Question Why aren't all motherboard USB headers USB 3.0 ?

[box o rocks]

Same might be asked for ports on cases as well.
USB 3.0 ports are backward compatible with USB 2.0 stuff anyway. Is it cost-prohibitive to make a chip set provide all USB 3.0 instead of a mix like it does now?

 

[USAFRet]

Same might be asked for ports on cases as well.
USB 3.0 ports are backward compatible with USB 2.0 stuff anyway. Is it cost-prohibitive to make a chip set provide all USB 3.0 instead of a mix like it does now?

Change to the new version doesn't happen all at once.

It has been like this forever.

 

[box o rocks]

Change to the new version doesn't happen all at once.

It has been like this forever.

Indeed it has. And yet RAM/VRAM, PCI Express, SSD interfaces, CPU sockets, etc. have evolved to replace their predecessors seemingly overnight. Still... the lowly USB 2.0 interfaces remain.

 

[USAFRet]

Indeed it has. And yet RAM/VRAM, PCI Express, SSD interfaces, CPU sockets, etc. have evolved to replace their predecessors seemingly overnight. Still... the lowly USB 2.0 interfaces remain.

Some interfaces cannot easily coexist.
Some can.

And for USB, I expect some older devices need the USB 1.0 or 2.0 interface.
Mice/keyboard, for example.
Yes, the 3.0 is backwards compatible.

But not having to change a particular port from 1.0/2.0 to 3.0 is zero cost to the manufacturer.

 

[LordVile]

Indeed it has. And yet RAM/VRAM, PCI Express, SSD interfaces, CPU sockets, etc. have evolved to replace their predecessors seemingly overnight. Still... the lowly USB 2.0 interfaces remain.

Because it’s a different interface and a lot of equipment still use USB2. You can’t really branch USB3 out into multiple small ports.

Why do you think we still have USBA 10 years after C came out? Because a lot of things still use the older standard.

PCI still exists in modern PCs too and so does SATA which is ancient too.

 

[dwd999]

It doesn't help any that manufacturers of AIO coolers, ARGB hubs, fan control hubs, PCIe add-in cards, etc. began adding interfaces that needed to be plugged into a motherboard 9pin usb2 socket, and the software that controls them looking for that connection. That was one of the reasons why motherboards went from having 1 9pin usb2 socket to having 2. As long as those are around there will still be a need for 9pin motherboard sockets even if case manufacturers drop case front usb2 sockets.

 

[box o rocks]

I'm always amazed at how much I don't know.

 

[thestryker]

Another reason they've stuck around is bandwidth from chipsets. USB 2.0 at maximum has 480Mbps worth of bandwidth whereas USB 3.0 is 5Gbps minimum. On the high end chipsets this isn't as much of an issue, but the middle and low it is. My motherboard for example has no USB 2.0 ports on the back and the only USB 2.0 is a couple of headers.

Examples:
Z890:
10 USB 3.2 Ports
- Up to 5 USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 (20Gb/s) Ports
- Up to 10 USB 3.2 Gen 2x1 (10Gb/s) Ports
- Up to 10 USB 3.2 Gen 1x1 (5Gb/s) Ports
14 USB 2.0 Ports

B860:
6 USB 3.2 Ports
- Up to 2 USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 (20Gb/s) Ports
- Up to 4 USB 3.2 Gen 2x1 (10Gb/s) Ports
- Up to 6 USB 3.2 Gen 1x1 (5Gb/s) Ports
12 USB 2.0 Ports

 

[CountMike]

Same might be asked for ports on cases as well.
USB 3.0 ports are backward compatible with USB 2.0 stuff anyway. Is it cost-prohibitive to make a chip set provide all USB 3.0 instead of a mix like it does now?

USB2 controllers are still part of chipset and it would be a waste not to have connectors on the MB since many devices don't need the speed of USB3/3.2 and it's cheap to implement. There is already USB4 which supports speeds up to 40 Gbps and is designed to be backward compatible with USB 3.2 and USB 2.0. Trend is to leave USB2 headers on the MB and less or none at back panels.

 

[box o rocks]

OK. Thanks for the wisdom and insight. All good reasons to keep USB 2.0 around I guess. Lordvile made a good point I hadn't thought about; branching out into multiple small USB2.0 ports.

Btw, I keep losing the "best answer" check. How do I get it back?