News Intel Announces Thunderbolt 4 Specification

[Admin]

Intel whips the covers off the Thunderbolt 4 interface.

Intel Announces Thunderbolt 4 Specification : Read more

 

[Giroro]

Its basically the of thing, but Intel made the number higher?

Looks like Intel's executives are still really hard at work earning those giant paychecks.

 

[shady28]

Its basically the of thing, but Intel made the number higher?

Looks like Intel's executives are still really hard at work earning those giant paychecks.

Actually pretty useful stuff for the consumer. Unified cabling standards is nice.

Also, truth in marketing is nice :
"the new specification requires vendors to enable all of the optional features built into Thunderbolt 3, like the ability to hit the 40Gb/s data throughput requirements and support two 4K displays or one 8K display, in order to qualify for Thunderbolt 4 certification. "

 

[nofanneeded]

Actually pretty useful stuff for the consumer. Unified cabling standards is nice.

Also, truth in marketing is nice :
"the new specification requires vendors to enable all of the optional features built into Thunderbolt 3, like the ability to hit the 40Gb/s data throughput requirements and support two 4K displays or one 8K display, in order to qualify for Thunderbolt 4 certification. "

hahahaha , so being truthful in marketing now needs a new name and a new generation ? Really? so what you are saying is : Intel was cheating in TB 3 and in TB 4 stopped cheating right ?

be careful dude , if you want vendors to enable all features , while giving the same tech , this is not a new thunderbolt ... it can be done without faking a new name and giving the same thing.

 

[z3mr2]

the new specification requires vendors to enable all of the optional features built into Thunderbolt 3, like the ability to hit the 40Gb/s data throughput requirements

So TB3 40Gb is false advertising? Intel knowingly told vendors not to provide the full 40Gb throughput available in Thunderbolt 3 but was advertised as a 40Gb throughput connectivity.

Another issue, how are we going to differentiate TB3 and TB4 ports and ultimately the cables!

 

[AnimeMania]

It is just a way to make Apple and AMD look bad since neither of their CPUs will not be able to qualify for the new standard. The latest Thunderbolt standard comes out and Apple can't use it, Most of the people who care about Thunderbolt are Mac users.

 

[Jennifer W]

I thought USB4 was supposed to incorporate Thunderbolt as well, so we could use a single cable and interface type for both USB & Thunderbolt devices...
But this sounds like TB4 and USB4 are going to be two completely different things, that just happen to use the same cable/plug type.
Am I getting that correct?

If that’s the case, I’m really not as excited for it as I was before.
Here I was thinking the two would be unified as a single new standard all under USB4.

 

[spongiemaster]

I thought USB4 was supposed to incorporate Thunderbolt as well, so we could use a single cable and interface type for both USB & Thunderbolt devices...
But this sounds like TB4 and USB4 are going to be two completely different things, that just happen to use the same cable/plug type.
Am I getting that correct?

If that’s the case, I’m really not as excited for it as I was before.
Here I was thinking the two would be unified as a single new standard all under USB4.

USB4 is a subset of TB4, so any usb device that uses the type c connector will work with TB4 ports if you're using a TB4 spec cable, but you can't plug a TB4 device into a USB4 port.

 

[Jennifer W]

USB4 is a subset of TB4, so any usb device that uses the type c connector will work with TB4 ports if you're using a TB4 spec cable, but you can't plug a TB4 device into a USB4 port.

See that’s what I’m getting at. I thought TB4 and USB4 were being merged so that there would only be one port (a type c port) which could accept either TB or USB devices.
But the way this sounds, there will be a type c port that lets you use TB or USB.... and another that is USB only.

 

[spongiemaster]

So TB3 40Gb is false advertising? Intel knowingly told vendors not to provide the full 40Gb throughput available in Thunderbolt 3 but was advertised as a 40Gb throughput connectivity.

No, chief. The controllers are all capable of 40Gb. What determines the actual transfer speed and feature set is the cable you use and this has always been made crystal clear. Passive copper cables (basically a USB type C cable) are only capable of 20Gb. Active copper is capable of 40Gb up to 6 feet. Active optical are theoretically capable of 40Gb up to 200ft though I don't think anyone sells a cable that long. Also, while copper variants can carry power and support USB C devices, optical cables which also need to use an optical port do not.

 

[spongiemaster]

But the way this sounds, there will be a type c port that lets you use TB or USB.... and another that is USB only.

Correct. If the two standards were exactly the same, what would be the point of having two different names for the same standard?

 

[Jennifer W]

Correct. If the two standards were exactly the same, what would be the point of having two different names for the same standard?

NM I reread the thing and it’s saying that everything will be on the same port... a simple TB4 type c..... as long as you use a TB4 rated cable, you should be able to plug in either a TB or USB device.

The article was being confusing and contradictory.

 

[jimmysmitty]

hahahaha , so being truthful in marketing now needs a new name and a new generation ? Really? so what you are saying is : Intel was cheating in TB 3 and in TB 4 stopped cheating right ?

be careful dude , if you want vendors to enable all features , while giving the same tech , this is not a new thunderbolt ... it can be done without faking a new name and giving the same thing.

No Intel was not "cheating". It was that vendors could have TB3 but not all the features working. Its much like say FreeSync which could be implemented on most any monitor but only support the basic features. AMD pushed FreeSync 2 to require more features to qualify for even basic level support.

So TB3 40Gb is false advertising? Intel knowingly told vendors not to provide the full 40Gb throughput available in Thunderbolt 3 but was advertised as a 40Gb throughput connectivity.

Another issue, how are we going to differentiate TB3 and TB4 ports and ultimately the cables!

No it was not false advertising. It was rated for up to 40 Gbps but the vendors were not required to hit that speed. Intel didn't tell them not to but never made it mandatory. Again like the example above FreeSync does not require all features to be enabled, such as higher refresh rate ranges, to qualify as a FreeSync monitor.

Another example is USB. USB 3 has multiple versions and not all USB 3 ports support every feature yet are called USB 3. They do differentiate though using sub versions and symbols. This instead would unify the TB4 USB C port so that if a vendor includes it on their setup it would be the same as any other vendor. Typically this is not done as it keeps costs higher than allowing a more pick and choose method.

 

[nofanneeded]

No Intel was not "cheating". It was that vendors could have TB3 but not all the features working. Its much like say FreeSync which could be implemented on most any monitor but only support the basic features. AMD pushed FreeSync 2 to require more features to qualify for even basic level support.



No it was not false advertising. It was rated for up to 40 Gbps but the vendors were not required to hit that speed. Intel didn't tell them not to but never made it mandatory. Again like the example above FreeSync does not require all features to be enabled, such as higher refresh rate ranges, to qualify as a FreeSync monitor.

Another example is USB. USB 3 has multiple versions and not all USB 3 ports support every feature yet are called USB 3. They do differentiate though using sub versions and symbols. This instead would unify the TB4 USB C port so that if a vendor includes it on their setup it would be the same as any other vendor. Typically this is not done as it keeps costs higher than allowing a more pick and choose method.

It is cheating to call it TB4 , they should just call it TB3+ or TB3 full or w/e , TBx naming was always related to the PCI Express Gen and lanes bandwidth. Many people will buy it thinking it is related to PCIe GEN4 ...

 

[spongiemaster]

TBx naming was always related to the PCI Express Gen and lanes bandwidth. Many people will buy it thinking it is related to PCIe GEN4 ...

Only, it didn't. The original Thunderbolt was released 4 years after PCIe 2.0 hit the market and utilized four 2.0 lanes. Same exact protocol as Thunderbolt 2.0, also 4 2.0 lanes. There was no correlation implied or not between the Thunderbolt version and anything PCIe related.

You want Intel to use the USB naming scheme for Thunderbolt? This is a usb 3 device. Ok, which one?
3.0
3.1 gen 1(Superspeed)
3.1 gen 2 (Superspeed+)
3.2 gen 1x1 (also Superspeed for some reason)
3.2 gen 1x2(Superspeed+ like 3.1 gen 2, or Superspeed 10 Gbit/s)
3.2 gen 2x1 (also either Superspeed+ or Superspeed 10Gbit/s)
or 3.2 gen 2x2 (Superspeed+ or Superspeed 20Gbit/s)

And let's not even bother with the different cable connectors.

Yea, that's a lot better for the consumer. Much easier for them to figure out. None of that cheating with the misleading number 4. Screw you number 4.