Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Adopts USB-C Connector For 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3, Supports USB 3.1, DP 1.2

Posted by timothy on from the ok-that's-pretty-cool dept.

MojoKid writes: The high speed Thunderbolt interface standard, which is used for everything from hyper-fast external storage solutions to external graphics cards, has been slow to take off. You can blame the high-priced Thunderbolt peripherals and the uber-expensive cables (at least when compared to your garden-variety USB cables). For most people, USB 3.0 is "good enough" and making a huge investment into the Thunderbolt ecosystem has been reserved for those in the professional video editing arena. However, Intel is looking to change all of that with Thunderbolt 3. Thunderbolt 3 once again doubles the maximum bandwidth, this time jumping from 20Gbps to a whopping 40Gbps. While that is impressive in its own right, the truly big news is that Thunderbolt 3 is moving away from the Mini DisplayPort connector and is instead adopting the USB-C connector. As a result Thunderbolt will also support USB 3.1 (which is currently spec'd at 10Gbps) and can optionally provide up to 100W of power (in compliance with the USB Power Delivery spec) to charge devices via USB-C (like the recently introduced 12-inch Apple MacBook).

17 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. One connector to rule them all. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 4, Funny

    We've finally done it. One connector for charge, data and display.

    Intel's hardware developers were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    1. Re:One connector to rule them all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      To be fair they also slowed themselves down by trying to make all the connectors female to control the population.

    2. Re:One connector to rule them all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What are the security implications of a single cable? If I plug in my laptop to charge in an East Molvanian airport, will the outlet try to infect my computer with a low-level virus that attacks the data ports used for negotiating amperage?

      There were good reasons to separate power and different kinds of data.

    3. Re:One connector to rule them all. by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Informative

      all of them will only offer one because of the rampant stupidity of the Consumers to want smaller and lighter.

      Sadly most laptop consumers are weak waifs that can barely carry 3 pounds. Those of us that do real work on laptops want a 21 pound 21" laptop with at least 10 USB ports 2 serial and frigging lasers.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:One connector to rule them all. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Don't worry, things will still be nice and confusing: It is valid to use a "Type C" connector in conjunction with a USB2 chipset(at least on the peripheral end, and probably in practice on the computer end). Further, if the "Type C" connector is actually USB3, there is the matter of "Alternate mode".

      "Alternate mode" allows the Type C jack and cable to act as a conduit for an entirely different protocol(Displayport and MHL have previously been announced, Intel's announcement presumably means that thunderbolt is along for the ride); but only if the system has the hardware necessary to implement whatever the other protocol is, and that hardware is suitably connected to the Type C jack in question. It doesn't actually give a USB 3.1(gen1 or gen2, yes there's that difference as well) device the ability to natively handle the other protocol in the USB silicon, merely to politely carry it from one end to the other, if the upstream device can generate it and the downstream device can accept it.

      So, when you combine this with the inevitable variations in how much power is available(spec allows for up to 100watts; but given that very few laptops, much less littler widgets, even have a hundred watt brick for their own needs, it is clearly the case that most Type C ports will be good for substantially less); a Type C port can do almost anything; but is required to do effectively nothing beyond acting as a USB 2 slave device and not starting any fires when plugged in. It might have full USB 3 silicon, it might not. It might support 10GB/s traffic, it might only handle half that; it might deliver 100 watts of power on request, it might be incapable of doing much besides browning out without a powered hub to protect it. It might have implemented one or more 'Alternate mode' protocols, it might support none.

      It will certainly be exciting, at least...

    5. Re:One connector to rule them all. by valinor89 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Comsidering I am still seeing mini-USB products being sold, and it seems designed, I would not announce the demise of micro-USB so soon.

    6. Re:One connector to rule them all. by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not everyone needs more than one.

      Whenever you post to /., remember that YOU'RE the weird one. You've got more rigorous demands than most people. There are lots and lots of people that don't need more than one port, and will be delighted that they don't have to even think about what sort of connector they'll need for whatever peripheral they have. Everything will come with USB-C, they've only got one port and nothing to sort out.

      For those of us that need more, there are plenty of options, but man, I have lots of people in my life that need ZERO ports on their laptop.

  2. Re:2x or 4x the bandwidth is not enough by pushing-robot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When 2x makes the difference between driving a screen at 30Hz vs. driving it at 60Hz, I'll take 2x.

    And Thunderbolt 2 came out less than two years ago. How long has it taken to go from 1000BASE-T to 10GBASE-T?

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  3. Re:2x or 4x the bandwidth is not enough by olsmeister · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fine. In base 2, the new revision is 10x the bandwidth.

  4. Where is my high speed LAN? by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Where is my Thunderbolt high speed LAN network connection? 10G Ethernet is prohibitively expensive, this has 40GB built in. Why can't I use 10G or so of that to network?!

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    1. Re:Where is my high speed LAN? by threephaseboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't know about other operating systems, but If you connect two or more Macs together with Thunderbolt, you get a virtual ethernet interface (just like you did with FireWire).
      Great if you have two Macs with fast storage, but for everything else, I'm waiting for a 10GbE Thunderbolt adapters to come down in price.

      --
      .
    2. Re:Where is my high speed LAN? by erice · · Score: 3, Informative

      Where is my Thunderbolt high speed LAN network connection? 10G Ethernet is prohibitively expensive, this has 40GB built in. Why can't I use 10G or so of that to network?!

      Because three meters (maximum length for Thunderbolt over copper) is kind of short for a network? Apparently you can get optical extenders that will do 30 meters but that doesn't sound like a way to save money.

    3. Re:Where is my high speed LAN? by wolrahnaes · · Score: 3, Informative

      Where is my Thunderbolt high speed LAN network connection? 10G Ethernet is prohibitively expensive, this has 40GB built in. Why can't I use 10G or so of that to network?!

      It's been a thing for a while, just connect two compatible systems with any old Thunderbolt cable.

      Macs got it with 10.9 in October '13: http://www.macworld.com/articl...
      Windows apparently got a driver from Intel to support it in April '14: http://www.engadget.com/2014/0...
      I can find a bunch of questions about it on Linux but haven't found anything conclusive about support. It doesn't look like there's been much work at the moment, likely because Thunderbolt systems are few and far between aside from Macs.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    4. Re:Where is my high speed LAN? by threephaseboy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Are you running a corporate lan off the (10g) segment?
      if not why the F*ck do u need 10g @ home??

      At home, my desktop PC, my Mac Mini, my MBPr, and my NAS all have storage devices that are 3x-10x the speed of 1GbE.
      I regularly push around dozens to hundreds of GB at a time.
      This isn't anything fancy, just standard consumer equipment I'm running. 1GbE is the limiting factor in any transfer.

      --
      .
  5. Re:One port to rule them all... by hattig · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And for most users, that one cable is going to be a bog-standard USB 3.1 passive cable, that can still be used for 20Gbps Thunderbolt, as well as USB 3.1 and DisplayPort. This is going to be massive news for consumer docks.

    If you absolutely need more than 2GB/s for your attached RAID/GPU then you will need an active Thunderbolt cable to reach 40Gbps.

    I'm sure this use case was part of the USB Type C plan.

  6. Re:Annoying by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I dread having to constantly explain to non computer savvy people that, yes that connector is a USB connector and your computer has USB ports, but that is a thunderbolt device and your computer doesn't support thunderbolt.

    And I look forward to getting a bunch of stuff at yard sales and flea markets that "doesn't work" for basically free.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  7. NOT exclusive to Apple. by CraigCruden · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apple DOES NOT have an exclusive on thunderbolt.... It is more expensive to implement than USB and users have not been clamoring for it because USB tends to be "good enough" for most users. You can get thunderbolt in motherboards -- but they tend to be top of the line motherboards and not all of them.