USB 3.0 vs Ethernet

[GraySenshi]

Witch is a better option for computer to computer communications. And when should you use one of the other.

I was thinking that if you only have 2 or 3 computers USB 3.0 would be the better option being it has 5 gigabit speed. and running ethernet you would need to get a expensive switch to get to that speed.

Where ethernet would be better you allready have a line going out for Internet. so it's one cable takes care of it all. good for several computers being you would need to rout all the the cables 2x one USB and ethernet rather then one cable. Plus you have all the options in a switch.

Is that right or am I totally off on my thinking. The reason I was thinking of this is I wanted a nas for video rendering but 1gigabit is to slow and to upgrade to 10 is out of my price range. So I thought USB may be a option.

 

[InvalidError]

There is no standard for networking PCs directly over USB3. Connect your drives directly to the computer you want to primarily use them from and share them to the rest of the network from there.

Not sure why you say Ethernet requires an expensive switch when 1GbE switches can be had for less than $50, unless you meant 10GbE then yes, 10GbE equipment is still prohibitively expensive for most people.

 

[rhysiam]

Until 10Gbps Ethernet gets down to reasonable prices there are very *edit* few alternatives for offering centralised ultra-high speed storage that is accessible to multiple computers simultaneously. As InvalidError says, you can't easily connect two PCs via USB 3. No doubt there are some hacks floating around which might achieve this, but you can't just connect a cable and expect it all to work.

If you're editing high bit rate video your don't really want to be doing that over 1Gbps LAN. However copying final footage/rendered footage is generally fairly acceptable over LAN, especially if you're writing to HDDs (rather than SSDs) which aren't much faster than the ~100-110MBps real-world limit of Gbit LAN anyway. I suspect for IO sensitive video editing (like 4K video), having a local SSD in each machine to use for local rendering, and then copying finished projects up to a shared NAS might be your best bet.

 

[GraySenshi]

I meant 10 gigabit switch for the high speed

 

[GraySenshi]

And I'll be doing 5930x1080 as of now raw avi so pretty large for only 1gbps

 

[rhysiam]

And I'll be doing 5930x1080 as of now raw avi so pretty large for only 1gbps

Right. So are you intending to use SSDs for storage? Because if you're only using HDDs anyway, then (as I said above), 1Gbit ethernet is getting you most the performance of a HDD anyway.

Can I just confirm, are you actually actively editing these videos? You're not just rendering them? Because as I understand it most people's video editing workflows involve an "active" project with various clips and materials, which then gets exported to a final video.

If your active projects really do require SSDs for performance, then can I suggest you put an SSD locally in each of the editing workstations. Your editors would copy the RAW video to their local SSD, edit the video and then export the final version to a central NAS with HDDs. Depending on how critical the work is you may need to put a backup strategy in place for active projects. Obviously their content would only be stored on a local SSD and is thus relatively vulnerable. But there are plenty of ways to mitigate those risks... and if content is critical, you really need offsite backups anyway.

 

[GraySenshi]

Yes ssd is the primary and some will probably have to be local but some raw files will be archived as well for re render purposes. I was trying to keep all raw files in one central location and keep rendered in a nother central location

 

[GraySenshi]

So the best option for me is. Keep raw files on the workstation and set it to shair and wake up buy ethernet. All other data on the server

 

[jsmithepa]

Another fallacy for wanting to use USB3 is, you can only achieve that speed with a relatively SHORT CABLE.

Dude if you have that kind of high bandwidth need, break down and spend the mula$$.

 

[rhysiam]

So the best option for me is. Keep raw files on the workstation and set it to shair and wake up buy ethernet. All other data on the server

Wait, do you only have one rendering "workstation", or more than one? Because if you only have one, why are trying to share it? What are you sharing it with?

When you say "keep raw files on the workstation and set it to share"... what other machine needs access to those raw (pre-edited) files?

 

[GraySenshi]

About how much would it cost if I made my own cables and what of fiber

 

[rhysiam]

About how much would it cost if I made my own cables and what of fiber

If you're talking about USB 3... As has been said above, the problem is not the cable. The problem is that USB 3 is NOT designed for computer to computer communication. Try a Google search for: "How do I connect two computers over USB 3"... you'll find a number of other threads where the question has been asked.

The simple answer is, "you don't"

As I said in my first post, you might find some examples where people have been able to get a workaround/hack USB 3 PC to PC connection going, but it's almost certainly going to be more trouble than it's worth.

Sometimes people have a very fixed workflow in their minds and try to make the technology fit their workflow. I suggest this is one of those cases where you're far better off adjusting your workflow slightly to fit the technology you have. That's why I've been asking questions about what your requirements actually are. If indeed you do really want/need ultra fast shared storage, then there aren't really any other options than 10Gbps ethernet, which is (at the moment) really expensive.

 

[GraySenshi]

Currently using m.2 for raw data to SSD raid and wd red raid for permanent storage. eventually I would like to go fiber but that's probably a ways away for my budget. Figured 3.0 may be a good temp option since its 5gbps

 

[InvalidError]

About how much would it cost if I made my own cables and what of fiber

USB3 is designed to connect a host to an endpoint device. To connect two PCs together over USB3, you need a device between the PCs to provide some sort of communication bridge between attached PCs. Such a chip could, for example, emulate a 10Gbps adapter over USB3 and switching between each virtual network adapter. Does such a chip exist? I have no idea.

There is a host-to-host specification for USB3 cross-over cables but AFAIK, it is only used for special tasks such as Windows kernel debugging. There is no standard file sharing or other protocol that works with it.

 

[rhysiam]

Currently using m.2 for raw data to SSD raid and wd red raid for permanent storage. eventually I would like to go fiber but that's probably a ways away for my budget. Figured 3.0 may be a good temp option since its 5gbps

Right, well I think we've well and truly answered the USB 3 question.

Sounds like you have some nice and fast storage already. I'm still not entirely sure from your workflow why you require that storage to be shared, but I'll leave that with you to figure out yourself. Unless you had any further questions?