If you think about purchasing a new device or decided to improve the already existing, then the choice of USB 3.0 is obvious. Therefore, with backward compatibility, everything is not bad. We did not reveal any significant differences from connecting via the "native" USB 2.0 controller (), except that slightly below the recording speed. To connect, we used both microusb 3.0 cable and normal microUSB, as the results differed only on the size of the error we will give only one of them.
Already today, the performance of hard drives connected via USB is not inferior to the discs connected via SATA.įinally, we decided to check how external boxes behave being connected via USB 2.0. Considering that SSD nobody will put into external boxes for economic considerations, and the speed of the most productive mass HDD does not exceed 100-130 MB / s, then the result is simply wonderful. However, everything is not bad, three times faster than USB 2.0. In this case, the restriction of current controllers models come into effect. If the records of special problems did not arise, then we have a fairly significant reduction in productivity. Let's see how things are at a more speed SSD. Now connect it via USB 3.0.Īs you can see the speed of the USB connection ceased to be a narrow neck, the disk capacity of the connected via USB 3.0 is no different from the disk performance connected via SATA. The values \u200b\u200bare very low, but it is not surprising, before us is a typical "laptop" disk with a speed of rotation of the spindle of 5400 RPM and no complaints about performance. The position saved an additional controller on the chip Renesas μpd720202.However, the need to buy additional components can not be happy, and if you do not cheap USB 3.0 cables here, then buying a device with a new interface is still able to fly into a penny.įirst of all, we connected the hard disk directly through the SATA to get the starting point to compare productivity. It is a very problem controller and call a cloudless compatibility situation we cannot. As not all USB 3.0 controllers outlined, the controllers are "equally useful": controller Etron EJ168.With which many Gigabyte boards are staffed, refused to work stably with an external boxing, after some time the disk simply turned off, continuing to be present in the system and issuing errors when trying to appeal to it. 320 GB SATA-II 300 Fujitsu 2.5 "5400 RPM 8MB and solid-state drive 60 GB OCZ AGILITY 2. The reason for testing was the purchase of an external box for 2.5 "disk Zalman ZM-HE130 BlackThis device refers to the average price category, made of aluminum and has a rich configuration.Īs participants in the test, the hard drive was already familiar to previous testing. Most often you can connect your USB 3.0 devices using a USB 2.0 cable, another question as they will work at the same time, but not vice versa. Technically, this is implemented by adding additional data lines and increasing the number of USB cable conductors, so USB 3.0 connectors are not fully compatible with USB 2.0, although the high degree of compatibility was still saved. What are the fundamental differences of USB 3.0 from previous generations of this interface? First of all, an increased up to 4.8 Gbit / s (as in SATA 6 GB / s) bandwidth, the current strength of one port also increased from 500 mA to 900 mA, which allows you to abandon the external power supply for many peripheral devices.
Then we did not carry out such tests in view of the small choice and high cost of USB 3.0 equipment, today there are enough devices with this interface in an acceptable price range, so we decided to return to this issue. Hard disk performance when connecting them via USB, leaving a new USB 3.0 interface for the sample.