndeed. I was shocked on the first read thinking "How can USB 2.0 ports all the sudden support that speed?"

I missed the "4" snuck in there.

Actually... We had low-speed, full-speed and high-speed USB, before USB 3.0.
They're now called basic-speed and high-speed, as USB 3.0 is SuperSpeed.

TheLostSwedeas USB 3.0 is SuperSpeed.

Then USB4 is UltraSpeed, USB4 v2.0 at 80G is(?) and at 120G is(?)?

Chrispy_If they do PD, then that should be clearly stated on the ports and cables in Watts, not hidden behind some bullshit lookup tables of USB version, sub-version, and bogus caveats* or using the words "up to" everywhere. I can type at "up to" 300 words a minute and my monitor's pixel response is 1ms*

65 W is not a USB PD standard. It goes 60 and 240 W only now, there was a 100 W one, but that's not being used any more, as 240 W replaced it.
As such, 60 W cables does anything up to 60 W and 240 W cables does anything up to 240 W.
The difference is with or without e-marker chip.

In other words, the USB-IF actually made this one simpler, by dropping the 100 W version and by only having two PD standards for charging.

That said, you could get a cable with the PD certification, which means no more than 15 W, but could be 7.5 W both at 5 V, because that's what the standard calls for, if it's a USB4 cable.

TumbleGeorgeThen USB4 is UltraSpeed, USB4 v2.0 at 80G is(?) and at 120G is(?)?

I don't think that marketing name was every used, it's simply USB4 now, at either 40 or 80 Gbps.

No thanks, I just wait for the Super-Duper-Giga-Ultra-Mega-Quad-OC'd cables to come out, then all my puters/devices will be sooo much faster than everyone else's, hahahahaha :)

TheLostSwedeThey changed that with USB4 2.0, we now have:

USB4 v2 didn't change the older USB4 20 Gbps and 40 Gbps name, those are still USB 4 Gen 2x2 and USB 4 Gen 3x2 respectively.

It's an abomination honestly.

AliExpress has you sorted.

Just get a USB 4 2.0 Gen 3x2 SS PD240 Ultra With HDMI Over CAT6 U2 40Gbps Thunderbolt-compatible Charging iPad iPhone SATA for Windows/Mac/Android/Apple/13-Amp EU Plug Adapter Multi-Tool with Dolby Atmos 7.2 RON92 Cable

persondbUSB4 v2 didn't change the older USB4 20 Gbps and 40 Gbps name, those are still USB 4 Gen 2x2 and USB 4 Gen 3x2 respectively.

It's an abomination honestly.

There is no USB4 20 Gbps spec, it's just a fallback mode and it has no marketing name. Also, as far as consumers are concerned, those two things aren't used, since it's 40 Gbps and nothing else as far as most people are concerned. Why are you worried about terms that aren't used outside of the companies developing these products?

240W. That’s no belt, it’s a USB4 2.0 cable.

TheLostSwedeThey changed that with USB4 2.0, we now have:



The USB-C connectors are too expensive to do that.
All the other connectors are only allowed on one end of the cable to be allowed to be called USB.
That said, there's no-one stopping you from doing it, it just wouldn't be something approved by the USB-IF.


USB4 already allows for the full 40 Gbps to be used.
I wrote about this over two years ago, but clearly no-one that is a regular TPU reader, read my article.
www.techpowerup.com/review/usb4-guide-info-technology-details/
USB4 1.0 and 2.0 also uses tunnelling for all the protocols, but DP is the one being prioritised when in use.


No, see above.

USB PD is a separate standard, USB4 only has a minimum requirement of 7.5 Watts (as I**** didn't want it to compete with T**********) but it seems like most motherboards do at least 15 W.

I just read the guide, but it never answered my question. Also, when I quickly look at USB4 external SSD reviews, they all give similar sequential transfer rates to that of Thunderbolt 3/4 external SSDs, approximately 3000MB/s, but shouldn't the USB4 drives be closer to 3500-4000MB/s if they're using the full 40Gbps? Technically, 40Gbps equals 5000MB/s, but obviously there's going to be some overhead, but all the reviews I've seen top out at 3100MB/s. I thought at first it might be because the reviewer is using a TB4 port and not specifying, by I just read a PCWorld review where they test a USB4 drive in both a USB4 port and a TB4 port and the transfer rates are identical.

TheLostSwedeThere is no USB4 20 Gbps spec, it's just a fallback mode and it has no marketing name. Also, as far as consumers are concerned, those two things aren't used, since it's 40 Gbps and nothing else as far as most people are concerned. Why are you worried about terms that aren't used outside of the companies developing these products?

It's not just a fallback mode but an actual mode that is required of devices. Gen 3(i.e. lanes at 20 gbps) is optional for some class of devices like peripherals but obligatory for hubs.

Single lane operation is a fallback though.

There are also cables that are sold that only met Gen 2 specs.

You can find the pdfs here:

usb.org/document-library/usb4r-specification-v20










(fallback)




(different specs for Gen 2 vs Gen 3)

AnarchoPrimitivI just read the guide, but it never answered my question. Also, when I quickly look at USB4 external SSD reviews, they all give similar sequential transfer rates to that of Thunderbolt 3/4 external SSDs, approximately 3000MB/s, but shouldn't the USB4 drives be closer to 3500-4000MB/s if they're using the full 40Gbps? Technically, 40Gbps equals 5000MB/s, but obviously there's going to be some overhead, but all the reviews I've seen top out at 3100MB/s. I thought at first it might be because the reviewer is using a TB4 port and not specifying, by I just read a PCWorld review where they test a USB4 drive in both a USB4 port and a TB4 port and the transfer rates are identical.

USB4 delivers at least 600/700 MB/s more sequential throughput than TB4. Keep in mind that a lot of tests are done with TB3/4 devices, so the cap is on that end, not the USB4 end.
So yes, you're correct and that's where it is if you look at these old figures from Computex 2023.
www.techpowerup.com/309494/asmedias-delayed-usb4-host-controller-is-nearly-here

I don't know what PCWorld did (except being amateurs and a lesser magazine than PCW used to be), but clearly something went wrong when they tested.

This is from CES earlier this year and QDM is hitting 3800 MB/s with Crucial's hardware.
www.anandtech.com/show/21229/micron-at-ces-2024-usb4-ssd-technology-demonstrations

persondbIt's not just a fallback mode but an actual mode that is required of devices. Gen 3(i.e. lanes at 20 gbps) is optional for some class of devices like peripherals but obligatory for hubs.

Single lane operation is a fallback though.

There are also cables that are sold that only met Gen 2 specs.

You can find the pdfs here:

usb.org/document-library/usb4r-specification-v20










(fallback)




(different specs for Gen 2 vs Gen 3)

Yes, it's a minimum requirement for USB4, something I**** forced through, yet NO-ONE at the USB-IF wanted it.
Good luck finding a single host controller that only does 20 Gbps.
It's pretty much a dead part of the standard, but yes, still part of the standard, so my bad there.

Hubs have to do 40 Gbps and support USB4, USB 3.2 2x2, PCIe and DP.

TheLostSwedeUSB4 delivers at least 600/700 MB/s more sequential throughput than TB4. Keep in mind that a lot of tests are done with TB3/4 devices, so the cap is on that end, not the USB4 end.
So yes, you're correct and that's where it is if you look at these old figures from Computex 2023.
www.techpowerup.com/309494/asmedias-delayed-usb4-host-controller-is-nearly-here

I don't know what PCWorld did (except being amateurs and a lesser magazine than PCW used to be), but clearly something went wrong when they tested.

This is from CES earlier this year and QDM is hitting 3800 MB/s with Crucial's hardware.
www.anandtech.com/show/21229/micron-at-ces-2024-usb4-ssd-technology-demonstrations


Yes, it's a minimum requirement for USB4, something I**** forced through, yet NO-ONE at the USB-IF wanted it.
Good luck finding a single host controller that only does 20 Gbps.
It's pretty much a dead part of the standard.

Hubs have to do 40 Gbps and support USB4, USB 3.2 2x2, PCIe and DP.

www.pcworld.com/article/2289586/adata-se920-external-ssd-review.html

fstoppers.com/gear/reviews-express-1m2-usb4-reaches-portable-ssd-market-678167

www.pcworld.com/article/2150957/owc-express-1m2-usb4-ssd-review.html

Here are a couple I looked at, but regardless, 3800MB/s is approximately 30Gbps.....10Gbps overhead seems a bit steep....I don't know, just haven't seen anything convincing that it's using the 40Gbps for data

AnarchoPrimitivwww.pcworld.com/article/2289586/adata-se920-external-ssd-review.html

fstoppers.com/gear/reviews-express-1m2-usb4-reaches-portable-ssd-market-678167

www.pcworld.com/article/2150957/owc-express-1m2-usb4-ssd-review.html

Here are a couple I looked at, but regardless, 3800MB/s is approximately 30Gbps.....10Gbps overhead seems a bit steep....I don't know, just haven't seen anything convincing that it's using the 40Gbps for data

Here’s an example of USB4 using the full 40Gbps vs Thunderbolt 3/4

GPU performance is about 10-20% better performance in games vs TB 3/4 and slightly behind Oculink. Since USB 4 2.0 will be using 80Gbps, GPUs will be able to fully stretch their legs the the devices that are utilizing the GPU will be charging at a fast rate vs Oculink

AnarchoPrimitivHere are a couple I looked at, but regardless, 3800MB/s is approximately 30Gbps.....10Gbps overhead seems a bit steep....I don't know, just haven't seen anything convincing that it's using the 40Gbps for data

Well, we have one third party host controller and one bridge chip so far. It's possible that ASMedia didn't get it all right at its first attempt. I don't know if AMD's implementation in their mobile chips is better or not. We also have Qualcomm now, but not seen anyone test the USB4 performance.
That said, Thunderbolt 3/4 are the same, at around 9 Gbps behind the claimed 32 Gbps data rate.
It'll be interesting to see what Thunderbolt 5 delivers in terms of performance.

Others got the Adata drive to go faster, even if it's slow on the write side.


www.tweaktown.com/reviews/10605/adata-se920-2tb-usb4-portable-ssd-fastest-ever-external-drive-tested/index.html