Exactly what compelling advantage does this have over normal USB 3.0? It even uses a run of the mill USB UASP bridge chip. I mean with the drive LaCie used (a 5400RPM Seagate laptop drive) USB 2.0 wouldn't even bottleneck it much lmfao. 90MB/sec read!? This must be an SMR drive?
It's 135 mb/sec in a pure sequential read. (High queue depth can help SSDs; but for spinning rust it introduces some seeks which slow everything down noticeably.)
It's about 3.3x faster than the ~40mb/sec that USB2 maxes out at.
Using 3.1 gen 2's only benefit is in potentially keeping costs down by allowing them to share more parts with the SSD member of the family which could benefit from the doubled bandwidth.
USB 3.1 Gen 1 = USB 3.0 = Makes a lot of sense for HDDs with ~100 MBps transfer rates USB 3.1 Gen 2 is the 10Gbps version that doesn't make sense for single HDDs.
This is USB 3.1 Gen 1 with a Type-C interface - definitely, a welcome product in the market, with many computing platforms coming up with Type-C ports.
Yes, the Type-C is especially interesting for external 3.5" HDDs. Case in point is Seagate's Innov8. Since Type-C delivers up to 15 W there is no need for an external power supply.
Unfortunately, it's *may* deliver, not *shall* deliver. The new USB power spec is optional; the port could deliver as much power as 5A @20V; or it could only deliver 1A @ 5V like a legacy 2.0 non-charging port. AFAIK most currently available ports on laptops and desktops are eschewing all the higher power modes. On desktops just because the extra power delivery would add costs for something that may or may not ever actually be needed; on laptops because when the base system only draws 5-10W pushing double or more that out a single port will obliterate battery life. This is the sort of mess that's had me against the USB consortium being seduced by one cable to connect them all and going from a standard that was universal in that any time you connected 2 usb devices it would probably just work; to one where any time you connected two devices you'd use a usb cable but there was no guarantee that any of it would actually work.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
12 Comments
Back to Article
nathanddrews - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link
Is it compatible with my Acer Ferrari One laptop and Lamborghini Aventador Wireless Mouse? I need to know, pls halp.Samus - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link
Exactly what compelling advantage does this have over normal USB 3.0? It even uses a run of the mill USB UASP bridge chip. I mean with the drive LaCie used (a 5400RPM Seagate laptop drive) USB 2.0 wouldn't even bottleneck it much lmfao. 90MB/sec read!? This must be an SMR drive?extide - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link
Probably not SMR at that platter density, and also this is only 5400 RPM. Also SMR doesnt really affect sequential read speeds.DanNeely - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link
It's 135 mb/sec in a pure sequential read. (High queue depth can help SSDs; but for spinning rust it introduces some seeks which slow everything down noticeably.)It's about 3.3x faster than the ~40mb/sec that USB2 maxes out at.
Using 3.1 gen 2's only benefit is in potentially keeping costs down by allowing them to share more parts with the SSD member of the family which could benefit from the doubled bandwidth.
takeshi7 - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link
You're dumb if you think 90MB/s won't bottleneck USB 2.0Arnulf - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link
Clueless kids such as yourself really shouldn't be allowed to post here.extide - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link
Now all we need is a 2.5" 4TB drive in less than 15mm thickness! My laptop will even take the 12.7mm ones, but 9mm would be even better.zodiacfml - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link
USB 3.1 HDD. An oxymoron to me.ganeshts - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link
USB 3.1 Gen 1 = USB 3.0 = Makes a lot of sense for HDDs with ~100 MBps transfer ratesUSB 3.1 Gen 2 is the 10Gbps version that doesn't make sense for single HDDs.
This is USB 3.1 Gen 1 with a Type-C interface - definitely, a welcome product in the market, with many computing platforms coming up with Type-C ports.
Mobilus - Saturday, April 2, 2016 - link
Yes, the Type-C is especially interesting for external 3.5" HDDs. Case in point is Seagate's Innov8. Since Type-C delivers up to 15 W there is no need for an external power supply.DanNeely - Sunday, April 3, 2016 - link
Unfortunately, it's *may* deliver, not *shall* deliver. The new USB power spec is optional; the port could deliver as much power as 5A @20V; or it could only deliver 1A @ 5V like a legacy 2.0 non-charging port. AFAIK most currently available ports on laptops and desktops are eschewing all the higher power modes. On desktops just because the extra power delivery would add costs for something that may or may not ever actually be needed; on laptops because when the base system only draws 5-10W pushing double or more that out a single port will obliterate battery life. This is the sort of mess that's had me against the USB consortium being seduced by one cable to connect them all and going from a standard that was universal in that any time you connected 2 usb devices it would probably just work; to one where any time you connected two devices you'd use a usb cable but there was no guarantee that any of it would actually work.blzd - Saturday, April 2, 2016 - link
I wonder if this would work as an OTG drive with Type C phones.