Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

USB-C head-to-head comparison

lumafield.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 232 posts

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#131

Post by atoav »

LeanderK wrote: post #60
mastax wrote: post #29

> Why does this cable have all 24 pins when only half of them are connected? The extra pins could help the plug sit more securely in its socket. Another guess: the same factory makes Thunderbolt cables, and it’s cheaper to maintain just one design, even though that means wasted material and effort. The highest volume manufacturers may be fully integrated. Usually how it works, especially for these relatively low volu…

are they really hand-soldered? They look so small! Isn't there a machine that is cheaper for high volume soldering of those small connections?

Soldering small stuff can sometimes be easier, because at that level surface tension will do the job for you. So hand soldering 14 pins on a small size TSSOP package can be faster than soldering a SOIC (through hole) package (google drag soldering — just be careful with that in certain parts of the US \s)

The hardest part with cables is to prepare the strands and keep them in place. For this you can build fixtures.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#132

Post by m463 »

aalimov_ wrote: post #19
culopatin wrote: post #6

I wish they had compared to off brand thunderbolt cables to see if Apple’s is worth the premium

You could get a 1m Belkin Thunderbolt 4 cable for about $40. Afaik Intel controls/certifies Thunderbolt cables and Apple just has free use of name or something.

I think steve jobs really liked the idea of a one-cable connection and worked with intel to create it.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#133

Post by oaiey »

gkfasdfasdf wrote: post #80

This really highlights one of the disadvantages of everything going to the same physical port - it's not easy to tell what the capabilities of the port and cable are.

It is a weakness of the USB consortia paper process to not enforce labeling on their hardware, cables and ports. Same physical port does not really matter. Also operating systems could help with clarifying the ports without special tools. Would be so easy.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#134

Post by MBCook »

criddell wrote: post #57
bloopernova wrote: post #3

I wish these were more widely available: https://caberqu.com/home/20-42-c2c-caberqu-746052578813.html... I have one from the kickstarter, and every new USB-C cable gets tested and labeled. Most are USB 2.0. A few will have the power delivery pins. It's such a crapshoot on any shopping site. It should be mandatory that these cables are correctly spec'd and labeled.

> It should be mandatory that these cables are correctly spec’s and labeled Why doesn’t the USB standards group mandate labeling of some type? Probably not words, but symbols would be good enough.

Isn’t that how we got USB 3 Gen 2 PD 130w Muffin-Spec?

Their names are terrible.

Besides. If companies are going to make non-conforming cables, they can put fake labels on them too. No normal person is going to check for the right labels.

They need a “USB C 4 cable”. They type that into Amazon and buy the thing with a low price and 4 stars.

The exact markings on the cable don’t make a difference.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#135

Post by MBCook »

lxgr wrote: post #78

Speaking of USB-C 10 Gbit/s cables, I've noticed something odd about the iPhone 15 Pro: I have a USB-C cable that has been yielding 10 Gbit/s speeds (i.e. USB 3 Gen 2x1 or possibly but very unlikely 1x2) when used at my Mac with various devices (mostly SSDs). However, that same cable only gets USB 2 speeds when connecting the iPhone to my Mac. The iPhone itself also seems to only get USB 2 speeds using the SSD and th…

Apple tends to be very picky about spec compliance in some things.

I wonder: is your Mac an Intel model or an Apple Silicon model? Perhaps the Intel powered ports are more lenient?

It would be interesting to know of a high quality cable tester showed some other difference in capabilities between the cables that may explain it.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#136

Post by MBCook »

CivBase wrote: post #92
upon_drumhead wrote: post #18

I wish they imaged other premium third party cables like cablematters or anker.

Anker, Cable Matters, Spigen, Satechi, Belkin, CalDigit, StarTech.com, OWC, Wavlink, UGreen, or literally any brand anyone has ever heard of would be nice.

Not a fan of GALKZ or FRELP?

Gotta love those random 5 letter “brands” amazon is covered in these days.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#137

Post by AceJohnny2 »

c-linkage wrote: post #94
lxgr wrote: post #78

Speaking of USB-C 10 Gbit/s cables, I've noticed something odd about the iPhone 15 Pro: I have a USB-C cable that has been yielding 10 Gbit/s speeds (i.e. USB 3 Gen 2x1 or possibly but very unlikely 1x2) when used at my Mac with various devices (mostly SSDs). However, that same cable only gets USB 2 speeds when connecting the iPhone to my Mac. The iPhone itself also seems to only get USB 2 speeds using the SSD and th…

I figure the reason the Apple USB-C cable has a complex PCB embedded in the head-end of the cable is to detect Apple-certified devices and ensure top speed only when paired with an Apple-certified cable. Both the device and the cable have to recognize each other as properly licensed devices, otherwise you get sub-standard performance.

Apple has denied this.

From their support page https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213839

> The USB-C cable that comes with your iPhone supports charging and USB 2 speeds. If you want to use a USB 3 device, use a compliant USB 3 cable that supports 10Gbit/s.

Note that this is only the 15 Pro. The "vanilla" 15 uses last year's A16 SoC and doesn't have a USB 3.x-capable PHY.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#138

Post by Dylan16807 »

Isthatablackgsd wrote: post #123
Dylan16807 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's exponential that's a huge assumption that needs more backing.

I'm not a EE. It is my understanding that to fully test 24 pins would includes putting a full load of higher wattage through those wiring to ensure they are capable of transferring. Higher wattage which means it needs a larger transformer to output that large amount of power or it would need a 200+ watts power brick to supply the wattage. That includes needing safety/failsafe components to protect itself and the devi…

I don't see how testing the wattage would be much different if it was two pins on a barrel plug.

Also you only really need to test the resistance here. Or volts and amps separately.

And I don't know if testing power was even part of the idea or if it was more about doing a signal test.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#139

Post by lxgr »

MBCook wrote: post #135
lxgr wrote: post #78

Speaking of USB-C 10 Gbit/s cables, I've noticed something odd about the iPhone 15 Pro: I have a USB-C cable that has been yielding 10 Gbit/s speeds (i.e. USB 3 Gen 2x1 or possibly but very unlikely 1x2) when used at my Mac with various devices (mostly SSDs). However, that same cable only gets USB 2 speeds when connecting the iPhone to my Mac. The iPhone itself also seems to only get USB 2 speeds using the SSD and th…

Apple tends to be very picky about spec compliance in some things. I wonder: is your Mac an Intel model or an Apple Silicon model? Perhaps the Intel powered ports are more lenient? It would be interesting to know of a high quality cable tester showed some other difference in capabilities between the cables that may explain it.

Both my current M1 Mac and my previous Intel Mac were fine with the cable!

> It would be interesting to know of a high quality cable tester showed some other difference in capabilities between the cables that may explain it.

I'm fairly certain that the cable itself is perfectly fine, but that the iPhone insists on a specific bit being set on the e-marker chip insider the cable, while Macs are more tolerant and will just attempt a USB 3 connection anyway, especially since they need to support unmarked USB 3 for use with USB-A adapters anyway.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#140

Post by lxgr »

radicality wrote: post #120
lxgr wrote: post #78

Speaking of USB-C 10 Gbit/s cables, I've noticed something odd about the iPhone 15 Pro: I have a USB-C cable that has been yielding 10 Gbit/s speeds (i.e. USB 3 Gen 2x1 or possibly but very unlikely 1x2) when used at my Mac with various devices (mostly SSDs). However, that same cable only gets USB 2 speeds when connecting the iPhone to my Mac. The iPhone itself also seems to only get USB 2 speeds using the SSD and th…

I think a good step in debugging this would be to download Apple’s “Additional Tools for Xcode 15”, and then open up IO Registry Explorer. There’s a lot more info to see there about attached devices than the standard system profiler.

I'll give that a try, thank you!

There are already some SOP-related messages in the system debug logs (although almost completely redacted), so I'm at least optimistic that this is handled by the OS, and not e.g. purely in firmware in the USB-C controller.

Post reply on HN