USB legacy performance

[alif_jamil]

Hi. I'm building a secondary budget system and was looking at vishera (AM3+) and trinity/richland (FM2) cpu+motherboard options.

Given the budget, 970 chipset is affordable in most cases for the FX (vishera) build while FM2/+ builds can get either of a75, a78, a85 or a88 chipset mobo.

My question is: Has AMD chipsets' built-in USB performance been able to catch up with Intel/nVidia's USB performance - when outside an operating system. The title of this thread may not be very elaborative with respect to my concern. Let me quote examples from the past to elaborate further.

I have utilized VIA KT133A, ATI Express 200, Intel 965, nVidia nForce 410, Intel 945G, Q35, HM55, AMD 690G chipsets over the past couple of decades and while installing Windows 98 upto 7 or a Linux distro (Fedora, Suse, Mandriva, OOL, Slax, Slackware et al).

I have noticed that the ATI/AMD-based chipsets have always displayed a slow data transfer speed when installing an operating system from USB-attached storage. This is to take USB 1.1 and 2.0 into account. Intel and nVidia have been equally fast on the hand - and amazing w.r.t OS installation from a USB Flash drive or a USB Optical drive (CD/DVD).

So my question is: has AMD improved (or has anyone witnessed) on an improved USB "dos" transfer speed / performance with the newer AMD chipsets as compared to the current rival intel chipset-based USB 2.0?

I would appreciate if respected users can keep from suggesting to go for c2d/core ix based lutions.

Thanks!

 

[King_V]

I tentatively want to say that there's been no improvement, you're talking about fairly ancient technology here.

How cheap are you getting these old CPU/MB combo? Generally, unless it's free or almost free, it's not worth bothering with FM2/+ or AM3/AM3+

Generally, it's as cheap, if not cheaper, to get a used Intel system of, say, Sandy Bridge generation or later, and the Intel will perform better.

 

[alif_jamil]

@King_V: Thank you, but sandy bridge is actually ancient. According to Wikipedia and TPU, it was released in 2009. I'm looking at technology released between 2013 and 2016 (2 to 5 years old only).

Then again, I'm interested in OS installation speed (data transfer-wise) and USB speed outside of an operating system is what catches my interest at the moment.

 

[Peter Martin]

i would be very surprised if intel mobo had faster usb installation speeds. you need drivers to get more than plain usb. your usb device has a lot to do with what performance it can deliver.

 

[alif_jamil]

@Peter: Yes, that has been the case, unfortunately for my AMD chipset builds (and also where I help friends/family with Windows installation on AMD chipsets). Intel and nForce chipsets load up and install Windows (including win8/8.1) real quick even if the processor is actually ancient 😀

I could not find any relevant question on the internet for years so I thought I would ask here.

Yes it definitely depends on the USB device itself, but I have tried same USB flash drive on many computers for OS installation with the same pattern as noted in the OP.

 

[alif_jamil]

Does anyone have experience with pre-DDR4 chipsets for AMD w.r.t USB speed as noted in the original message?
Perhaps, Thomas Pabst or a guru can answer this?