Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
Thread started 16 Dec 2011 (Friday) 09:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

USB 2.0 vs 3.0 comparsion

 
bespoke
Senior Member
Avatar
710 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
     
Dec 16, 2011 12:28 |  #16

ben_r_ wrote in post #13554671 (external link)
But of course. Something like this would do it: LINK (external link)

Provided that you have an open PCI-e 1X slot on your motherboard.

sweet. and it's cheap too!


Toronto Fashion Photographer (external link)
5D3 & 5D2s | 24 TS-E II, 24-70 II, 85L II, 100L, 70-200L II, 35 & 85 Zeiss ZE, Samyang 14, Sigma 50
Hasselblads + Leaf Aptus MFDB, Fuji X100, Epson 3880/9890

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
Avatar
15,893 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Dec 16, 2011 12:29 |  #17

Just ordered the Transcend and a USB 3 extension cable. $26 for the combo. Not bad.


[Gear List | Flickr (external link) | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protection (external link) /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lauderdalems
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
759 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jun 2006
     
Dec 16, 2011 12:41 |  #18

On a side note - I have a 3TB external 3.0 hard drive also running off the laptop. Makes backups a breeze


http://gamedayphotos.u​wa.edu/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Dec 17, 2011 05:41 |  #19

It would be really cool if people could test the speed of their USB3 readers. I'd be willing to bet a big pile of cash that some (a lot?) of them are the same speed as a good USB2. The best testing procedure is to use CrystalDiskMark (external link) which gives results like this...

IMAGE: http://www.frankhollis.com/temp/CF2.jpg

That's my ExpressCard reader - I don't have USB3 yet.

Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
7D_Shooter
Member
Avatar
92 posts
Joined Dec 2011
     
Dec 17, 2011 05:50 |  #20

lauderdalems wrote in post #13554002 (external link)
My new laptop (Window 7) came with two 3.0 USB ports an one 2.0 port.
I just got a 3.0 card reader and did a little comparison using a CF card with raw files.

transferring 3.56GB from flash card to laptop (Window 7)

using 2.0 connection it takes about 7 minutes and 20 seconds
using 3.0 connection it takes 1 minute and 15 seconds

My laptop does not have a built in reader that accepts CF cards.

Good stuff. For me, the difference was going from USB 2.0 to 1394b via a Lexar card reader and a Sonnet Firewire card.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
7D_Shooter
Member
Avatar
92 posts
Joined Dec 2011
     
Dec 17, 2011 05:51 |  #21

hollis_f wrote in post #13558127 (external link)
It would be really cool if people could test the speed of their USB3 readers. I'd be willing to bet a big pile of cash that some (a lot?) of them are the same speed as a good USB2. The best testing procedure is to use CrystalDiskMark (external link) which gives results like this...

QUOTED IMAGE

That's my ExpressCard reader - I don't have USB3 yet.

If they are the same as USB 2.0, it's because they are bottle necked by the source media.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Dec 17, 2011 06:23 |  #22

7D_Shooter wrote in post #13558141 (external link)
If they are the same as USB 2.0, it's because they are bottle necked by the source media.

Impossible to be sure without testing. I'd be highly surprised if some of the less trustworthy suppliers didn't just dump out a load of USB3 compatible devices. After all, there's a least one USB2 reader on Amazon that claims to be UDMA, but is one of the slowest readers I've ever used. But the Amazon page has several people praising its high speed.

Besides, who's going to spend extra on a USB3 reader when they've only got cards slower than 30 MB/s?


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
7D_Shooter
Member
Avatar
92 posts
Joined Dec 2011
     
Dec 17, 2011 07:21 |  #23

hollis_f wrote in post #13558202 (external link)
Impossible to be sure without testing. I'd be highly surprised if some of the less trustworthy suppliers didn't just dump out a load of USB3 compatible devices. After all, there's a least one USB2 reader on Amazon that claims to be UDMA, but is one of the slowest readers I've ever used. But the Amazon page has several people praising its high speed.

Besides, who's going to spend extra on a USB3 reader when they've only got cards slower than 30 MB/s?

Ah, now I see your point.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DisrupTer911
Goldmember
Avatar
2,452 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 29
Joined Jul 2008
Location: NJ, USA
     
Dec 17, 2011 09:25 |  #24

For a while computer case manufacturers were using a blue internal USB cable to the front ports and marketing as usb3.0.

People caught on complained big time about that lol

I trust lexar won't lie like that ... I hope hahaha


www.vividemotionphotograph​y.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pbelarge
Goldmember
Avatar
2,835 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Westchester County, NY
     
Dec 17, 2011 10:55 |  #25

ben_r_ wrote in post #13554622 (external link)
This one by chance? LINK (external link)

If not could you post a link to the one you bought?

I had been kicking around this one: LINK (external link)

I bought this same unit and I like it alot, it is also designed to make sliding the card into it much simpler.


just a few of my thoughts...
Pierre

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EmaginePixel
Goldmember
Avatar
1,944 posts
Likes: 42
Joined Sep 2008
Location: So Cal
     
Dec 17, 2011 11:33 |  #26

I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of USB3.0 vs Firewire. I love my Sandisk FW reader but for some reason it's intermittently kicking read error.

I'm with Ben... but since my media workstation has USB3, I might just go the Transcend route.


"Yesterday is history. Tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift. That’s why its called the present” - Kung Fu Panda
EmaginePixel.com website (external link) ----- SportsShooter profile (external link) ----- Facebook page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,702 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2530
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Dec 17, 2011 11:48 |  #27

mellofelow wrote in post #13559031 (external link)
I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of USB3.0 vs Firewire.

According to the standards of the specifications,

  • USB 2.0 specification runs at a theoretical maximum speed of 480Mbps, and can supply power
  • USB 3.0 has a theoretical maximum rate of 5Gbps, and is full duplex, meaning it can upload and download simultaneously (it's bi-directional); USB 2.0 is only half duplex.
  • eSATA is an external connection that runs at the same speed as the internal SATA 1.0 bus, and has a maximum theoretical of 3Gbps
  • USB3 about six times faster than FireWire 800, which is a full duplex communication at 800Mbps.
  • USB3 also provides another advantage; while eSATA is faster than FireWire 800, unlike FireWire eSATA cannot supply power. USB 3.0 has the advantage of being faster than both, even while supplying power.

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DiMAn0684
Goldmember
Avatar
1,933 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Boston, MA
     
Dec 17, 2011 11:49 as a reply to  @ pbelarge's post |  #28

Here's the speed difference I'm seeing with Lexar Professional 16GB 400x CF card. The card has been formatted in camera, and had some images during the test. Maybe the results would be different for a card formatted in the PC?

First reader: Lexar Professional USB 3.0
Second reader: Cables Unlimited USB 2.0 (non-UDMA, as I understand)

Edit: wanted to point out that my results are in line with Rob Galbraith's test (Link (external link))


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Canon 5D MkII | Canon 16-35mm f/4 | Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM | Canon 24-105mm f/4 | Tamron 70-300mm VC | Canon 430EX II | Benro A2682TB1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,702 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2530
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Dec 17, 2011 12:01 |  #29

DiMAn0684 wrote in post #13559070 (external link)
Here's the speed difference I'm seeing with Lexar Professional 16GB 400x CF card. The card has been formatted in camera, and had some images during the test. Maybe the results would be different for a card formatted in the PC?

First reader: Lexar Professional USB 3.0
Second reader: Cables Unlimited USB 2.0 (non-UDMA, as I understand)

Edit: wanted to point out that my results are in line with Rob Galbraith's test (Link (external link))

While USB3 vs. USB2 should net 10x speed, this test illustrates the fundamental principle that in spite of the theoretical speed differences of I/O standards, the true effective speed is likely to be limited by the computer, its I/O processor and I/O bus, and also the interface to the harddrive as well as the harddrive speeds themselves and the true I/O of the memory devices in the data transfer.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DiMAn0684
Goldmember
Avatar
1,933 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Boston, MA
     
Dec 17, 2011 12:09 |  #30

Wilt wrote in post #13559102 (external link)
While USB3 vs. USB2 should net 10x speed, this test illustrates the fundamental principle that in spite of the theoretical speed differences of I/O standards, the true effective speed is likely to be limited by the computer, its I/O processor and I/O bus, and also the interface to the harddrive as well as the harddrive speeds themselves and the true I/O of the memory devices in the data transfer.

first and foremost, in this particular case, the speed is limited by the source. Even before you start hitting bottlenecks along the data path you'll be limited by the fact that the memory card speed ratings are way below the theoretical limit of USB 3.0. With that said 200%+ increase in transfer speed is well worth the $25 paid for the reader & USB controller.


Canon 5D MkII | Canon 16-35mm f/4 | Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM | Canon 24-105mm f/4 | Tamron 70-300mm VC | Canon 430EX II | Benro A2682TB1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,232 views & 0 likes for this thread
USB 2.0 vs 3.0 comparsion
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Accessories 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is bushpilot
1163 guests, 205 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.