Report: USB 3.0 not coming to Intel chipsets until 2012

TechEye has received word from Gigabyte that Intel’s "USB 3.0 chipset" has been delayed until 2012. This presumably refers to core-logic chipsets with integrated USB 3.0 functionality, which had previously been expected next year. Intel is, however, rumored to be working on a stand-alone controller that would compete with similar chips from NEC and VIA.

The Register suggests Intel may be holding back USB 3.0 to prime the market for its upcoming Light Peak optical interconnect. That seems unlikely if Intel is indeed working on a standalone SuperSpeed controller, though. Perhaps USB 3.0 is simply more difficult to integrate into a chipset than previously anticipated. After all, AMD stuck with USB 2.0 on its new SB850 south bridge, which features a 6Gbps Serial ATA controller, instead.

Comments closed
    • prashu
    • 10 years ago

    So, here’s what I understand

    -> Intel rolls out USB 3.0 on its chipsets from 2012
    -> USB 3.0 devices will be made available atleast two years from then – 2014+

    WTF! are we in the stone age?

    • tygrus
    • 10 years ago

    Intel et. al. don’t have enough bandwidth to the South Bridge to fully support USB3.0. It’s bad enough with SATA 6.0Gbps support. I/O demand has increased but the chipset architecture hasn’t progressed fast enough over the last ten years. It’s like Intel took 8years and 5 chipset generations to double performance.

    • DrCR
    • 10 years ago

    I wonder how USB 3.0 or light blah would compare to Firewire 1600 and 3200 we heard of a while back, but have seen nothing of.

    • Krogoth
    • 10 years ago

    No big deal.

    Wait until USB 3.0 devices start become more commonplace. There is no big rush for USB 3.0. The niches that require more bandwidth then what USB 2.0 can handle already got their own solutions. The mainstream market doesn’t have a killer app that makes USB 3.0 a necessity.

    Just look how long it took USB 2.0 to overtake USB 1.1 .

      • mutarasector
      • 10 years ago

      No ‘niche’ is required for the adoption of USB 3.0. Users will always find ways to utilize the additional bandwidth if it were made widely available.

      USB 3.0’s increased bandwidth would change the desktop peripheral paradigm considerably, and all the second guessing by vendors as to whether or not it is worth going to USB 3.0 is exactly just that — second guessing.

      As much as I tend to dismiss a lot of speculation put forth by sources such as The Register, I have to concur with them on this one — Intel is more interested in priming the market for adoption of their upcoming Light Peak interface. That may be a good thing however. Why waste the silicon real estate for USB 3.0 on current chip sets when they’ll just have to change it again in a couple of years? Think about it: USB 3.0 chipsets are available now, but if Light Peak does arrive in a couple of years, will vendors still offer *widespread* support of it (in precious silicon real estate no less) if some that is better (by an order of magnitude no less) could better utilize that real estate?

    • Vaughn
    • 10 years ago

    ESATA FTW!

    • wira020
    • 10 years ago

    I thought the reason for AMD not integrating USB3 with their chipset was because the USB3 specification got delayed so they cant do it in time… Intel was the main cause if i remember correctly..

      • MadManOriginal
      • 10 years ago

      Maybe, but then again the SB800’s were originally supposed to come out over a year before they actually did so AMD had some major delays as well. I don’t know that they expected USB 3.0 to be ready for their initial or even subsequent delayed but missed release dates.

    • tfp
    • 10 years ago

    Eh I really can’t say I’m disappointed.

    • NeelyCam
    • 10 years ago

    No need to panic – the mobos are already coming with USB3.0 controllers from other manufacturers like NEC.

    You know, NEC USB2.0 card was my best friend back then when I was trying to get an AMD/VIA system running. The drivers for on-board USB2.0 controller just wouldn’t work… NEC card worked flawlessly.

    That was also the last time I bought an AMD CPU. Everything worked so well in my next system (Intel P4), that I had no desire to get AMD even though their CPUs were better at the time.

    Maybe I should give AMD another chance now..?

      • flip-mode
      • 10 years ago

      Why change what works for you? I haven’t had an Intel system since the Pentium 2. Always had good experiences with AMD platform, but the 785G that I’m currently using is the best yet. It’ll be a sad day if I ever have to go Intel.

        • wira020
        • 10 years ago

        Because of better value maybe?

    • marvelous
    • 10 years ago

    no surprise here. USB 3.0 takes up way too much bandwidth.

    • Raskaran
    • 10 years ago

    Intel saves something for Sandy Bridge chipset refresh.

    • dpaus
    • 10 years ago

    Damn… USB 3.x is crucial to my planned smartphone+desktop architecture….

      • wira020
      • 10 years ago

      You’re making tablets too?

    • bdwilcox
    • 10 years ago

    Fixed.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This