Good to see something of this sort, though as koga73 mentioned, it lacks any header on the board itself so we could hook it up to our case's front port without some ridiculous-looking workaround. (i.e, running a USB cable around the system, or back through the case from the back... Not ideal) Of course, I can SOMEWHAT understand this, since I don't know of any existing cases where the front ports actually have the pins for USB 3.0. (of course, that wouldn't stop some enthusiasts from cannibalizing a 3.0 cable to replace said port)
Still, the fact that ASUS was willing to stick their neck out and make it a 4-lane part is a good thing. Even if it's PCI-e 1.0, (I have the impression it's probably 2.0, given what they spent on all the OTHER important interface silcon...) that still gives it, once overhead is counted, about 8 gbps. Since it's not a RAID controller, chances are slim that both SATA interfaces, if occupied, would have full bandwidth use, so that wouldn't be much of an issue for bandwidth at all; counting in the overhead, you're looking at 4 mbps for the USB and 6 mbps for the SATA. This means since one would be bottlenecking the other anyway, you could still get full speed in transfering from a USB device on it, to a SATA drive on it.
[citation][nom]IronRyan21[/nom]Now I cant wait for USB 3.0 Devices to show up, im tired of the slow transfers from my USB flash drive to PC[/citation]
Actually, that tends to be not the fault of the USB port at all. Rather, the limitation is your flash drive; either the controller chip(s) on it are slow, or the flash memory chips themselves are slow. Unless, of course, you're using models specifically made for speed, where then the port might in fact be the bottleneck. Otherwise, USB 2.0's 480 mpbs would be likely enough to handle a USB drive; that's up to a theroetical 60 MB/sec, while most cheaper drives only even read at like 8-12 MB/sec, as I recall.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram