Live data from Hacker News

USB-C head-to-head comparison

lumafield.com

1–10 of 232 posts

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#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.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#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.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#5
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 also test the resistance/voltage drop of the cable to detect thinner-than-spec conductors.

I'm pretty sure USB-C hardware in a typical laptop can already do most of this, if only the firmware added support for such testing.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#7

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 :/

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#8

Insane difference between thunderbolt vs competitors. Clearly we are paying for quality here, the question is LTV how quickly does the thunderbolt break

Anecdotally, I haven't yet had a Thunderbolt cable break. The caveat is that I haven't used TB cables in high-abuse scenarios (field work, etc.).

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#9

Insane difference between thunderbolt vs competitors. Clearly we are paying for quality here, the question is LTV how quickly does the thunderbolt break

Based on my experience - much more quickly than the "normal" USB-C cables. Those cables are also short and rather thick in most cases (and cost like 50$+).

But that's also because TB has significantly lesser margins for errors than USB 3.1/3.2.

Re: USB-C head-to-head comparison

#10
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.

It seems like a niche for someone to step in and provide a service for QC.
Post reply on HN