USB 3.2 Gen 1 vs Gen 2 Mobo Connector Confusion

[EarthDog]

I'd venture a guess to say it wasn't mentioned because power wasn't part of the question, but throughput. That said, I agree with understanding how much each is able to power. Here's a quick link.

https://www.onlogic.com/company/io-...th USB 3.2 Gen 1,providing 2.5 watts of power
https://resources.pcb.cadence.com/b...and-data-transfer-rates-for-the-usb-standards

The (top) link also touched on the cable and its importance to throughput.

 

[roirraWedorehT]

The new smaller connector ("USB 3.2 Gen 2 Front Panel Connector") is good for one 20 Gbps connector when one becomes available to plug into this connector. I am assuming it will drive only one connector because the 20 Gbps communication rate requires two 10Gbps channels.

By this point, @Barryng probably got the information he needed, but I wanted to clarify this particular remark based on hordes of research I've been doing lately since I built a new PC. I have found no evidence yet that the "Type-E" small rectangular USB front motherboard connector on motherboards can or at least has yet been used for USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 (20 Mbps) - only 3.2 Gen 2 (2x1 - 10 Mbps). I also don't feel secure yet that any cable/extension/front panel mount USB-C connector that handles 3.2 Gen 2x1 will handle 2x2. Leave it to some cheap manufacturer to leave a wire or two out that aren't used in 2x1.

I've also seen the motherboard Type-E USB connector referred to in the manual for my MSI MS-7C59 TRX40 Creator as "USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-C Connector", and I've seen it referred to as still something else on Amazon.

Please anyone feel free to correct me or update this with new information as it comes.

 

[Barryng]

By this point, @Barryng probably got the information he needed, ...

Thanks. I did. See post #3.

Nevertheless, still a lot of good interesting information in the subsequent 19 posts.

 

[Blaylock]

No worries on the Necro. This is still a very active area of confusion.

I did a few quick pokes of some high-end motherboards (Z590, WRX80) and was not able to find a board that specified a USB 3.2 Gen2x2 internal connector either. That is very interesting.

 

[roirraWedorehT]

[rant]I can't wait to see what kind of sub-versions, generations, and multipliers they have for USB 5.x. I also fear that USB-C is already becoming saturated, at least standard-wise. Since 3.2 Gen 2x2 isn't prevalent enough yet there's still nothing to worry about just yet, and it may be 5 years, and I guess 10 years total would be a good enough run for USB-C if they don't find a way of keeping it backward compatible but moving forward with speeds. I wish someone would stop the crazy train. I know not all devices need the highest speeds, and that it's nice for manufacturers of cheap devices to be able to stick with USB 2.0 through a USB-C connector. At a minimum, they should at least use USB naming such as 5A, 5B, and 5C, etc, if necessary. No decimal, generations, or multipliers. Maybe decimals later if it makes sense, i.e. "5A.1" as they fix something that's wrong or missing with the original standard. I'm definitely open to suggestions for better alternates.

I can understand and respect the need for USB-C to be able to handle both old and new speeds. It would be helpful if USB-C cables would be marked with their capabilities, but even this might be difficult in some cases as some of them might support standards and speeds that haven't even come out yet.

Who knows. Maybe the Thunderbolt 3 and 4 taking on the same USB-C connector and compatibility will help somehow if it doesn't just make it worse.[/rant]

Nice title, @Blaylock. "Senior Alien Cat Hunter"

 

[Blaylock]

Believe it or not, the USB 3.2 standards were created to prevent confusion. In that regard, it has failed.

USB 4.x should use a 3.5mm hole so we can confuse it for a headphone/mic jack too. /s

In all seriousness, I would like to see them implement that magnetic feature some phones use. That could save countless cords/motherboards/cases from getting wrecked by the old cord around the chair wheel issue. It's as if the cord and wheel are magnetized. SMH

 

[roirraWedorehT]

LOL! I've had mixed thoughts about magnetic ports. If they're implemented in a way that completely prevents shorts, then maybe. Every time I've considered buying magnetic adapters for my phones at least, I've talked myself out of it. I wonder what exactly was the reason Apple did away with MagSafe the first time?

Some things I definitely wouldn't want to come unplugged too easily. Close my computer room window's curtain, brush up against the cables on the back of my PC, interrupt some large transfer going on.

After I built my previous PC in 2016, my cat knocked it down from where it was in the middle of the night. It was still plugged in and running as if not much happened, with a big dent in the drywall where the case hit it. It did kill two of my cheapest $/TB hard drives, though - but not right away and without warning for me to know to get the data off of them first.

Edit: Interesting info - https://www.pcworld.com/article/361...oducts-are-here-what-to-know-what-to-buy.html

Still wouldn't totally remove confusion since it's adding ThunderBolt 4 to the mix. TB4 definitely includes USB4 compatibility, but USB4 doesn't necessarily include TB4.