Manufacturers deviating / confusing labelling of USB ports.

[theborv]

My motherboard is the Gigabyte Aorus Master X570, but this will apply to several if not all of their models, and perhaps it will apply to other motherboard manufacturers, and other types of devices too.

We all know the USB naming convention has been confusing (to say the least) and has changed in stupid ways over the years, and as such we're often left with having to look things up on the interweb to double check things in order to know which port a device actually has and so forth. It has certainly been like this for me.

This evening I wanted to test something with an external drive I have, and I realised I didn't know for sure exactly which versions of USB ports my motherboard has. I then spent a good few hours working out what those specs are as Gigabyte has not accurately labelled the USB ports anywhere in their documentation (at least that I could find). It appears as a small mislabelling, but it's exactly the kind of mislabelling that makes it impossible to understand which USB version each port has, except the USB 2.0 ports. I came across a review which had described each ports specs (thanks to kitguru.net) and was then able to settle the issue. Also, what I don't understand is why Gigabyte don't write the ports' speeds anywhere, for example on their website, as marketing info. This would have solved the whole problem.

I have attached an image of my motherboard's back plate with the ports named the simple way and their speeds. I have also listed the ways USB ports are labelled, adapted from wikipedia and USB-IF. As you can see, leaving out the x 1 or x 2 part of the version name in columns 'Also named 1' & 'Also named 2 ' makes it impossible to know which USB version one actually has at hand. This is what Gigabyte do.

(Please correct me if I have made mistakes anywhere in this post, as it sure wouldn't be useful with even more confusion!)

Anyway, hope this helps someone at some point not having to spend several hours of their evening figuring out something that shouldn't take more than the time it takes looking up the product on the manufacturer's website. What an incredibly idiotic thing it is to not write at least the ports' speed numbers. One should think that marketing mumbojumbo theoretical speed numbers sells more products than naming conventions nobody understands without digging into wiki pages, and then on top of that using them wrong. It's just makes no sense whatsoever.


USB versions, their speeds, and their different naming conventions:

Easy USB version/name	Consumer/marketing name	Speed (theoretical)	Also named 1	Also named 2	Note
USB 2.0	High Speed	0.48 Gbit/s (480 Mbit/s)
USB 3.0	SuperSpeed USB	5.0 Gbit/s	USB 3.1 Gen 1	USB 3.2 Gen 1 × 1
USB 3.1	SuperSpeed+ USB	10.0 Gbit/s	USB 3.1 Gen 2	USB 3.2 Gen 2 × 1	Last version to support Type A
USB 3.2	SuperSpeed+ USB dual-lane	20.0 Gbit/s	USB 3.2 Gen 1 × 2	USB 3.2 Gen 2 × 2 multi-link modes	Requires type C connector
USB4 20Gbps	USB4 20Gbps	20.0 Gbit/s
USB4 40Gbps	USB4 40Gbps	40.0 Gbit/s

My motherboard's backplate, the correct USB versions and Gigabyte's labelling underneath:

 

[tabascosauz]

Not even Gigabyte that threw you for a loop, but the stupid Wikipedia page making things harder than they already are, with its x1 x2 "a.k.a." table Literally never have I heard of things being referred to as x1 in actual practice. Don't need even more pedantry from the Wikipedia crowd ("well ACKSHUALLY that's the old nomenclature, there is another name for it").

• Anything Gen 1 = literally USB 3.0, usually blue
• Anything Gen 2 = 10Gbps, should be red
• 3.2 Gen 2x2 = 20Gbps, should be red
• Thunderbolt 3 and 4 (and one future standard of USB4 iirc) = 40Gbps, only in Type-C form

Gen 2x2 is not available natively on AM4, so if it exists (on a few of the absolute newest X570S boards) it's through a third party controller. So unless you have one of those expensive boards, you need not be concerned about anything faster than 10Gbps.

Or just to label things in terms of bandwidth as you've already correctly done, which is the easiest and bypasses the 3.1 and 3.2 idiocy.

In all fairness, the next gen USB4 does seem to specify more Gen x and x1 x2 bullcrap. And probably contains minute details about signaling protocol that make the "new" 20Gbps technically not the same as the "old" 20Gbps...... but it's still 20/40Gbps and none in-between, so as long as you think of things in 5Gbps, 10Gbps, 20Gbps and 40Gbps, you'll still be fine.

 

[Fangio1951]

What about Thunderbolt 3, 4, etc.

Where does that fit into the table = would be good to know + knowledge base reference.

 

[theborv]

Remove the wiki page and one is just as lost. I would say this is Gigabyte's error. I know blue usb 3 is older than red, and hence is slower, but using 'USB 3.2 Gen 1' can be two different speeds if one has some problem with colour recognition or otherwise (I don't but point is clear). Gigabyte is just making very strange and idiotic decisions about labelling. I checked Asus, at least there is mention of some speeds in their manual and it is at least possible to deduct that USB 3.2 Gen 2 is USB 3.1.

What about Thunderbolt 3, 4, etc.

Where does that fit into the table = would be good to know + knowledge base reference.

Have no relationship currently with thunderbolt as I have no equipment which use it at the moment, so don't have any info at hand, sorry. Must be searchable, no?

 

[ir_cow]

Hate to say this but wiki and the MB manual would have save you from the guesswork. USB has renamed things multiple times. LIke SuperSpeed+ USB doesn't exist anymore. USB 3.1 10 Gbps is now 3.2 2x1 and the list goes on. The only thing is now messed up is USB4 has 20 Gbps and 40 Gbps. 20 Gbps is the base and always support while 40 Gbps like optional which is tunneled through Thunderbolt 4.

 

[tabascosauz]

Remove the wiki page and one is just as lost. I would say this is Gigabyte's error. I know blue usb 3 is older than red, and hence is slower, but using 'USB 3.2 Gen 1' can be two different speeds if one has some problem with colour recognition or otherwise (I don't but point is clear). Gigabyte is just making very strange and idiotic decisions about labelling. I checked Asus, at least there is mention of some speeds in their manual and it is at least possible to deduct that USB 3.2 Gen 2 is USB 3.1.

I know you've dug into the terminology where Gen 1x2 might technically exist, but in practice it's just not a thing. When 3.1 magically became 3.2, Gen2 still remained Gen2, nobody wrote Gen 1x2.

I'm not aware of any company making any USB product that has adopted the Gen 1x2 moniker. Gen 1 = 5Gbps, Gen 2 = 10Gbps, Gen 2x2 = 20Gbps.

Best to just forget the "3.1" or "3.2", just confusing and unnecessary and a painful reminder of USB-IF's naming mistake. Gen1 and Gen2 are the same speed regardless of 3.1 or 3.2. Here's how MSI lists it:

USB4 gives me some hope for the future, but they'll probably look for a way to distinguish 20Gbps/40Gbps without naming the speeds, meaning the .1 and .2 might come back

 

[eidairaman1]

Remove the wiki page and one is just as lost. I would say this is Gigabyte's error. I know blue usb 3 is older than red, and hence is slower, but using 'USB 3.2 Gen 1' can be two different speeds if one has some problem with colour recognition or otherwise (I don't but point is clear). Gigabyte is just making very strange and idiotic decisions about labelling. I checked Asus, at least there is mention of some speeds in their manual and it is at least possible to deduct that USB 3.2 Gen 2 is USB 3.1.


Have no relationship currently with thunderbolt as I have no equipment which use it at the moment, so don't have any info at hand, sorry. Must be searchable, no?

Talk to Gigabyte and the USB Standards committee

 

[joemama]

I don't understand what you're talking about, Gigabyte is just listing their USB ports using the name in your "Also named 1" column instead of the easy name.
The only thing confusion should be the USB standards only.

 

[theborv]

I don't understand what you're talking about, Gigabyte is just listing their USB ports using the name in your "Also named 1" column instead of the easy name.
The only thing confusion should be the USB standards only.

View attachment 255452

You mean "Also named 2" without the x 1

 

[R-T-B]

tl;dr the whole thing is a hot mess and that's why you have inconsistent naming.

 

[Mussels]

Part of this can be confusing on AMD boards since the 'top' USB ports are controlled from the CPU - a Zen 3 can give you 10Gb, while an APU or older CPU will only give you 5Gb.
Some boards like my X570-F only give you 5Gb, no matter what CPU.

According to chipset diagrams, I should have 4x 10Gb from the CPU and 8x 10Gb from the chipset
Instead I get 3x 10Gb Type A, 2x 10Gb type C and 5x 5Gb type A - none of the marketing materials seem to match up to reality.


The rest comes from companies re-labelling boards to USB 3.1/3.2 on their websites, but not the product manuals or the actual products themselves, as well as totally forgetting to label the ports.

Spoiler: Asus: Decent

Taken from my ASUS x570 manual written before Zen 3 launched:
States the CPU driven ports are 5Gb, but has 2x 10Gb type C (one front one rear) and four 10Gb ports.

while the same boards marketing page is updated for 5000 series, it at least matches up.

4x 5Gb CPU ports
Chipset:
3.2 gen 2 front panel (type c) (10Gb)
4x 3.2 gen 2 at rear (3x A 1x C) (10Gb)
2x 3.2 gen 1 front (5Gb)

And on the board itself it's actually clear: the 10Gb ports are actually labelled as 10Gb.
Blue is 5Gb, red is 10Gb

I confirmed this with a 1TB NVME drive in a USB 3.2 10Gb enclosure.

Red portsA and C, and front C)

Front USB 3.0 and blue rear ports:

Spoiler: Aorus: Garbage

Meanwhile the X570 AORUS XTREME (rev. 2.0) has this confusion:

According to that we have:
4x ports from the CPU, 2 of which may be 10Gb
3x 10Gb ports from the chipset
There is no useful explanation which ports are which
The manual will not help in this case. It's still loading on the dial up connection apparently.

If i had to guess, i'd say blue and grey are 5Gb ports from the CPU
Red below them are the 'might be 10Gb' CPU ports
All the red 3.1 ports are 10Gb from chipset (incl the type C)

This confusion stems from the fact they've updated their website to use the latest USB naming schemes, despite the older names being labelled on the products themselves!


As for the meaning of USB's confusing naming - they changed the names. It sucks but it's as simple as that.
Focus on whether the ports are 5, 10 or 20Gb and ignore the rest.

Two 5Gb ports merged together was called "*x2" - so a 3.0 header with two 5Gb ports could merge to make a single 10Gb USB C port.

USB 3.x Generation 1: 5Gb
USB 3.x generation 2 10Gb

x.1 = normal speed
x.2 = two ports merged into double speed, with a USB C connector

This list has the final terminology used, which doesn't help products released before the changes.
All ports are x1 unless stated otherwise - there's no need to label it since a 3.0, 3.1 and 3.2 x1 are all 5Gb and technically the same damn thing.

USB 3.0/3.1/3.2 = 5Gb (This has led to hardware being renamed to USB 3.2 all over the web, for no goddamn reason)
USB 3.2 gen 2 = 10Gb
USB 3.2 gen 2x2 = 20Gb

 

[xtreemchaos]

i was not confused before but i am now i just plug anything to do with gaming and high speed data needs into red or C anything else into blue and ive no need for usb 2 maybe the odd thumb stick.

 

[theborv]

i was not confused before but i am now i just plug anything to do with gaming and high speed data needs into red or C anything else into blue and ive no need for usb 2 maybe the odd thumb stick.
View attachment 255483

Just for info: Keyboard, mouse, game controllers, usb dacs etc only need usb 2.0, no benefit in using the higher speed usb ports for such devices. This only is a point if one needs to free up higher speed ports for something, like external ssd's or VR kit or whatever.

 

[Mussels]

I use a 7 port USB 3 hub for all my peripherals except my keyboard (some boards are too slow to load the USB hub to enter the BIOS)

while most devices may not need much bandwidth for themselves, a hub can share that 5Gb between a looooot of 480Mb devices

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

It gets better!

Not every manufacturer uses red for 10Gbps ports...

Spoiler: ASRock

Then there is ASUS, a new kind of special.

Spoiler: TUF Gaming

Spoiler: Prime

Spoiler: ROG Crosshair

Spoiler: ROG Strix

Spoiler: ProArt Creator - this one is bad

Spoiler: Pro WS

@Mussels, I don't think Asus is very decent...

Pardon the massive pictures, TPU forums on mobile are a

Edited to shrink pics now that I am at my pc.

 

[Mussels]

My board in particular was labelled accurately - Not the brand as a whole
Mostly i like that it says 10Gb on anything that isn't 5Gb.


I think this is my favourite mislabelling

Unsure about on mobile, but on PC you can click and drag to resize the images - or when you attach the file directly you can post the 'thumbnail' sized photo and users have to click to see the uncompressed image

 

[anfazi54]

sometimes with color, sometimes with icon. what else in the future.

 

[ir_cow]

I wish coloring and numbers was standardized on ports. I look it up for ever single review. Some MB are easy to guess because it says 10, 20, Lighting Bolt, etc. I found a Blue port once be 20 Gbps lol.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

If something is 2, i plug it into a USB 2 port. If I know it is a 3 device, I plug it into any free USB 3 port. If it is USB C then it goes in a free C port. I don't really pay any attention to the speed or gen.

 

[Mussels]

If something is 2, i plug it into a USB 2 port. If I know it is a 3 device, I plug it into any free USB 3 port. If it is USB C then it goes in a free C port. I don't really pay any attention to the speed or gen.

I was the same until i got an NVME enclsoure that should have achieved 1GB/s and ran into ports doing 380MB/s (even some native type C ports)



Interestingly, the best way to add a 10Gb port to most systems is to merge two 5Gb ports from the mobo into a 1x2 type C
(Edit: This may be misleading advertising, as some claim to support 10Gb but the more reputable sellers say it's limited to 5Gb)
I wonder if its possible to do that via cables, connecting two type A ports into a 10Gb type C....

Since a 1x2 connection is literally two 'single sided' USB A joining together for a 'double' type C, in theory its possible (and the mobo headers do it)
Edit: Theres a lot of splitters, but they're made for phones and only work at USB 2.0 speeds.

I'll look for any that split a 10Gb port to two 5Gb, and if any do it the other way around - out of boredom, since i dont expect to succeed.

 

[AsRock]

Talk to Gigabyte and the USB Standards committee

Confuse and get to sell more. everyone's at it. Why change the hardware when you can just change a label.