Which is faster? USB 2 or Firewire IEEE1394

[Topher]

Originally posted by: DaFinn
So, what you are saying is: Firewire is faster since it's rated slower, but USB2 is actually slower since it's rated higher...

Anybody confused yet...

LOL! This is almost as good as Abbott and Costello! You guys crack me up!

 

[Topher]

To those who ARE confused.:

Firewire has less overhead and enables more of the bandwidth to be used for actual data transfer, so while USB2.0 *looks* faster on paper, in reality it is not.

For optical drives, using USB2.0 is perfectly fine, for hard drives, you will want to go with firewire (or SCSI, or FibreChannel - as money will allow).

Me personally, I'm waiting for iSCSI to put both of these to shame.

 

[Hottie]

Firewire.

Also take into consideration that Firewire ext HD don't need extra AC adapter but USB2 ext HD do need AC adapter

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: Hottie
Firewire.

Also take into consideration that Firewire ext HD don't need extra AC adapter but USB2 ext HD do need AC adapter

This is true for some higher power external 2.5" hard drives. Lower power (slower) 2.5" drives often work fine with both but do indeed somewhat exceed the USB spec.

However, this is not true for external Firewire 3.5" hard drives. The 3.5" drives require external power regardless if you use Firewire or USB.

 

[stranger707]

I think that you asked the wrong question. The question should be, what peripherals are available for 1394? I have built two new computers in the last 2 months and both had 1394 on the motherboard. I was curious after building them whether the Firewire ports worked, but I don't have a 1394 device to use to test them.

Does anybody have any 1394 devices?

 

[RalfHutter]

Originally posted by: stranger707

Does anybody have any 1394 devices?

I have an external HDD in a Firewire case. Works great, runs fast, hot swaps, puts no load on the CPU. Much better way to go than USB 2.0 (but I think about 200 people already pointed that out in the above posts)

 

[LED]

Another key element that could reverse roles and make USB2.0 faster then Firewire 400 are if new drivers are established as an update for many chipsets had already been implemented and possible could improve further as well.

 

[thorin]

Originally posted by: LED
Another key element that could reverse roles and make USB2.0 faster then Firewire 400 are if new drivers are established as an update for many chipsets had already been implemented and possible could improve further as well.

Which brings us to the point that USB is a controllerless interface like a WinModem and puts load on your CPU unlike Firewire which uses a decicated controller and doesn't load your CPU. Which is likely why USB2 is faster ON PAPER but NOT IN REALITY (but you've heard that I think ).

OH and BTW (just incase you missed it) there's also new Firewire800 which is 800Mbps (MegaBits per sec) or 100MBps (MegaBytes per sec) which is faster then both USB2 and Firewire (FW400).

Thorin

 

[alexruiz]

The last stone in the grave....

If you PC doesn't have native firewire or USB 2.0 support, firewire is also cheaper..... check pricewatch, as $15 get you a PCI firewire card, a 6-4 pins cable and even software for video edition...... you cannot even get a bare USB 2.0 card for that price shipped!!!

Though, USB 2.0 is cheaper to implement in the peripherials......

Eug and the others have already said the truth, firewire is king and USB 2.0 is pretender only for high-perfomance. As the other mentioned also, only really demanding applications will show the difference (external hard drives, and incoming HDTV video....)

 

[arcenite]

Did you get your answer, biggie?

Bill

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: stranger707
I think that you asked the wrong question. The question should be, what peripherals are available for 1394? I have built two new computers in the last 2 months and both had 1394 on the motherboard. I was curious after building them whether the Firewire ports worked, but I don't have a 1394 device to use to test them.

Does anybody have any 1394 devices?

3 computers with Firewire
Firewire Compact Flash reader
Firewire CD-RW
Firewire DVD-RAM/-R/-RW
Firewire portable 2.5" drive (for portable backups and to hold my MP3 collection)
Two Firewire 3.5" drives (for backups)
Two Firewire hubs

If you PC doesn't have native firewire or USB 2.0 support, firewire is also cheaper..... check pricewatch, as $15 get you a PCI firewire card, a 6-4 pins cable and even software for video edition...... you cannot even get a bare USB 2.0 card for that price shipped!!!

Though, USB 2.0 is cheaper to implement in the peripherials......

Well, around here the cards are about the same price usually, so I can't agree that Firewire is cheaper. Better yes, but overall it's a bit more expensive.

 

[EdipisReks]

i like to have both firewire and USB2. i plug paper drives into the USB2 posrts, since USB2 is faster on paper, but i plug real drives into the firewire ports, since firewire is faster with real drives, and all.

 

[Eug]

P.S. I have 1 USB 2.0 device. It's a Sandisk flash card reader (does multiple types). So I bought a USB 2.0 card for one of my XP computers, but the damn drivers didn't work. :frown: So I gave up and I'm using it via USB 1.1 for now.

I also used to have a Firewire/USB 2 combo drive, but even via USB 1.1 the drive wasn't seen by XP, but Firewire worked fine. Eventually the enclosure died though so I just replaced it with a Firewire-only one.

 

[Wyvern03]

I've been reading the replies to your post with interest, the one question that hasn't been answered is this: What are the field results for both USB2.0 anf Firewire ie: which actually works better?!!!.

I 'm lucky enough to own an external CD-RW (USB2.0/Firewire) and an external backup harddrive (firewire).....i actually prefer USB2.0...not because its faster than firewire, but because its actually more stable than firewire...unless this problem is unique to me, i find that my ext firewire backup drive doesnt not show up in Windows xp whenever my pc is restarted!...as where USB2.0 has always worked for me..without any failures.

Anybody else experienced this weird fault with firewire?

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: Wyvern03
I've been reading the replies to your post with interest, the one question that hasn't been answered is this: What are the field results for both USB2.0 anf Firewire ie: which actually works better?!!!.

I 'm lucky enough to own an external CD-RW (USB2.0/Firewire) and an external backup harddrive (firewire).....i actually prefer USB2.0...not because its faster than firewire, but because its actually more stable than firewire...unless this problem is unique to me, i find that my ext firewire backup drive doesnt not show up in Windows xp whenever my pc is restarted!...as where USB2.0 has always worked for me..without any failures.

Anybody else experienced this weird fault with firewire?

Well, USB 2.0 doesn't work reliably for me as I've mentioned earlier.

I have experienced the situation however where a Firewire drive did not show up in WinXP when I booted up with the drive on. However, unplugging it and plugging it back in made it show up. Or I could turn it off, reboot, and then plug it in after bootup is finished and it would work fine. OTOH, my Firewire compact flash reader always shows up regardless of the situation.

So I guess it depends on the implementation of each of the devices with regards to both the hardware and software, whether it'd be USB 2.0 or Firewire.

That said, ALL of my Firewire devices ALWAYS show up fine with my Mac. So I'm thinking that WinXP's implementation of Firewire is simply not as good as Apple's. With USB 2.0, you're more dependent upon the manufacturer though, since it requires 3rd party drivers for XP. (I can't test USB 2.0 on my Mac, since my Mac has no USB 2.0 ports.)

 

[Czar]

what was the speed of usb1.1 again?

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: Czar
what was the speed of usb1.1 again?

1.5 MB/s (12 Mbps) max theoretical, and usually much less than that in real life. ie. Almost useless for hard drives and current generation optical drives.

Firewire will get you almost 40 MB/s, which is pretty good for hard drives.
USB 2.0 will get you a little over 20 MB/s maybe, which is OK but limiting for hard drives. More than sufficient for even the fastest optical drives however.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: Czar
what was the speed of usb1.1 again?

1.5 MB/s (12 Mbps) max theoretical, and usually much less than that in real life. ie. Almost useless for hard drives and current generation optical drives.

Firewire will get you almost 40 MB/s, which is pretty good for hard drives.
USB 2.0 will get you a little over 20 MB/s maybe, which is OK but limiting for hard drives. More than sufficient for even the fastest optical drives however.

thanks
what do you think about this box? it is supposed to support firewire also, or so says the store (one week untill they get another shipment so I havent seen the actual product yet)
http://www.firewiregear.net/productdetails1.cfm?sku=35KSSLU2&cats=306

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: Czar

what do you think about this box? it is supposed to support firewire also, or so says the store (one week untill they get another shipment so I havent seen the actual product yet)
http://www.firewiregear.net/productdetails1.cfm?sku=35KSSLU2&cats=306

Never used it myself. I think CompGeeks has the same one or a very similar one.

If you go Firewire, be sure that it sports the Oxford 911 chipset. The other chipsets are slower, usually in the range of USB 2. (They work fine though, and are no problem for optical drives, but I see you are looking a 3.5" hard drive enclosure.)

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: Czar

what do you think about this box? it is supposed to support firewire also, or so says the store (one week untill they get another shipment so I havent seen the actual product yet)
http://www.firewiregear.net/productdetails1.cfm?sku=35KSSLU2&cats=306

Never used it myself. I think CompGeeks has the same one or a very similar one.

If you go Firewire, be sure that it sports the Oxford 911 chipset. The other chipsets are slower, usually in the range of USB 2. (They work fine though, and are no problem for optical drives, but I see you are looking a 3.5" hard drive enclosure.)

does the hd box itself need the oxford chipset or is it the motherboard?

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: Czar

does the hd box itself need the oxford chipset or is it the motherboard?

The enclosure needs it. If you check out compgeeks, you'll see that in the specs of most of their firewire enclosures you'll see mention of Oxford911 or OXFW911 or something like that.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: Czar

does the hd box itself need the oxford chipset or is it the motherboard?

The enclosure needs it. If you check out compgeeks, you'll see that in the specs of most of their firewire enclosures you'll see mention of Oxford911 or OXFW911 or something like that.

thanks again, I found the one I'm going to buy and it has the oxford chipset
http://www.compgeeks.com/details.asp?invtid=ME-720U2F
sucks that I'm going to use it at school where there are only usb1.1 ports but its better than email or having to spend money on a normal hd enclosure which i will only use for school, this has function

 

[Eug]

While Firewire hard drives are awesome, I find carrying around 3.5" hard drives a big pain in the @ss, esp. since you'll need to carry around the AC adapter, and there's no guarantee it will work via USB unless you install drivers on the host machine (which presumably belongs to the school, and may or may not be locked down).

If it is just for small file transfers, you could consider a 64 MB USB pen drive or possibly a USB powered 250 MB zip drive.

I use a 60 GB 2.5" bus-powered Firewire laptop drive. Very convenient for me but my main computers all have Firewire and 2.5" Firewire drives are $$$.

 

[Czar]

good points there
I know I can install stuff on the computers there so that shouldnt be a problem
thumbdrives are just too small for me, wish they had 1gb models out. Then 2.5" enclosures are probably the best buy if it werent for the expensive hd's.