http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/4...underboltr.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Engadget
Sources:Quote:
Originally Posted by Intel
1) http://www.intel.com/technology/io/t...bolt/index.htm
2) http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/24/a...s-thunderbolt/
3) http://www.apple.com/thunderbolt/
More info:
Quote:
Originally Posted by onethreehill
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowfat
I'm wondering since Thunderbolt is based off PCI-Express if we will see external GPU solutions for mobile stations. I remember Asus and MSI coming up with something similar but the speed sucked.
So it begins...
Are there any peripherals with Thunderbolt support being showcased already?
I'm skeptical about this ever taking over USB. USB's just got too much market penetration. I mean, where's 1394 now? Sure, you can still get it on the more expensive boards, but the cheaper ones don't bother any more. There's very few devices that use it, too.
Anything can be phased out. It would just take time and the right product. Im looking forward to seeing what happens. We wont see usb disappear for a long while thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
Yeah, parallel and serial port market penetration didn't stop them being phased out.Quote:
Originally Posted by \/icious
This is huge...
could it scale to 100Gbps?
I can only see the positive in thunderbolt, no other standard shares another standard and thus makes this the king of the hill.
http://www.sweclockers.com/image/red...ull&k=887d366f
I told you guys Intel would have power over cable.
Many people said the same thing about USB when Serial R232 already had all the market penetration.Quote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
It depends how Intel charges with Lightpeak.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Thunderbolt is just name for coper version insted of optics, so it is not renamed.
This is a great move based on a great vision. Combining high-speed data and HD video connections in a single cable is a big achieving.
Those who are concerned about the lack of peripherals for this new technology, or are trying to stick to USB3, are probably suffering from some kind of fanatic views.
The OP and the links clearly mention "electrical or optical cables".Quote:
Originally Posted by n!Cola
give me a break. think for a second, please. there is very little use for this. and the only use they did show was a RAID array that didn't even exceed ESATA speed.
wow, I can put my raid array on the same cable as my monitor? thanks.
this is just an intel money grab. and apple loves getting an expensive new differentiating feature. this is what the apple brand is all about, exclusivity.
they did show this actually:
http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/201...47_540x360.jpg
a SSD NAS doing 700MB/s over a 3 foot wire. now, lets forget that people are already doing this inside their cases with "raid cards".
if you DO need to do this (3 feet away from your pc), then thunderbolt will be a good way to do it. fiber channel is more expensive, esata will take more cables, and SAS/infiniband/whatever will be some combination of expensive and more cables. so thunderbolt wins this round. unless you just put the ssds in your case with trays like http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-002-_-Product and call it a day.
This is the first step in transitioning much of the computer from silicon/electricity to optics/light.Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
The roadmap has lightpeak scalable to 100gbps. I really think you're missing the entire point completely. There is now a port on the side of a laptop that can transfer 10gbps each way..Do you know what that means?
The tech had to come out first, same old chicken and the egg..It had to come out first before people could start making devices for it..
Besides, one universal port that supports pci-express, displayport/hdmi/dvi , usb, ethernet etc..I'm all for it.
Not everything is always about money man..Intel has been developing this tech for decades..Intel is smart and realized Apple is more progressive and liberal with cutting out legacy stuff and adding new stuff. OSX is a smaller market, one manufacturer to worry about and its on a higher end boutigue computer that people would buy anyway..
Smarty move for intel dropping this on Apple first than the PC world. think about it..
one immediate benefit from this new tech is that it will reduce cable clutter. You can daisy chain them together too. Win for staying organized!
[QUOTE=
.........Besides, one universal port that supports pci-express, displayport/hdmi/dvi , usb, ethernet etc..I'm all for it.
[/QUOTE]
"One port to bind them all":ROTF: interesting tech that for sure!
Yeah, it's quite promising.
Imagine, in the future...
Instead of DVI / DisplayPort / HDMI and FireWire / eSATA - optical TB.
Instead of USB - electrical TB.
Instead of Ethernet - optical TB (I suppose ?).
All driven by a single controller. No additional chip mess. No different ports and running around looking for cables and adapters for your monitor.
Good stuff. :up:
But this is in theory... And this might be one big flop, we'll see! :rofl:
Aye Apple make enough products for it to reach the mass market and then Intel just sell the chips. Intel trying to push this with USB still around wouldn't cut it but Apple can sell pork to a rabbi.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenknics
The professional market will eat it up, A Samsung F3 can swamp 1Gb LAN and 10Gb networks aren't cheap, then Intel releases a wonder cable.
This is EXACTLY how Apple should market this tech after their success with Magic Mouse and iPad beating netbooks with magic! :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconyu
It means no one will use it because they don't have anything that moves so fast. I'm not being luddite here, I'm being practical. Fast links aren't news, fast media is. And you have none. Unless you've got that SSD raid array, that is, which is fine if you do. Most people will not, however.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenknics
And this cable does not have ethernet, and it does not have USB, so you didn't have a reason for implying it did. And everything in business is about profit, get a clue.
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/3...gthepointk.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
(he means that you'll be able to use an external video card)
Although you'll probably need more links than just one. Like 3 of them in parallel have the same bandwidth as 16x PCIe 1.X
E: although they claim they can get it up to 100 gbps, which I guess is actually faster than PCIe 2.0 and only slightly slower than PCIe 3.0. If I were a laptop manufacturer, I'd start pushing USB3 as hard as I can, while completely ignoring LightPeak though... wouldn't want people to simply buy a desktop video card rather than a whole new laptop.
I remember someone doing a test with high-end GPUs a year or two back and dropping down to I think an x4 PCIe link yielded something like 80% of the performance. I'd be fine with 80% of a GTX 580 linked to my MBP :DQuote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
It supports Ethernet and USB protocols, and making an adapter is possible. So he was right to imply it, as these were written on the Intel link.Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
One socket can do all that and all you can do is say we don't need it?Quote:
Extend to reach other I/O technologies by using adapters that use widely available PCI Express controllers. It's simple to create a Gigabit Ethernet, or FireWire, or eSATA adapters using existing device PCI Express drivers.
my laptop packed it in recently, good timing :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
Quote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconyu
He's just trolling and being negative for no reason. Batman I've been following this tech for awhile. Even if it didn't show up in apple's implementation, intel since day one, has planned this to replace all ports eventually and one of the first things they did was make it support ethernet and USB, the current backbone of our computers. Lightpeak would be doomed from the start if it didnt work/talk with ethernet or usb.
Are just an amd fanboy or what? This is a really legit tech and has A LOT going in its favor. Are you just mad because Intel came up with it?
Again, the chicken or egg argument applies to any new tech that comes out that surpasses our current needs. You really haven't had anything compelling to say that we don't already know. :down:
I do all my work on my laptop. A lot of heavy video rendering. It'd be nice to have a lightpeak port linked to external vid card or another computer all together and use it for faster rendering.
Bring this on!
P.S. it's been said, but one cable to rule them all? thats enough right there.. Cable clutter out the door! and daisy chaining? I have 4-5 things plugged into my laptop almost 24/7..I would love to reduce the cable amount with nice bendable optical cables that can daisy chain!
P.S.S. Aja, Apogee, Avid, Blackmagic, LaCie, Promise and Western Digital have signed on to add Thunderbolt support to their devices
Avid is the key here..Very surprised..big move
Wow this is epic, big thumbs up!!Quote:
full-length HD movie (roughly 10 - 20GB in size) in less than 30 seconds
LightPeak alas Thunderbolt is awesome and I am or was very excited about it until I heard that Apple will have dips on the tech.
that will basically bury it.
What are you talking about? Just because Apple is the first adopter doesn't mean a thing. It isn't proprietary.Quote:
Originally Posted by bot@xs
i sure hope you are right.
I would say...
Bringing it through Apple is a genious idea from Intel.... Apple has a huge crowd of very loyal customers, and extreme fanatics... Reminds me a little of Islam...
Using this for kick off, is likely to work like a gem, finally Intel makes a wise decision.... After that "Will.I.Am" joke, one thought all hope was gone, because that is fair to say completely retarded.
An In Depth Look at Intel’s Thunderbolt Technology
From Hardware Canucks
10-20GB in 30 sec? I'm buying it.
So youre trying to say its worthless because it cant be saturated? Not sure im following your logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
Leading Hard Drive Makers to Support Intel Thunderbolt.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/storage...underbolt.html
Hopefully this will be on Ivy Bridge mobos...
Considering they don't have the technology (other than enterprise SAS systems) to even push USB 3.0, that's a bit of a hollow victory IMO. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by onethreehill
RaidQuote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
did they say that today? I don't think so. your imagination is strong. well, lets hope for the best. maybe your dreams can come true.Quote:
Originally Posted by iddqd
it supports pci express. you can put a lot of stuff on pci express. don't go around saying it supports ethernet and usb, because that is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconyu
a company has to go buy an ethernet or usb chip from an ethernet or usb chip company, buy a thunderbold chip, build an adapter, and then thunderbolt "supports" it. these are different things.
and by the way, did you ever consider that everyone already has the ethernet and usb chips built into their motherboards? why would anyone want an adapter for these on thunderbolt? so you can put an ethernet port on your monitor? give me a break. temper your enthusiasm with some realism.
I'm saying if people and manufacturers won't pay for something not needed. eSATA and USB are now included "free" on every chipset.Quote:
Originally Posted by \/icious
Then consider the cost of thunderbolt. It probably costs a company like Asus about $10, +/-$5, to buy that chip. And to pay for that in their product, they need to charge an extra $20. Is that a smart business decision? Do their customers need more than eSATA and USB already provides?
don't answer these questions. for the answer let's wait until thunderbolt shows up on PC motherboards.
i bet intel will just start bundling them with their chipsets to get market share
how stupid do you think they are?
Obviously they have to do some massive discounts intially to get this technology widely adopted.
I can see your point, but the SATA consortium is already planning the demise of eSATA. The new external SATA design calls for both data AND power to be in the same cable. Sure it will reduce clutter and make it easier to hook up an external drive, but it will also increase power strain on the hosting computer. They are basically remaking eSATA into what it SHOULD have been in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
As far as ThunderBolt is concerned, I say bring it on! Less clutter and higher bandwidth is ALWAYS welcome! As much as it pains me to say it, Apple does have a way of pushing technologies forward so its part in ThunderBolt is integral. Hell, you see how much crap is available for iPods? Thats the kind of growth that we can see for ThunderBolt with Apple on board.
Any source indicates Thunderbolt is not proprietary?Quote:
Originally Posted by lowfat
USB is maintained by a consortium.
The LaCie Little Big Disk is one of the first drives to be announced. Looks pretty sweet as it's powered by two Intel 510 SSDs.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Source
http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/...ies-SSDs-2.jpg
or thunderbolt could end up as isolated as firewire and someone else has to come along and does something similar (USB) in order to make it a fair and open market.
that is my greatest concern with intel giving apple dips on this. i hope it's just a head start and as isolated as apple is form the rest of the pc market they would greatly benefit from this as would the pc market.
and i hope that intel is smart enough to not let apple talk them into a propitiatory structure with this technology.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ntil_2012.html
So it is Apple exclusive tech till spring 2012 ?
Does this imply that 3D work performed by the AMD GPU has to travel back through the PCIe bus in order to be displayed through a Thunderbolt connector?Quote:
Thunderbolt ports can't be added to existing PCs via an expansion card; Intel says the only way to have it is to buy a system or logic board that incorporates the new Thunderbolt controller chip. That's because the Thunderbolt chip needs direct access to both the system's video and PCI Express architecture.
yeah! this is the best thing intel has done since c2d imo! :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gogeta
glad i didnt jump on the usb3 bandwagon, i knew this was coming :D
ill make sure my next gen smartphone has thunderbolt!
dont get it... so having a pciE thunderbolt bridge chip with integrated display port engine doesnt work... why?Quote:
Thunderbolt ports can't be added to existing PCs via an expansion card; Intel says the only way to have it is to buy a system or logic board that incorporates the new Thunderbolt controller chip. That's because the Thunderbolt chip needs direct access to both the system's video and PCI Express architecture.
Cause they need to sell boards, I guess... :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
I want a DIY ViDock based on this instead of the one I have :) much more bandwidth, should give almost 100% performance of a pci-e 2.0
If Apple helped fund development, then that may be the case but IMO it would be an absolutely ridiculous decision by both parties. It would choke off competition in a segment that is DRIVEN by the PC's widespread market share.Quote:
Originally Posted by n!Cola
Not allowing PC manufacturers to implement Thunderbolt from the onset will basically push it into a niche which is NOT something that will aid acceptance.
Also, this little tidbit is patently wrong:
Intel details in their White Paper that backwards compatibility CAN be achieved by using a PCI-E bridge chip in parallel with a TB controller. This in effect would allow either add-in cards or stand-alone adaptors to be created. The press conference never mentioned that it wasn't possible, they just said that it would take additional logic to be implemented.Quote:
The new standard is not backwardly compatible with USB 3.0, and Thunderbolt ports can't be added to existing PCs via an expansion card; Intel says the only way to have it is to buy a system or logic board that incorporates the new Thunderbolt controller chip. That's because the Thunderbolt chip needs direct access to both the system's video and PCI Express architecture.
Here's the passage from the White Paper:
Quote:
Users can always connect to their other non-Thunderbolt products at the end of a daisy chain by using Thunderbolt technology adapters (e.g., to connect to native PCI Express
devices like eSata, Firewire, etc.). These adapters can be easily built using a Thunderbolt controller with off-the-shelf PCI Express-to-“other technology” controllers.
I think you are misunderstanding. that quote is talking about something different. it says a company can build an ethernet adapter that plugs into thunderbolt. meanwhile that mac site says a company cannot build a pci-e card that outputs thunderbolt because there is no way to get the video to the card.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
they didn't mention anything about phones, and there is no small thunderbolt connector, so I don't know where you got that ideaQuote:
Originally Posted by saaya
that report is unclear. basically bad reporting.Quote:
Originally Posted by n!Cola
That to me reads like board makers dont want it. They're taking a wait-and-see approach and told intel "maybe next year". But since they're unclear, how can you tell?Quote:
PC makers are expected to begin adding Thunderbolt to their machines next spring, giving Apple a year to trailblaze the technology
Well, a commenter says this: "According to the CNET article, it's not that Apple has an exclusive. Intel just thinks that PC manufacturers will probably wait until their next design cycles to implement."
PROMISE Technology Announces Pegasus Storage Line (DAS)Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
LaCie Outs Little Big Disk
Batman must be hand picked by AMD to just take negative dumps all over this thread. Great insight man, great insight. Truly contributing to the conversation!
Ever think of any usage scenario other than your own?
I'd love to plug 1 light peak cable from my laptop to my 24" monitor and then all the rest of my peripherals into the monitor..kinda like how it already is but with 10 less cables.
Why would AMD care about Lightpeak? It does not compete directly with any of their products and anyway i wouldnt say that bamtan2 is an AMD fanboy..
I am kinda of excited because I see eSATA as a failure and USB3 adaption is so dang slow.
For my personal usage, I can see one usage for Thunderbolt: It is to separate my rig and storage compartment completely. I like having a central storage (sort of NAS but for more friendly access and usage).
Anything that benefits Intel, whether or not the product competes with AMD, doesn't bode well for AMDroids.Quote:
Originally Posted by h0bbes
There is nothing in the passage I quoted which indicates they are talking about Ethernet.Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
And yes, just like the DisplayPort functions can be used without passing a PCI-E signal to a secondary device, the PCI-E signal can be sent without piggybacking on a display signal.
It was an example. Let me clarify:Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
http://www.intel.com/technology/io/t...bolt/index.htmQuote:
Thunderbolt technology enables engineers to:
Extend to reach other I/O technologies by using adapters that use widely available PCI Express controllers. It's simple to create a Gigabit Ethernet, or FireWire, or eSATA adapters using existing device PCI Express drivers.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-20...ap;editorPicksQuote:
10:34 a.m. (Dong Ngo) : There won't be add-in TB adapters, you'll need a new computer/motherboard that supports TB.
So, like I said. There are no adapters which output Thunderbolt. There are only adapters for pcie devices which plug into Thunderbolt. "Adapter" is apparently not a clearly defined word right now, thus some confusion.
Check out some Apple-centric sites. Word is the iPad2 will have lightpeak.Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
Perhaps you can explain why this card has a lightpeak chip on it?
http://macpcwiz.com/blog/wp-content/...ightpeak-2.jpg
Later from the same interview:Quote:
So, like I said. There are no adapters which output Thunderbolt. There are only adapters for pcie devices which plug into Thunderbolt. "Adapter" is apparently not a clearly defined word right now, thus some confusion.
Sounds to me like he was backtracking a little. By claiming there will be no add-in cards, they wont risk hurting any sales of brand new, very expensive mac book pro's.Quote:
10:40 a.m. (Josh Lowensohn) : Q: Will we see add-on cards for laptops?
A: Like using the PCI Express slot? We don't have a specific implementation to talk to you about that today.
That's the thing though. Intel has bypassed the whole "anti-competitive practice" thing by allowing apple to use it. It's not going to be a product exclusive to intel chipsets. If this technology takes off and starts heading down the path to becoming a standard in the industry, AMD will be dead in the water without it. In that case, they will have to pay intel their royalties to adapt the technology.Quote:
Originally Posted by h0bbes
Unless AMD has their own implementation of this tech, they're going to have to get it from Intel. Seeing as Intel is a much larger company, AMD isn't going to be able to have a competing standard. They simply do not have the money to go on such a campaign. Therefore, if Thunderbolt is successful, AMD is going to need it to survive.
I like this tech so far. The fact that it's a blanket technology for USB3.0, eSATA, SATA3, and all the video adaptor ports (with sound), Light peak has the makings of a highly successful standard in the future. I mean, if you can channel virtually anything down one cable, wouldn't you use it? No more going out looking for a specific cable type. All you would need is a TB cable (sounds like a bad disease :p:)
Seriously though, I could swear TB is already taken by a disease that affects the lungs.
"Hey guys, I just got my TB cable from Newegg. *cough* This cough has been bothering me for a few days. *cough* *cough* I think I need to see a doctor."
Nice going Intel. :rofl:
Am I the only person here who sees the irony in Apple getting their hands on a new interface which has almost limitless potential, is ground breaking innovative and will provide the end user with a lot more connectivity options.
We all know that Apple will lock it down tight with DRM and their propitiatory interface that Light Peak/Thunderbolt is going to be crippled on the Apple Platform.
I am looking forward to when LightPeak/Thunderbolt is unveiled on the PC Platform, THEN we will see what can be achieved with this new, innovative and ground breaking technology with almost limitless potential.
John
another player using his imagination. all rumors and guesses. you don't know what ipad2 will have, and you don't know what that board is for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew LB
meanwhile I'm talking about facts. Intel didn't talk about ipad2, Intel didn't talk about mobile devices, Intel didn't talk about small mobile plugs, Intel didn't talk about Thunderbolt expansion cards.
there is news, and then there is imagination.
If Intel really made it free, then there is no problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Pistol
Otherwise AMD and other ARM-related platform will suffer.
Intel: No Plans for Support of Other Protocols over Thunderbolt.
Thunderbolt to Remain PCIe and mDP Solution
Even though originally Light Peak was meant to support a number of completely different protocols, its final implementation - Thunderbolt 1.0 - only supports two. As a result, those device makers, who want compliancy with the tech should acquire a controller from Intel.
"PCI Express and DisplayPort are supported natively. Other protocols can be supported via adapters," said Dave Salvator, a spokesman for Intel, in an interview with X-bit labs.
At this point Intel does not comment whether it plans to support the Thunderbolt - previously known as Light Peak - by its chipsets and when. Besides, the company believes that the TB will complement USB, but not replace the USB 3.0.
"We see Thunderbolt and USB 3.0 as complementary, we continue to support USB 3.0," added Mr. Salvator.
Using adapters or other means it will be possible for device makers to comply to the TB standard.
"If you can make a device use PCI Express, it can run on Thunderbolt," said the Intel spokesperson.
Thunderbolt technology supports two low-latency communications protocols - PCI Express for data transfer and DisplayPort for displays. Thunderbolt technology works on data streams in both directions, at the same time, so users get the benefit of full bandwidth in both directions, over a single cable. With the two independent channels, a full 10Gb/s of bandwidth (something not truly needed for HDDs these days) can be provided for the first device in the chain of the devices. All Thunderbolt technology devices share a common Mini DisplayPort connector. Intel's Thunderbolt controllers interconnect a PC and other devices, transmitting and receiving packetized traffic for both PCIe and DisplayPort protocols and thus makers HDDs need to develop or use additional controllers to make their drives compatible with the TB I/O interface.
Intel claims that the adoption rate of the new I/O technology will not be considerably limited. Still, it is aimed currently at professionals rather than on typical consumers.
"The combination of the very fast data transfer and beyond-HD display support on a single slender cable has great appeal for HD media creators, especially who work on laptops. Those same features also solve the big challenges posed by the growing HD media libraries many of us now own," stated Mr. Salvator.
Source: Xbit
Well, USB3 makes a lot of sense to use for devices that don't need insane throughput. Plus the infrastructure is built already.
http://www.wegotserved.com/2011/02/2...king-big-disk/Quote:
Originally Posted by qcmadness
This article is about the LaCie drive but mentions that it is proprietary.
Though there are strong rumors that Nikon's D4 will have a Thunderbolt connection which would lead to market assumptions being made that it will be wide spread and readily available upon the D4's release.
dudes. this is the future. get over it. They already have a succesor to this that is WAY faster and better. try 50GBPS.http://hothardware.com/News/Intel-An...-Breakthrough/
LightPeak isnt going away. Intel will not let it.
lets see, we lock all peripheral connections down to one. we integrate NB/SB and bring them on die. then we bring PCIE controller on-die as well. then we come up with this wonderful new device that is piggybacking over pcie until it replaces it.
this is the groundwork for optical computing, and also the progression of Intel owning EVERYTHING. they want it all on-die and the methods of connecting to that over their own proprietary connection. smart business move.
this one benefits us though. lots. hit the wiki if you dont get it.
ive been following this one for years, and to see it come to fruition is awesome. i couldnt be happier! you are aboutu to start seeing some radical new things in computing, and this is the preparation for them.
I don't see how this is groundbreaking. It provides one common interface, but in the end you still need a hub or something to split the PCIE lanes into all your standard fare - eSATA, USB, etc.
It might be more convenient, smushing them all together into one interface, but in it's just another interface for peripherals to use. For older peripherals, you will still need to have an adapter.
While this looks very cool, traditional Hard drives will have a very hard time putting this to good use. Until SSD drives come way down in price, its usability in the home market will be very limited.
better make flash drives faster :D
love a flash drive with 700 MB/sec transfer speed
why limit yourself to nand? why not consider memristors and such, what about the next next gen? thats where this is headed (hopefully)
Until all ports are replaced by lightpeak ports, this is just another interconnect solution. For that to work, one would probably need an agnostic transfer medium, a hardware level demuxer / muxer, and most importantly, software control to instantaneously implement new standards that new devices might need or introduce.
Now that they use a displayport cable, is that supported by default or would the TB cable need an adabter to connect from the computers port to a DP display? Or do we need new monitors with TB ports to use this?
thunderbolt is backwards compatible with displayport and displayport cables.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mech0z
thunderbolt itself uses thunderbolt cables.
could this be used for external VGAs with nvidia optimus or the Lucid software?
it could be interesting,
but apart from that is quite good to keep the connector compatible with the displayport, and there are many new possibilities, connecting many devices with decent performance through one cable
Already been implented in the new macbook pro's.. now its a matter to get this onto desktops!!
From Xbit -
AMD: Thunderbolt Is Just Another Proprietary Standard
Advanced Micro Devices, the second largest supplier of x86 microprocessors on the globe and the designer of half of the world's discrete graphics adapters, said that Intel Corp.'s recently introduced Thunderbolt input/output technology will become just another proprietary standard with not a lot of chances to be adopted widely. The chip designer also doubted that the TB actually brings any tangible improvements.
"Existing standards offer remarkable connectivity and together far exceed the 10Gb/s peak bandwidth of Thunderbolt. These solutions meet and exceed the bandwidth utilization of many peripherals," a spokesperson for AMD said.
AMD did not take part in the development of Thunderbolt technology and therefore will not be able to support it natively in the foreseeable future. In addition, the company does not see a lot of prospects for Thunderbolt in the short-term future as it does not substantially outperform current generation I/O technologies and sometimes even offers lower bandwidth. Coupled with the lack of devices that really take advantage of extreme throughput and the fact that Thunderbolt is a proprietary tech for now, the situation does not seem to be good for the interconnection.
"The DisplayPort1.2 standard offers up to 17Gb/s of peak bandwidth for displays. [...] Many AMD-based platforms support USB 3.0 which offers 4.8Gb/s of peak bandwidth, AMD natively supports SATA 6Gb/s with our 8-series chipsets. [Meanwhile], the total bandwidth stated for a Thunderbolt channel is only 20% higher than one PCI Express 3.0 lane and about 52% higher than a single USB 3.0 port," claimed the official for AMD.
The designer of graphics processors also pointed out that Thunderbolt uses the mini DisplayPort connector and that the solution [when actually utilized] essentially reduces bandwidth available for displays connected to the mDP port. For example, AMD recently announced a multi-stream technology with the Radeon HD 6800-series graphics cards that enables a single cable to link multiple displays for additional display flexibility employing AMD Eyefinity technology. Essentially, this multi-display tech if implemented into a laptop, will not be compatible with TB.
"Employing Thunderbolt in the DisplayPort connector implementation decreases the bandwidth available for DisplayPort reducing the bandwidth available for various multi-display configurations," stated the company.
Although manufacturers of external hard disk drives, such as Seagate Technologies and Western Digital, do support Thunderbolt and plan to introduce HDDs featuring the interconnector later this year, it is clear that only high-speed solid-state drives will be able to actually utilize 10Gb/s of bandwidth. In fact, there are generally no devices - apart from external graphics processors - that can use 10Gb/s of bandwidth over the PCI Express protocol. Moreover, graphics cards actually require more than 10Gb/s. All-in-all, the actual market prospects of Thunderbolt seem rather gloomy.
"Consumers generally benefit by having standard, high-speed ports available on their mobile devices. Proprietary ports, or the requirement of a dongle to employ those industry-standard ports may be an obstacle to consumers having the full computing experience at home or on the road," assumed the official for AMD.
Previously known as Light Peak, Thunderbolt technology supports two low-latency communications protocols - PCI Express for data transfer and DisplayPort for displays. Thunderbolt technology works on data streams in both directions, at the same time, so users get the benefit of full bandwidth in both directions, over a single cable. With the two independent channels, a full 10Gb/s of bandwidth can be provided for the first device in the chain of the devices. All Thunderbolt technology devices share a common Mini DisplayPort connector. Intel's Thunderbolt controllers interconnect a PC and other devices, transmitting and receiving packetized traffic for both PCIe and DisplayPort protocols and thus makers need to develop or use additional controllers to make their products compatible with the TB I/O interface.
Intel claims that the adoption rate of the new I/O technology will not be considerably limited. Still, it is aimed currently at professionals rather than on typical consumers.
"The combination of the very fast data transfer and beyond-HD display support on a single slender cable has great appeal for HD media creators, especially who work on laptops. Those same features also solve the big challenges posed by the growing HD media libraries many of us now own," a spokesman for Intel said last week.
Source
Pipe down, get back to your corner, and concentrate on your CPU/GPU's AMD. What connectors have you come up with as of late hmm o.O? Just cos Intel are making connectors. And Mobile SoC's. And basic Integrated video. And leading performance wise in currently released CPU's.
This connector will be awesome. As soon as it comes to fruition in Australia, I'm in :-)
knew amd was gonna jump in and call it all a fad
kinda makes sense too, since this new port is really not a new thing, but a fix to an issue that is quite minor (one port for all things)
given the probably high cost of having this port on products, either laptops or motherboards, i really dont care that i have an extra 2 wires going across my desk. and i dont think most of the world will either.
and AMD is right that displayport is suppose to be able to daisy chain aswell, which would suck if you cant do that using TB
If intel decides to put thunderbolt into there centrino platform and also on there mainstream desktop platform, it will be used widely, regardless if amd wants it or not.
Thats advantage of controlling more then 50% of the market.
But what I dislike is that there is no out of the box support for other protocols... imho that was the biggest advantage of lightpeak...
Need usb 3?..No problem LP can do it, need FW also no problem... with only DP and PCI-E its really only a extention then a repleacment for all other connection types...
That is indeed a disappointment. I still wish for a one for all connection solution.
[Edit]
Looks like it will be Thunderbolt in a combination with this --> http://www.tested.com/news/how-netwo...splayport/514/ , plus the other proprietary formats.
Further reading on HDBaseT can be found at the official site --> http://www.hdbaset.org/technology/what_is_hdbaset
i dont think this holds trueQuote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
with this being new, its only on new machines. the time it takes for a good majority of machines to have it is looking like 3+ years. then we will see products using it.
i can understand some things like a monitor that could have this in addition to other ports. but what else would care to use it? a external HDD that will have usb, esata, then on top of it all, TB? those devises would be too few and too far away.
i dont see people wanting to eat the cost of something they wouldnt use for years. but a business i can kinda understand if they are trying to get all new tech, and intel provides all hardware with TB connections (like their SSDs).
question though, in the future would i expect my graphics card to have no TB port, but my motherboard will, and i dont have to plug my monitor into the gpu, bur rather the motherboard?
Same could be said about Usb3. Add in cards don't sell that much, and personally i would hate it to use a addin card for such a thing, plus this is only a option for desktops.
So in the notebook market it boils down to new units, and there intel has the leadership with ~85% marketshare of shiped untis each quartal. My original statement still remains valid, if intel decides to include TB in centrino 80% of all new books will have TB and in 2-3 years the majority of the market will have it. Amd is in that equation a nonfactor. In fact they even could use this to block amd from getting more marketshare, if they agressivly market TB as must have feature.
Regarding conection to the MB, whats the problem with that?
You already do this with all of the hybrid graphic solutions... :p:
USB3 is backwords compatible, you wouldnt notice you had it, and there is no worry if you make a device thats only 2.0 compliant, cause you know it will fit. i can expect people to see USB3 and pay the few dollars more for it. but with TB and intels goal to have everyone on it, the first few years will feel like a tax on the motherboard until devices use it. or if they even need it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
people get USB3 because they know its futureproofing and servers a current purpose. plus the cost seems to be about 10$ more for boards that come with sata6.0 and usb3, (i only know of the AMD board costs which seem very consistent in cost for that SB850 which has nicer usb/sata)
no problem at all, its actually a good thing since it means you may not need a gpu with the port if your motherboard already has it. (no idea if it would work)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
i also think they are still missing a huge thing by not providing serious power to external ports. there needs to be something that can provide 20-30W, useful for things like powering a monitor external hard drive, or charging more than just a cellphone. i cant stand how so many little things that need their own power brick that you cant loose or else its a dead product. that kind of port would impress me.
Current implemention of TB can supply 10W which is already nearly tripple the ammount of what usb 3.0 can deliver (3,6W) and 4,5 times that of usb 2.0 (2,2W), and I bet they could deliver more if they would have stuck with the original fiber approach and copper for the power.
Also TB has already been speced for fiber form the beginning and 100Gb/s was the original spec, the 10Gb/s is a lower cost alternative so if the first itteration "only" has 10gb/s and will followed by a 100gb/s version, I take it over usb 3.0 any day.
10w is an improvement, but still nothing that will change the world.
i better see alot of external enclosures for HDD and blue rays that get power solely from the port.
Also, in contrast to appels FW back then intel charges no licens or per port fee. If you buy the controller, you can build a device. Hell i bet with a bit of a work around some mobo makers could even get amd boards to work with TB, cause all it needs is a connection to the pci-e bus and to the displayport io of the gpu...
Forget USB 3.0. Give us Thunderbolt devices that are powered by Pikachu's very own electricity!
I would love it if computers only needed 1 cable and one connector type to hook everything up. It would make things a lot cleaner and a lot simpler when it comes to setting up computers.