USB 3.0 was pretty relevant way before it became part of Intel's chipsets. Almost all SandyBridge motherboards had USB 3.0 support through an external controller.
"Given that the controller requires two PCIe 2.0 lanes, it makes interesting reading as to how freely USB 3.1 might be implemented on Intel’s next desktop platform."
Intel's next platform will offer PCIe 3.0 from the southbridge (vs 2.0 on today's mobos). Hopefully ASMedia will have a 1 lane PCIe 3.0 version of the current controller available when Skylake launches. A version that uses 2 3.0 lanes so it can run both ports at 3.1 speeds concurrently would be nice too, although given the popularity of onboard 3.0 hubs to cheaply add ports on current boards makes me doubt it'd see much adoption. Skylake's chipset will offer 28 high speed IO ports (USB3, Sata6gb, PCIe) up from 18 on 8 or 9 series chipsets; so even the only controller available at launch is the current one needing 2 PCIe lanes shouldn't be a catastrophic limiting factor.
1 PCIe 3.0 lane actually doesn't have quite enough bandwidth to saturate a USB 3.1 connection - PCIe 3.0 allows 8 Gb/s on each lane but USB 3.1 is 10 Gb/s. That's not accounting for overhead though.
I was really disappointed to read that too. A few months back we were all sold on a USB 3.1 type C connector that offered 10Gbps data throughput as well as up to 100W of power. We've been told for months that we could finally charge our laptops and connect to an external display or port replicator dock through one cable. And now we're being sold an actual product that can't power 2 mSATA SSD's (a whopping 10W) without the need for a second USB connector for power?
My only thought is that the PCIe card isn't engineered to deliver enough power on its own. PCIe slots are rated to deliver 75W on their own and they could always add a Molex, SATA, or 6-pin PEG power plug to the card if they need more power than the slot alone can provide. Since there aren't any heatsinks on any components on the card my guess is that nothing there needs more than a few watts of power and there's no reason they can't push enough power through the USB cable other than the cost to add the components is too high to justify for this cheap add-in card. If that's the case then I can't imagine high-powered USB 3.1 devices catching on because the biggest strength of USB is its low cost to implement compared to something like Thunderbolt. Manufacturers will just stick with low power over USB 3.1 for high data transfer rates and require a wall wart for anything over 5W like they always have.
The power distribution spec that offered upto 100W is optional, has always been optional, and has always been described as such in articles at reputable sites like this one.
Also, only 8/16x cards can do 75W power. Smaller ones are only able to draw 25W. In both cases 10W is 3.3v, the remainder 12V.
Lastly, going above 60W would require a collection of VRMs similar to what you have around the CPU because the 100W level is at 20V and would need to be created on the card instead of just pumped from the PSU.
I understand all of that. I recognize that they would need additional VRM circuitry on the PCIe card and would need to negotiate power requirements with the connected device. That's a given. What I'm irritated by is that they didn't just add a Molex, SATA, or 6-pin connector to provide the additional 12V power. I'm disappointed by ASUS's lack of foresight and the fact that they didn't include some sort of secondary power connector for this PCIe card to provide additional power to devices that may require it (including their own 10W dual-mSATA demo box).
I don't expect every laptop, desktop, phone, tablet, or anything else that might be a host device to be able to provide 20V@5A. That would be unreasonable. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a $40 desktop PCIe card with a single USB port to be able to supply 10W over USB. The issue is that if someone buys this card then any device they try to plug in will either require less than 10W power draw or will need a second USB connector or wall wart for power.
The greatest appeal of USB has always been its low cost. Either the cost of implementation is too high or ASUS cheaped out on the power delivery to increase margins and gimped this card as a result. I'm hoping that it's the latter and we will see more reasonably priced options from other companies that fully support the new power delivery spec. If $40 is the expected price for a single-port USB 3.1 card that can't push 10W of power then USB 3.1 is dead on arrival.
"If $40 is the expected price for a single-port USB 3.1 card that can't push 10W of power then USB 3.1 is dead on arrival."
Where exactly are you getting this? The review says: "The Type-A versions will support 900 mA charging at 5V, whereas Type-C will do 3A at 5V, suitable for 15W." The spec sheet says the same thing. If you buy the PCIe card with a true Type C connector, then you're getting 3A at 5V which is the intended spec for USB 3.1.
to achieve the usb 3.1 speeds you'll need an usb 3.1 cable right? Usb 3.0 cable will slow you down right? If you purchase just the add on card, does the usb3.1 cable come with it?
It's only a doubling, so I expect it uses the same cables. The point of USB Type-C is that it standardizes the end (instead of standard, mini, and micro) and is flippable. There shouldn't be much difference between 3.1 Type A and Type C.
They should include a 3.5 inch bay front USB 3.1 with this card ... no one likes rear ones... make a front connector on the card that is shared with the rear ones.
The only reason I would buy it right now is for the higher wattage charging @ 15W.
Charging devices in my house are a constant argument of whose is whose and where is one. A desktop sized charger is much harder to disappear with.
PCIe SSD or RAID enclosures are about all you can use to drive the bandwidth at the moment. Docking stations are the next sensible item. I would be interested in monitors that connect to the desktop for video (standard cable), data, and power. The monitor would have USB ports (two USB 3.0) and audio ports; basically quick access ports.
Go to the local dept store, electronics store, whatever store, and pick up some wall chargers and USB cables. There's plenty of wall charges that plug into the outlet (covering both) and provide 1 external power outlet and a bunch of <1A and 2.1A USB ports. Make a couple of "charging stations" around the house (near the couch, in the kitchen, by the beds, etc) and then you'll never have to worry about "who took my charger?" again.
I honestly could not tell you where the actual chargers for the phones and tablets are anymore. (I think they're tucked into the suitcases for travelling.) We just have "charging stations" around the house and in the car.
10W would still be enough for two mSATA SSDs. Besides, they could have implemented DC-DC conversion on their PCI-Express card to deliver at least 20W over type-C plug.
It seems that Asus was very lazy and implemented type-C plug with standard USB3 power levels (0.9A = 4.5W). So we need to wait a bit more for real type-C products.
A quick look at the spec spelled everything out rather clearly. Power Delivery 2.0 requires a new Type-C cable that include four power/ground pairs, for a total of 24 pins.
It's just my speculation but I'm guessing that we aren't going to see many devices that weren't already tasked with power delivery showing up with the capability to push 10, 25, or 100W. While it would be nice, I think that the new power specification will show up on portable power supplies and docking devices first. Especially in the desktop form factor, I see Type-A remaining predominant for some time and it simply doesn't have the conductors to carry the current.
I have a question that I couldn't find an answer for after reading several articles about USB 3.1 in CES...
Will the current USB 3.0 cases out support USB 3.1 also ?, I'm only talking about Type-A ports usually found in cases.. of course Type-C will need some time..
Regarding the ASUS prototype drive enclosure, I find the two cables requirement a little bit odd but understandable in the same time. 1- USB 3.1 is able to provide all the power that these drives will take + more to spare also, the spec. can handle charging the laptop. 2- looking the early stages of USB 3.1, not all USB ports will be able to handle such power requirement as most will just stick to the standard. 3- Even in the final design for the device, I don't think that every USB 3.1 port will be able provide the full power required for the drives, not to mention that it still backward compatible with USB 3.0 port which aren't capable of providing such power.
I still like the power delivery that USB 3.1 provides, and I really hope that manufacturers will depend more on it specially laptops, tablets & smartphones where they only need one or two Type-C port with one them capable of charging the device also... and laptop chargers will be able to charge all laptops, tablets & smartphones with the same cable... but I know this will need a long wait... specially that some companies sees that their power adapter business provide a lot of revenue ( specially DELL with their proprietary power adapter )
Those two PCIe cards are seriously flawed. USB 3.1 for 2x type-A connectors OR 1x type-C connector with NO real power delivery? No thanks.
All we need is a single PCIe card with 2x/3x type-C connectors with an aditional PSU connection for power delivery and a couple of Type-A adaptors bundled.
Type-C to Type-A adaptors should be stupidly cheap so I don't understand this laughable limitation of sticking to Type-A connectors.
Buying one of those is basically paying twice for either Type-C or power delivery in the future.
There's really no point to spend extra money for usb 3.1 now. If there was a good reason to rush and buy usb 3.1 now then it might be worth it to rebuy it again when proper type c and 100 watt power are available but no devices available. I never bother buying extra ports that aren't natively integrated.
Any difference between this Asus card and the Gigabyte GC-USB3.1 card? Both seem to have the exact same asmedia chip as far as I can tell, but the Gigabyte card is almost half the cost.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
32 Comments
Back to Article
Laststop311 - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
this is just meh until its natively in intel's chipset.ToTTenTranz - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
USB 3.0 was pretty relevant way before it became part of Intel's chipsets. Almost all SandyBridge motherboards had USB 3.0 support through an external controller.DanNeely - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
"Given that the controller requires two PCIe 2.0 lanes, it makes interesting reading as to how freely USB 3.1 might be implemented on Intel’s next desktop platform."Intel's next platform will offer PCIe 3.0 from the southbridge (vs 2.0 on today's mobos). Hopefully ASMedia will have a 1 lane PCIe 3.0 version of the current controller available when Skylake launches. A version that uses 2 3.0 lanes so it can run both ports at 3.1 speeds concurrently would be nice too, although given the popularity of onboard 3.0 hubs to cheaply add ports on current boards makes me doubt it'd see much adoption. Skylake's chipset will offer 28 high speed IO ports (USB3, Sata6gb, PCIe) up from 18 on 8 or 9 series chipsets; so even the only controller available at launch is the current one needing 2 PCIe lanes shouldn't be a catastrophic limiting factor.
SirKnobsworth - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
1 PCIe 3.0 lane actually doesn't have quite enough bandwidth to saturate a USB 3.1 connection - PCIe 3.0 allows 8 Gb/s on each lane but USB 3.1 is 10 Gb/s. That's not accounting for overhead though.defter - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
"it uses a Type-C connector for data along with a micro-USB for power"What!? The whole point of type-C is to provide power along data.
Besides, it's not like two mSATA SSDs use lot of power.
WithoutWeakness - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
I was really disappointed to read that too. A few months back we were all sold on a USB 3.1 type C connector that offered 10Gbps data throughput as well as up to 100W of power. We've been told for months that we could finally charge our laptops and connect to an external display or port replicator dock through one cable. And now we're being sold an actual product that can't power 2 mSATA SSD's (a whopping 10W) without the need for a second USB connector for power?My only thought is that the PCIe card isn't engineered to deliver enough power on its own. PCIe slots are rated to deliver 75W on their own and they could always add a Molex, SATA, or 6-pin PEG power plug to the card if they need more power than the slot alone can provide. Since there aren't any heatsinks on any components on the card my guess is that nothing there needs more than a few watts of power and there's no reason they can't push enough power through the USB cable other than the cost to add the components is too high to justify for this cheap add-in card. If that's the case then I can't imagine high-powered USB 3.1 devices catching on because the biggest strength of USB is its low cost to implement compared to something like Thunderbolt. Manufacturers will just stick with low power over USB 3.1 for high data transfer rates and require a wall wart for anything over 5W like they always have.
DanNeely - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
The power distribution spec that offered upto 100W is optional, has always been optional, and has always been described as such in articles at reputable sites like this one.Also, only 8/16x cards can do 75W power. Smaller ones are only able to draw 25W. In both cases 10W is 3.3v, the remainder 12V.
Lastly, going above 60W would require a collection of VRMs similar to what you have around the CPU because the 100W level is at 20V and would need to be created on the card instead of just pumped from the PSU.
WithoutWeakness - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
I understand all of that. I recognize that they would need additional VRM circuitry on the PCIe card and would need to negotiate power requirements with the connected device. That's a given. What I'm irritated by is that they didn't just add a Molex, SATA, or 6-pin connector to provide the additional 12V power. I'm disappointed by ASUS's lack of foresight and the fact that they didn't include some sort of secondary power connector for this PCIe card to provide additional power to devices that may require it (including their own 10W dual-mSATA demo box).I don't expect every laptop, desktop, phone, tablet, or anything else that might be a host device to be able to provide 20V@5A. That would be unreasonable. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a $40 desktop PCIe card with a single USB port to be able to supply 10W over USB. The issue is that if someone buys this card then any device they try to plug in will either require less than 10W power draw or will need a second USB connector or wall wart for power.
The greatest appeal of USB has always been its low cost. Either the cost of implementation is too high or ASUS cheaped out on the power delivery to increase margins and gimped this card as a result. I'm hoping that it's the latter and we will see more reasonably priced options from other companies that fully support the new power delivery spec. If $40 is the expected price for a single-port USB 3.1 card that can't push 10W of power then USB 3.1 is dead on arrival.
teddoman - Thursday, March 12, 2015 - link
"If $40 is the expected price for a single-port USB 3.1 card that can't push 10W of power then USB 3.1 is dead on arrival."Where exactly are you getting this? The review says: "The Type-A versions will support 900 mA charging at 5V, whereas Type-C will do 3A at 5V, suitable for 15W." The spec sheet says the same thing. If you buy the PCIe card with a true Type C connector, then you're getting 3A at 5V which is the intended spec for USB 3.1.
eanazag - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Was that micro C port on the enclosure? It looked small. Hence it may require a second for power.phoenix_rizzen - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Paraphrasing the article:One Type-C connector (for data), 1 Micro-USB connector (for power).
SirKnobsworth - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Well, if the connection on the other side isn't also type c then it can't deliver any more power.megalee - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
It would have been nice to summarize the differences in specs of USB 3.0 vs. 3.1A5 - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
More speed, more power delivery, and the Type-C connector.frenchy_2001 - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Type-C is actually independent and backward compatible. The first implementations (I think from Nokia) were USB 2.0 on type-c.MikeMurphy - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
I can see the type-c connector gaining adoption but USB3.1 has such little benefit to most consumers I suspect it will be much slower.eddieobscurant - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
to achieve the usb 3.1 speeds you'll need an usb 3.1 cable right? Usb 3.0 cable will slow you down right? If you purchase just the add on card, does the usb3.1 cable come with it?SirKnobsworth - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
No. USB 3.0 cables should work fine. You needed new cables from 2.0 to 3.0 because they added more pins.mkozakewich - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
It's only a doubling, so I expect it uses the same cables. The point of USB Type-C is that it standardizes the end (instead of standard, mini, and micro) and is flippable. There shouldn't be much difference between 3.1 Type A and Type C.sna1970 - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Why are they using 2 Msata in Raid 0 doubling the power needed when we already have M2 PCIe SSD from Samsung ? not a smart move Asus ...sna1970 - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
They should include a 3.5 inch bay front USB 3.1 with this card ... no one likes rear ones... make a front connector on the card that is shared with the rear ones.sna1970 - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
one Question ,is this card Bootable ?
eanazag - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
The only reason I would buy it right now is for the higher wattage charging @ 15W.Charging devices in my house are a constant argument of whose is whose and where is one. A desktop sized charger is much harder to disappear with.
PCIe SSD or RAID enclosures are about all you can use to drive the bandwidth at the moment. Docking stations are the next sensible item. I would be interested in monitors that connect to the desktop for video (standard cable), data, and power. The monitor would have USB ports (two USB 3.0) and audio ports; basically quick access ports.
phoenix_rizzen - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Go to the local dept store, electronics store, whatever store, and pick up some wall chargers and USB cables. There's plenty of wall charges that plug into the outlet (covering both) and provide 1 external power outlet and a bunch of <1A and 2.1A USB ports. Make a couple of "charging stations" around the house (near the couch, in the kitchen, by the beds, etc) and then you'll never have to worry about "who took my charger?" again.I honestly could not tell you where the actual chargers for the phones and tablets are anymore. (I think they're tucked into the suitcases for travelling.) We just have "charging stations" around the house and in the car.
defter - Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - link
10W would still be enough for two mSATA SSDs. Besides, they could have implemented DC-DC conversion on their PCI-Express card to deliver at least 20W over type-C plug.It seems that Asus was very lazy and implemented type-C plug with standard USB3 power levels (0.9A = 4.5W). So we need to wait a bit more for real type-C products.
giby - Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - link
A quick look at the spec spelled everything out rather clearly. Power Delivery 2.0 requires a new Type-C cable that include four power/ground pairs, for a total of 24 pins.It's just my speculation but I'm guessing that we aren't going to see many devices that weren't already tasked with power delivery showing up with the capability to push 10, 25, or 100W. While it would be nice, I think that the new power specification will show up on portable power supplies and docking devices first. Especially in the desktop form factor, I see Type-A remaining predominant for some time and it simply doesn't have the conductors to carry the current.
Chaitanya - Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - link
Since this is asus I like to stay away from their products like a plague. I will wait till Gigabyte/Msi release their Usb 3.1 based motherboards.baii9 - Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - link
can we charge phones from computer as quick as a wall charger with USB 3.1?...Xajel - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
I have a question that I couldn't find an answer for after reading several articles about USB 3.1 in CES...Will the current USB 3.0 cases out support USB 3.1 also ?, I'm only talking about Type-A ports usually found in cases.. of course Type-C will need some time..
Regarding the ASUS prototype drive enclosure, I find the two cables requirement a little bit odd but understandable in the same time.
1- USB 3.1 is able to provide all the power that these drives will take + more to spare also, the spec. can handle charging the laptop.
2- looking the early stages of USB 3.1, not all USB ports will be able to handle such power requirement as most will just stick to the standard.
3- Even in the final design for the device, I don't think that every USB 3.1 port will be able provide the full power required for the drives, not to mention that it still backward compatible with USB 3.0 port which aren't capable of providing such power.
I still like the power delivery that USB 3.1 provides, and I really hope that manufacturers will depend more on it specially laptops, tablets & smartphones where they only need one or two Type-C port with one them capable of charging the device also... and laptop chargers will be able to charge all laptops, tablets & smartphones with the same cable... but I know this will need a long wait... specially that some companies sees that their power adapter business provide a lot of revenue ( specially DELL with their proprietary power adapter )
SirPerro - Monday, March 23, 2015 - link
Those two PCIe cards are seriously flawed. USB 3.1 for 2x type-A connectors OR 1x type-C connector with NO real power delivery? No thanks.All we need is a single PCIe card with 2x/3x type-C connectors with an aditional PSU connection for power delivery and a couple of Type-A adaptors bundled.
Type-C to Type-A adaptors should be stupidly cheap so I don't understand this laughable limitation of sticking to Type-A connectors.
Buying one of those is basically paying twice for either Type-C or power delivery in the future.
Laststop311 - Thursday, April 16, 2015 - link
There's really no point to spend extra money for usb 3.1 now. If there was a good reason to rush and buy usb 3.1 now then it might be worth it to rebuy it again when proper type c and 100 watt power are available but no devices available. I never bother buying extra ports that aren't natively integrated.SkOrPn - Friday, June 3, 2016 - link
Any difference between this Asus card and the Gigabyte GC-USB3.1 card? Both seem to have the exact same asmedia chip as far as I can tell, but the Gigabyte card is almost half the cost.