• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel to Make Thunderbolt Royalty-Free; Looking to Increase Adoption

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,171 (2.80/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
also if i understand correctly can use USB 3.1 C cables and TB cables in the same port since TB supports both modes and both cables. That is awesome.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/compu...l-it-be-released-and-what-will-it-do-for-pcs/
Same cable and connector, yes but there are limitations. TB 1 and 2 had special circuitry in the connectors to mux/demux the PCI-E signal into something that can handle distance a little better. If you're using a passive TB3 cable (run of the mill Type C cable,) you're incredibly limited when it comes to distance unless you have an active cable, much like TB1 and 2.

So, there is a benefit in the sense that you can use cheaper and more basic cables but, your range is incredibly limited (< 1 meter @ 40Gbps) on a passive cable and if the quality is poor, it very well could still drop down to 20Gbps. The flexibility is nice but, it comes at a cost and like regular TB2 cables, you can't subtitute in active ThunderBolt cable for a Type C cable using USB, just as you can't use a ThunderBolt cable to drive Mini-DisplayPort.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
344 (0.08/day)
Same cable and connector, yes but there are limitations. TB 1 and 2 had special circuitry in the connectors to mux/demux the PCI-E signal into something that can handle distance a little better. If you're using a passive TB3 cable (run of the mill Type C cable,) you're incredibly limited when it comes to distance unless you have an active cable, much like TB1 and 2.

So, there is a benefit in the sense that you can use cheaper and more basic cables but, your range is incredibly limited (< 1 meter @ 40Gbps) on a passive cable and if the quality is poor, it very well could still drop down to 20Gbps. The flexibility is nice but, it comes at a cost and like regular TB2 cables, you can't subtitute in active ThunderBolt cable for a Type C cable using USB, just as you can't use a ThunderBolt cable to drive Mini-DisplayPort.
obviously, the tech is still years a head of usb either way and better.
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,171 (2.80/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
obviously, the tech is still years a head of usb either way and better.
The Type C connector is actually pretty cool in the sense that it was designed to transfer more power and to support multiple kinds of transport over the same cable and connector. To me, that's really cool and is more universal than just USB 3.1 by itself. Honestly, the only reason this is possible is because of how similar USB 3.1, DisplayPort, HDMI, and ThunderBolt are as they're all built on differential signaling and to make them even more similar, they all use 4 differential pairs to do a lot of their magic.
 
Top