S/A - Intels Thunderbolt pointless? USB3 design upward of 25 Gbps!

[Mopetar]

Well speed isnt the reason to advocate Thunderbolt, USB3 is capable of 25 Gbps if they wanted to make chips for them that funktioned at those speeds (they dont because of price costs atm, but thunderbolt is bound to make them push it out soon).

And Thunderbolt is capable of 50 - 100 Gbps, but for cost reasons it's using copper.

USB isn't going anywhere for a long while because it's so ubiquitous, but I don't think it's going to surpass Thunderbolt either. It might have been easier for everyone to swallow and understand if they had just called it Firewire 10k or something like that.

 

[Nemesis 1]

The drawback is compatibility and whether SI will want to continue to support both standards when. Here's a good analysis.

AMD, Intel Partners Support USB 3.0 In Fusion Chipsets Over Thunderbolt

I fail to understand what your link has to do with AMD and thunderbolt. I will go into what I mean in another response to a more reasonable member. THe Car will never ever replace the Horse and buggy so said MILLIONS.

 

[Nemesis 1]

To be honest though, thunderbolt could be the the difference between world peace and total anarchy and AMD would have no choice but to argue the case for total anarchy because thunderbolt is an Intel product and they know what it is like trying to get the necessary info from Intel to implement simple ISA extensions in a timely fashion...not viable.

I not sure I understand you here . It almost sounds as if you believe Intel is going to give AMD Its ISA on lightspeed. NO where in intels agreement with AMD does intel have to Give AMD this ISA for a product that has nothing to do with x86 . Intel will NOT ever give AMD this ISA . AMD wants something like this AMD has to spend its own research dollars or Beg IBM for its assistance once again. IF AMD attempts to reverse engineer lightspeed THIS lawsuite would go badly for AMD as they have been caught already once reverse enginnering intel cpu that WAS x86 ISA. SO the courts threw much selling out found against intel . There won't be a repeat

 

[Voo]

I not sure I understand you here . It almost sounds as if you believe Intel is going to give AMD Its ISA on lightspeed.

I fear you don't know what ISA stands for or otherwise completely missed IDC's point xX

Thunderbolt will most likely turn out just like FW did - a niche product for those who have use for the extra speed and don't have to worry about it not working on 3/4 of all PCs. TB isn't inherently more scalable than USB, also as a matter of fact we already have today, on the market connections with data rates of 300Gbit/s, I really don't understand why nobody is interes.. oh yeah right, low price >> speed.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Actually I think you miss the whole point of lightspeed. Its more than USB ever thought of being or will be . Even though USB has a speed of 25gb. Real world is NO were near that speed not even close.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I fear you don't know what ISA stands for or otherwise completely missed IDC's point xX

Thunderbolt will most likely turn out just like FW did - a niche product for those who have use for the extra speed and don't have to worry about it not working on 3/4 of all PCs. TB isn't inherently more scalable than USB, also as a matter of fact we already have today, on the market connections with data rates of 300Gbit/s, I really don't understand why nobody is interes.. oh yeah right, low price >> speed.

Really . I think alot of you are missing the point. Intel could likely careless if AMD has Standard arch that intel will will push as its own STANDARD and not the industry. Intel has 80%+ market share . Intel not going to give this to AMD as a standard and with APPLE already using thunderbolt and intel to follow with lightspeed with 80% market share Intel doesn't need AMD to have this as a standard. We will have to see how this plays out . IF i were intel and had apple in my corner . I to would careless about AMD after all AMD as USB 3 . Now who develops USB 4 thats going to be interesting as it won't be intel not a chance of that.

The line has already been drawn in the dirt. Apple crossed over . Intel with 80% market share forces the M/B to adapt and companies who sell HDs ect ect ect . Sure it will be a slow process . But intel already has the arch at a cost of billions. Light speeds future is bright.
Many here are already putting LLANO in Apples computers. LOL . I will take any and all bets on that ever happening.

 

[piesquared]

I fail to understand what your link has to do with AMD and thunderbolt. I will go into what I mean in another response to a more reasonable member. THe Car will never ever replace the Horse and buggy so said MILLIONS.

Sure no problem, thanks for the response!

 

[Idontcare]

I not sure I understand you here . It almost sounds as if you believe Intel is going to give AMD Its ISA on lightspeed. NO where in intels agreement with AMD does intel have to Give AMD this ISA for a product that has nothing to do with x86 . Intel will NOT ever give AMD this ISA . AMD wants something like this AMD has to spend its own research dollars or Beg IBM for its assistance once again. IF AMD attempts to reverse engineer lightspeed THIS lawsuite would go badly for AMD as they have been caught already once reverse enginnering intel cpu that WAS x86 ISA. SO the courts threw much selling out found against intel . There won't be a repeat

You misinterpreted my post by 180°

AMD has long complained that one of the challenges with coordinating joint developments to x86 ISA extensions (SSE 5, etc) is that Intel reportedly drags their proverbial feet in getting the specs and documentation to AMD in a timely enough manner that AMD would stand a chance to incorporate compatibility for the ISA extensions in their next-gen parts.

I was extending this reality of CPU development to the realm of platform development where AMD is now trying to craft chipsets and platforms that are dependent on Intel getting thunderbold/lightpeak specs to them in a timely and orderly fashion as well.

Why would AMD ever voluntarily agree to such a future if they have a say in it? They wouldn't, IMO.

 

[Voo]

Intel has 80%+ market share

Number of USB ports and devices in use: 5billion?
Number of Tb ports and devices: 10k? Do they even sell yet?

That's like saying MS can do whatever they want in the smartphone business because they have 90% marketshare in desktop OSes. And we all remember how the last time Intel tried to push a specific standard against the rest of the market turned out, don't we?

Also Intel trying to force MB manufacterers to avoid USB and use TB is the best way for Intel to set a new record in fines (hey we need someone for the first double digit billion fine). You can be sure that the EC and FTC keep an eye out for that.


But everything's possible maybe TB will turn out to be the next cool thing - but for the vast majority of users the advantage of the current TB implementation isn't worth giving up the ubiquity of USB also not to forget that TB is a good bit more expensive to include on a MB than USB.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Technically, while USB3 might be able to reach 25Gbps, it would be at the end of its lifecycle, while 10Gbps with Thunderbolt is just the beginning.

At the moment though, Thunderbolt is merely USB with a different connection. I guess the specifics are different, but may need going to optical to really differentiate from USB.

The question is then, will optical Thunderbolt be getting widespread acceptance, aside from Apple? Perhaps it'll get to replace the connections in our video cards, and allow other very high bandwidth interal only devices to finally become external, but right now, its time might not be here yet.

 

[itsmydamnation]

Copper isn't an issue, what do you think the multi Terrabit scaling routers and switches use for back plane interconnects. Creating ASIC's that forward data at high wirespeeds is far more of a challange and TB does 0 to address that, regardless of the Transceiver.

 

[Voo]

Copper isn't an issue, what do you think the multi Terrabit scaling routers and switches use for back plane interconnects.

Well most of those interconnects are everything but copper nowadays (is there anything over 10gbit copper links available right now?). They've been fiber for years now for range reasons alone but even the cost for high speed copper connections (CX4 or something) is quite prohibitive. I dimmly remember asking what the Infiniband interconnect for our small cluster cost and the number wasn't pretty.

Technically we could fit every PC for the last few years with an interconnect that has a three times higher bandwidth than what Intel promises for TB, the real problem is as always cost. So while Intel surely could sell TB for 100gbit today, who'd buy it at the prices they'd target?

And TB wasn't engineered to solve the problems of on-chip communication, so I don't see what that has to do with this discussion? Intel and others are researching quite heavily in that area as well for obvious reasons (optics would offer high speed, low energy communication without those pesky analog problems like parasitic inductance), but I'd think the similarities end there

 

[Nemesis 1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk69pCcVSSQ&feature=related

 

[Arkadrel]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk69pCcVSSQ&feature=related

Meh, personally dont own 6 external hard drives in raid, nor wish to.
I already have a cable that goes from my graphics card to the monitor.

I dont really care if you can daisy chain them.

Would I pay 15$ extra to have thunderbolt on a motherboard? not as it stands atm, I have no need for it.

I suspect its this way for ALOT of users.

Which is my point, I dont doubt its a shiny new tech thats slightly better than USB3 currently.... question is if its worth the cost? not for me, I dont want to daisy chain 4 pc monitors together, nor do I own 6 hdd external drives in raid to make use of it's speed (which usb3 could match, if they made chips for it).

 

[VirtualLarry]

THIS lawsuite would go badly for AMD as they have been caught already once reverse enginnering intel cpu that WAS x86 ISA. SO the courts threw much selling out found against intel . There won't be a repeat

AMD was a second-source licensee to Intel's designs. They didn't need to reverse-engineer it.

 

[Nintendesert]

Intel needed to choose a better name. Spelled out it is ridiculous and saying a nasty communicable disease to try and shorten it isn't any better. The marketing folks at Intel really dropped the ball on this one. I don't like saying either to people in our community let a lone the common person.

 

[Idontcare]

AMD was a second-source licensee to Intel's designs. They didn't need to reverse-engineer it.

True for 286 and 386, not true for 486...that was the basis of the lawsuit (486 reverse-engineering). It was also the basis for Cyrix's own chip design, for which they were sued as well.

Its not illegal to reverse-engineer a chip (this is fact), but it is illegal to sell a chip without the proper licenses.

This was the crux of AMD's defense for selling a 486 that was reverse-engineered, the 286/386 licenses from Intel did not explicitly exclude the possibility of AMD using the license as cover for selling 486 chips (regardless where AMD's design came from).

Cyrix on the other hand did not procure an x86 license, they just started selling the chips. They got sued by Intel, naturally, and settled out of court for terms that included them receiving an x86 license (plus rights to use the FSB) in exchange for $ to Intel and cross-licensing of some Cyrix IP that Intel wanted to access.

Modern IC's are not reverse-engineered simply for practical reasons. They are so complex that it is actually more costly and time-consuming to reverse engineer the chip versus just hiring yourself a team to design your own.

 

[jiffylube1024]

The whole point of USB is ubiquity, and if they phase out USB in favor of some new Intel standard, I'll be disappointed. USB has flaws, certainly, but it is also perhaps one of the best standards that the computer industry has, in terms of interoperability, save for perhaps the VGA port.

^^ Agreed 100%.

As a display standard, I think DisplayPort should become the next PC de-facto standard. It's a nice, compact, versatile standard capable of driving uber high res screens or multiple screens at once. The connector is much better/smarter than the old DVI plug.

As a data cable, what it has in speed, low CPU cycles and smart two-way traffic management, is unfortunately trumped by the fact that USB is in every computer sold in the last decade.

You simply cannot beat the fact that USB is the standard transfer method for just about everything - smartphones, input devices, portable consumer storage devices, printers, even many speakers!

 

[Soleron]

Cyrix on the other hand did not procure an x86 license, they just started selling the chips. They got sued by Intel, naturally, and settled out of court for terms that included them receiving an x86 license (plus rights to use the FSB) in exchange for $ to Intel and cross-licensing of some Cyrix IP that Intel wanted to access.

I'm surprised they ever did that. They'd never settle for that today (see Nvidia's case, they desperately wanted a license as part of the settlement terms).

 

[Idontcare]

I'm surprised they ever did that. They'd never settle for that today (see Nvidia's case, they desperately wanted a license as part of the settlement terms).

There was some ambiguity at the time.

Cyrix's position was that the terms of the x86 license agreements that Intel took out with both IBM as well as Texas Instruments were structured such that anyone having IBM or TI produce an x86 compatible chip was covered by the IBM's or TI's license.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...own_name_of_x86-processors_designed_by_others

This turned out to not be a view shared by the courts, but obviously Cyrix's lawyers figured they had a shot at making the case when they first set out to make this the basis of their business plan.

 

[exar333]

^^ Agreed 100%.

As a display standard, I think DisplayPort should become the next PC de-facto standard. It's a nice, compact, versatile standard capable of driving uber high res screens or multiple screens at once. The connector is much better/smarter than the old DVI plug.

As a data cable, what it has in speed, low CPU cycles and smart two-way traffic management, is unfortunately trumped by the fact that USB is in every computer sold in the last decade.

You simply cannot beat the fact that USB is the standard transfer method for just about everything - smartphones, input devices, portable consumer storage devices, printers, even many speakers!

I love DP as well, but it is currently competing against VGA (yes many people still use this) DVI, and HDMI. The idea behind TB is that you could eventually have one connector for EVERYTHING. Maybe that is an aggresive goal, but a great one to work toward. For the 'average joe' it is a great idea to have a single connector used for everything (monitor, eHDD, etc).

 

[Lightflash]

I would rather have one standard instead of the numerous standards that exist today. However TB will be slow to get integrated into use by the everyday consumer, whereas enthusiasts will usually pick it up to see how it works and if it is better than existing technology.

 

[Starcrosser]

THe Car will never ever replace the Horse and buggy so said MILLIONS.

Millions of total idiots, or people who loved horses

 

[Nemesis 1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_m6NfMY-zs

 

[Lonbjerg]

Meh, personally dont own 6 external hard drives in raid, nor wish to.
I already have a cable that goes from my graphics card to the monitor.

I dont really care if you can daisy chain them.

Would I pay 15$ extra to have thunderbolt on a motherboard? not as it stands atm, I have no need for it.

I suspect its this way for ALOT of users.

Which is my point, I dont doubt its a shiny new tech thats slightly better than USB3 currently.... question is if its worth the cost? not for me, I dont want to daisy chain 4 pc monitors together, nor do I own 6 hdd external drives in raid to make use of it's speed (which usb3 could match, if they made chips for it).

lol
First you "boast" about USB and "25gbps"...but then you try and downplay Thunderbolt and 10Gbps...because you don't need the speed?

How much fanboy dribble can you post?