USB/USB 2.0 vs. Firewire

[Barnaby W. Füi]

[*]Firewire is 400Mbps
[*]USB is 11Mbps
[*]USB 2.0 is 480Mbps
[*]Firewire can connect deviced without the need for a computer
[*]Currently, Firewire is more expensive to add to another motherboard, USB costing less then one dollar, and Firewire being about 15 dollars.

So I have one big question:

Being the relative CPU hog that USB is, is Firewire the same way, or does it have its own hardware to do that for it?

discuss!

 

[Pabster]

FireWire is superior in all ways, but, unfortunately, it hasn't received the market acceptance that USB has. USB 2.0 promises to bring USB mainstream, with speedy external data storage and digital editing ... but I'm sticking with FireWire.

I think the big thing FireWire has against it is price. A lot of people balk at spending even $20 for an adapter. And FireWire devices are often (much) more expensive than their USB counterparts.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

thanks for the reply pabster.....the ONLY reply that is!!!

where is everyone?

 

[NFS4]

Read here:

http://www.gamepc.com/reviews/hardware_review.asp?review=diskinterfaces&page=1&mscssid=&tp=

I choose USB 2.0 for backwards compatibility, speed, cost, and ease of use.

 

[StanFL]

This thread at "another" hardware forum is 36 pages long with nothing but USB 2.0 vs Firewire stuff. It's got it all, specs, flames, trolls, points, counterpoints, you name it, lol. Anything you want to know on the subject has probably been beat to death in that thread.

 

[JellyBaby]

I'm hearing a lot about USB 2.0 support directly on upcoming motherboards but narry a whisper about 1394 integration. USB 2.0 looks good to me and facilitates older USB stuff just fine. There may be room for 1394, too but given the choice it looks like USB 2.0 is the way to go.

 

[NFS4]

<< I'm hearing a lot about USB 2.0 support directly on upcoming motherboards but narry a whisper about 1394 integration. USB 2.0 looks good to me and facilitates older USB stuff just fine. There may be room for 1394, too but given the choice it looks like USB 2.0 is the way to go. >>


Yep, Intel is pushing USB 2.0 into their motherboards, and Gateway is on the ball as well. Haven't heard anything concerning Firewire

 

[daddyo]

I think they both have a place, but not because one is any better.

Firewire has become THE standard in the video world. You can now buy just about any camcorder with a 1394 port. I even saw the new Philips DVD+RW recorder has firewire ports. USB2.0 might be comparable spec-wise, but I still don't think it will push firewire out of it's seat as Video King. Firewire is just too entrenched.

USB is becoming the standard with PC-type peripherals. Web cams, printers, mice, keyboards, etc. etc....and I don't think that's going to change any time soon either.

 

[dbrandel]

 

[dbrandel]

Sorry about the blanker.

My MSI K7T266Pro2-RU (VIA 266A) has a NEC USB 2.0 chip on the mobo. MSI packages a 4 port adapter for USB 2.0 that plugs into 2 jumpers on the mobo inorder to use the NEC 2.0 chip. Only downside is that Microsoft has yet to release drivers for the USB 2.0 Root Hub.

 

[Alex]

NOBODY has answered the important question tho: is usb2.0 a cpu hog and whether it is or not does firewire use as much cpu as it does?

thx

 

[JellyBaby]

franguinho, I don't know the answer but even if USB 2.0 grabs more CPU does it matter? It's not like our processors are being taxed to the max with modern software anyway. And if you're playing games the only USB activity is likely the mouse/controller. Hardly chip-busting work.

 

[passign]

well motherboards will come with usb 2.0 if ya want firewire ya need an external pci card in most cases, and I heard there buggy... so looks like usb 2.0 will be the clear winner

 

[WebDude]

<< if ya want firewire ya need an external pci card in most cases, and I heard there buggy... >>



I've been running firewire off a pci card for over half a year with absolutely no problems. Expensive (relatively speaking) maybe, but buggy? Not that I've heard.

WebDude

 

[daddyo]

I haven't noticed any excessive CPU usage with a firewire device. USB can take processor time though.

I don't think you can declare a winner. I think it will be a cold day in hell before you see a USB2.0 port on the back of your TV, and in the same respect, it is equally unlikely that you'll see a firewire keyboard anytime soon.

 

[CQuinn]

Firewire will not take as much CPU as USB, that's because 1394 devices
have the connection/controller circuitry built into the devices,
which adds to the cost.

JellyBaby, the point is that if you add more than the mouse/controller on
to the bus, then data transfer with USB will start to affect system performance.
Firewire would (should) handle the load itself, without significantly impacting
the rest of the system. This will turn into another one of those IDE vs SCSI
styles of arguement, where the choice between the two will be best determined
on how each individual uses their system.

Nobody mentioned the Sound Blaster Audigy and ATI All-in-Wonder Radeon 8500DV,
both of which come with Firewire ports built-in. Orange Micro has a
dual USB 2.0/IEEE 1394 adapter card on the market now too.

 

[Beau]

Isn't the effective bandwidth of Firewire ~40mb?

Don't the specs for USB 2.0 overcome the downfalls of USB1? IE processor utilization?

 

[Kingofcomputer]

my guess:
DV will stay with Firewire,
Mainstream computer stuff will stay with USB, ext harddisk and cd-rw will have both Firewire and USB 2.0 models (Maxtor ext hd already does that).
Both have their usage areas, no need to argue which one is better.

If you need to use both, get MSI's -RU mb with USB 2.0 ports and a SB Audigy or Radeon 8500DV, so you don't need to buy separated USB 2.0 host card and Firewire host card.

PS: Playstation2 has both Firewire and USB1.0 ports.