Will Intel Thunderbolt kill SuperSpeed USB?

[Voo]

It's not officially called SATA3 but besides that there are other protocols that would work just fine. Simple answer SCSI or specifically iSCSI.

You mean SAS? Because that has superseded SCSI and I'm not sure why you throw iSCSI into the discussion.
But anyhow SAS also supports not more than 6Gbit/s so that won't help much. Well we could obviously use PCIe, but until that is adopted by the drive manufacterer's we'll have SATA4

@Idc: Hey wait, I still have my PS/2 port, maybe in.. 5 years?

 

[Edrick]

So when will we see Intel chipsets with this technology? If Intel start putting this into every chipset, and not USB 3, then that would be interesting to see how the market adjusts.

 

[rgallant]

- could be wrong , but did Intel not mention years ago they were looking at optics to replace the pci-e traces on\in the mb and internal cables , the final app for light peak once scaled down with cheap interface optic chips could do that maybe.

 

[wahdangun]

Yikes!! Are you sure you want to replace dp with lightpeak ? Dp is superior in everyway than lightpeak, i mean 17gb/s in dp vs 10 gb/s in lightpeak, more adopted, open and royalty free. Its now up to amd and nvdia to throw away this lightpeak out of window

 

[Phynaz]

Yikes!! Are you sure you want to replace dp with lightpeak ? Dp is superior in everyway than lightpeak, i mean 17gb/s in dp vs 10 gb/s in lightpeak, more adopted, open and royalty free. Its now up to amd and nvdia to throw away this lightpeak out of window

Your specs are wrong, Lightpeak is 20gbs bi-directional, in it's first version. Future versions are as high as 100gps.

It's about more than speeds anyway. What protocols does DP use? Can you daisy chain DP? How about power over DP?

 

[wahdangun]

Your specs are wrong, Lightpeak is 20gbs bi-directional, in it's first version. Future versions are as high as 100gps.

It's about more than speeds anyway. What protocols does DP use? Can you daisy chain DP? How about power over DP?

but right now lightpeak only have maximum transfer of just 10 Gbps, and 100Gbps will use fiber optic so it will not compatible with current coper solution (and thats why intel rename it to thunderbolt)

here article regarding DP :

Intel's hoping Thunderbolt, the spec formerly known as Light Peak, will change the world. So is Apple, which introduced Thunderbolt with its recently retooled MacBook Pro computers. That's fine and dandy, but AMD doesn't get what all the hoopla is about. After all, what's the point of Thunderbolt if we can get this whole USB 3.0 thing rolling? That's basically how AMD put it, CrunchGear reports.

"Existing standards offer remarkable connectivity and together far exceed the 10Gb/s peak bandwidth of Thunderbolt. These solutions meet and exceed the bandwidth utilization of many peripherals," an AMD spokesperson said.

According to AMD, if given a choice, consumers would rather ride it out with USB rather than futz around with daisy chaining devices to their monitors. On top of that, aren't mini DisplayPorts fast enough already?

"The DisplayPort 1.2 standard offers up to 17Gb/s of peak bandwidth for displays...Many AMD based platforms support USB 3.0 which offers 4.8Gb/s of peak bandwidth, AMD natively supports SATA 6Gb/s with our 8-series chipsets. The total bandwidth stated for a Thunderbolt channel is only 20 percent higher than one PCi Express 3.0 lane and about 52 percent higher than a single USB 3.0 port," AMD's talking head added.

Interesting choice of words, because 52 percent sounds pretty significant to us, though AMD's other points are well taken.

maximumpc
and yes DP can also daisy chained too,