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

21–30 of 232 posts

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#21

Post by masto »

izacus wrote: post #7
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.

Unfortunately it doesn't check for the last piece of the puzzle - the USB-C cable e-marker which has to be present to signal advanced capabilities for charging and thunderbolt. So it's not sufficient to test for high performance cables :/

For that, I use an FNB58 (which I got from AliExpress - https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256804478930060.html).

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#22

Post by kalleboo »

izacus wrote: post #7
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.

Unfortunately it doesn't check for the last piece of the puzzle - the USB-C cable e-marker which has to be present to signal advanced capabilities for charging and thunderbolt. So it's not sufficient to test for high performance cables :/

Yeah for that you need one of the POWER-Z (or I'm sure there are other brands now) USB-C cable testers on AliExpress. Will even tell you the brand of the chipset in the cable https://kalleboo.com/microblog/posts/109391700632886806.html

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#23

Post by npongratz »

kridsdale1 wrote: post #20
floatrock wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> accumulated 29 one-star reviews on Amazon and was discontinued the day after we bought it. They forgot to say how it re-appeared the next day under some other manufacturer name that's a random assortment of words and letters slightly different than "NiceTQ"

I swear, there must be software to make pseudo English phoneme strings for Chinese resellers to register as “companies” on amazon. 95% of them are ridiculous and I can’t believe a human made them.

It's a fast and cheap way to avoid running afoul of trademark laws.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#24

Post by izacus »

kalleboo wrote: post #22
izacus wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately it doesn't check for the last piece of the puzzle - the USB-C cable e-marker which has to be present to signal advanced capabilities for charging and thunderbolt. So it's not sufficient to test for high performance cables :/

Yeah for that you need one of the POWER-Z (or I'm sure there are other brands now) USB-C cable testers on AliExpress. Will even tell you the brand of the chipset in the cable https://kalleboo.com/microblog/posts/109391700632886806.html

I actually have a POWER-Z tester (the KM003C) and it can read the eMarker (yay), but it doesn't actually test the cable pins (boo). So it'll tell me if a cable is capable of charging the laptop at 100W, but it won't tell me if data lines are all fine and if it reports thunderbolt capability.

It's pretty much useful for testing charging, but not use for e.g. eGPUs. :/

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#25

Post by larschdk »

mardifoufs wrote: post #17
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.

There are tons of them on AliExpress! Some can even test resistance, emarkers, etc.

Tons of 4-pin cable testers, no 24-pin testers that I can find.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#26

Post by izacus »

masto wrote: post #21
izacus wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately it doesn't check for the last piece of the puzzle - the USB-C cable e-marker which has to be present to signal advanced capabilities for charging and thunderbolt. So it's not sufficient to test for high performance cables :/

For that, I use an FNB58 (which I got from AliExpress - https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256804478930060.html ).

Oh this looks interesting, thanks.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#27

Post by aalimov_ »

londons_explore wrote: post #5
gregmac wrote: post #2

> This manufacturer claims the cable transmits data at up to 10 Gbps – a speed that corresponds to USB 3.1 Gen 2 – but it only has enough pins and wires to support USB 2.0 at up to 480 Mbps. In any case, this cable accumulated 29 one-star reviews on Amazon and was discontinued the day after we bought it. Pretty much sums up the experience of buying cables in the past couple years.

I really want my computer to have a built in cable tester. Just plug both ends of the same cable into two different ports of a computer, and it has a little popup saying "This cable can support charging at this rate and data at that rate, and is fully functional". Or "This cable has 1 bad pin, and that may affect video/audio/charging/whatever functionality" Ideally, the computer would test every pin in the cable, and…

> I really want my computer to have a built in cable tester. Just plug both ends of the same cable into two different ports of a computer … If you have a Mac you might be able to try the Blackmagic Disk Speed Test app. It would require you to also have a drive that* can handle the read/write speeds of the cable you are testing… but you’ll only get accurate numbers if your drive can handle read/write that’s above what the cable can handle. Hopefully someone else knows of a better way.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#28

Post by arecurrence »

Very cool site. Their 3d models are fascinating to look at. I've often wondered what all goes into the construction of these and while I've seen one off scans in the past... being able to click and scroll around through the slices and whatnot is really cool.

Would be awesome if these were donated somewhere like Wikipedia some day.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#29

Post by mastax »

> 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 volume no-name brands, is they buy connectors from one vendor, PCBs from another, cables from another, plastic moldings from another, and then assemble them together (which may also be subcontracted). The assembly process doesn't have to be sophisticated: a small warehouse with a few workers with soldering irons and some jigs. Even some medium-volume assemblies like the USB-C front panel cables for major computer case brands are soldered by hand by a handful of workers in a small building.

Almost all of the USB-C connectors which are available off the shelf have all of their pins populated. Pins are very cheap. You need to be moving a whole lot of volume before it makes sense to go to your connector manufacturer and ask for a custom one with missing pins.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#30

Post by kalleboo »

brightball wrote: post #15

This stuff is what worries me about the whole EU standards body issue. I'd rather Apple be able to innovate and create a better connector than locking them into this mismatched and inconsistent reality.

Apple created a better connector it's called USB-C, they adopted it among all their other devices aside from the iPhone (Mac and iPad) in fact they were the pioneers in adopting it on computers.

The worst USB-C to C cable is still no worse than the best Lightning cable

Post reply on HN