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

141–150 of 232 posts

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#141

Post by lxgr »

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.

If that were true, my fairly cheap ($10) newer cable also shouldn't work at 10 GBit/s, but it does.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#142

Post by moonfern »

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.

"USB-IF strongly discourages its members and the industry at-large from using specification names/terminology in consumer-facing branding, packaging, advertisements, and other marketing materials."

They recommend the following naming: XYZ's USB 40Gbps 60W USB Type-C® Cable or USB 40Gbps 60W USB Type-C® Cable

USB 40Gbps... correspond to the USB4 Gen 3×2 mode Hi-Speed USB is USB 2.0 (High-Speed).

A tip usb cable and a number in the logo = not USB2. A usb c cable and black/white in the logo = not USB2

Sometimes the marketing name and a logo specify a certain mode like USB 10Gbps the marketing name is only used for USB 3.2 Gen 2×1 mode, the black/white logo with 10 Gbps always correspond to USB 3.2 Gen 2×1 mode.

If you see USB in blue and 10 Gbps in red than it's either USB 3.2 Gen 2x1 or USB4 Gen 2×1 ( those modes have different encodings )

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#143

Post by nrp »

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.

You’re getting a lot of “hot take” and sarcastic responses, but the actual answer is that they do. To use any of the USB-IF logos (including the official ones that clarify power and signal compatibility) a product has to go through the certification process: https://www.usb.org/logo-license

USB-IF also maintains a list of products that are certified: https://www.usb.org/products

The question then is, “Why is this still confusing?”. The answer is probably that the popular retail and e-commerce channels are flooded with products that aren’t certified, and consumers don’t realize that a certification process even exists.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#144

Post by sleepybrett »

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.

There used to be a thing where cables that supported usb-3 had blue interiors to their connectors. But then some jackasses started shipping crap cables with blue connectors at inflated prices...

I don't think the usb standards body can realisticly police the labeling in any real way.

Also apple's usb-c cables w/ thunderbolt has the little thunderbolt icon on it, so at least they are labeling it (https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MN713AM/A/thunderbolt-4-u...)

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#145

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#146

Post by criddell »

nrp wrote: post #143
criddell wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

You’re getting a lot of “hot take” and sarcastic responses, but the actual answer is that they do. To use any of the USB-IF logos (including the official ones that clarify power and signal compatibility) a product has to go through the certification process: https://www.usb.org/logo-license USB-IF also maintains a list of products that are certified: https://www.usb.org/products The question then is, “Why is this sti…

This is really helpful. Thanks.

I've bought some supposedly USB-IF certified cables a couple of weeks ago and I didn't notice the logos. When I get home tonight, I'm going to take a closer look.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#147

Post by londons_explore »

artimaeis wrote: post #122
londons_explore wrote: post #77

On the apple cable... That circuit looks like a lot more than an e-marker. Why do we have a massive 105 pin BGA chip in there? Does this cable run iOS or something?

It's an Intel Thunderbolt ReTimer chip. https://youtu.be/LBWnb0ZIlEA?si=hgLg_TOa9zr42wpU&t=304 I can't find the 7040 specifically, but here's a similar 9040R chip: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/211299/...

I understand having retimer (ie. active signal booster) chips midway along a long cable... But at the end of a cable a mere 2 inches from the place the signal is going to end up seems superfluous...

Is it because the thunderbolt spec inherits timing parameters from PciE and it was hard to meet those with a long cable?

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#148

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

Krasnol wrote: post #116
upon_drumhead wrote: post #18

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

Their choice is remarkably ridiculous. It looks like they start at a 10 and then continue with 4, 3, 2. I wonder who paid for this...how is this even getting so many upvotes? It's pretty much useless.

I try to find the humor that our global manufacturing is so absolutely broken and encouraged by our politicians that Chinese crapware makers don't need to do anything but slam the keyboard for their "company name"... And the world lines up to buy it.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#150

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

m463 wrote: post #132
aalimov_ wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sounds great until you realize some people have "I need to charge my phone 15ft from an outlet" needs, and other people have "I need 40GBPS which needs a dual side populated 9 layer (wtf?) PCB with blind and buried vias, extremely small components" needs.

USB-C the idea was great. The execution has been so stupid.

Post reply on HN