USB Finalizes 10Gbps SuperSpeed+ Standard as USB 3.1 - MacRumors
Skip to Content

USB Finalizes 10Gbps SuperSpeed+ Standard as USB 3.1

by

NewImageEarlier this year, the trade organization behind the USB 3.0 specification proposed a new version of USB 3 that supports 10Gbps of data transfer over a backwards compatible connector.

The spec has now been finalized, and the first developer sessions will begin later this month.

SuperSpeed USB 10 Gbps uses a more efficient data encoding and will deliver more than twice the effective data through-put performance of existing SuperSpeed USB over enhanced, fully backward compatible USB connectors and cables. Compatibility is assured with existing USB 3.0 software stacks and device class protocols as well as with existing 5 Gbps hubs and devices and USB 2.0 products.

[…]

"While maintaining backward compatibility, USB continues to advance to meet customer's growing need for higher speed data" said Roland Sperlich, TI Consumer and Computing Interface Product Line Manager. "The 10 Gbps data rate allows designers across many industries to do more with a universal standard."

The first products with USB 3.1 should launch sometime in 2014.

Thunderbolt, which moves data at up to 10Gbps in both directions, appears mostly on Apple devices currently, but devices tend to be more expensive than their USB 3.0-compatible counterparts. However, Thunderbolt does have a strong ally in Intel, with the company pushing the standard heavily.

Thunderbolt 2, the next generation of the protocol, will support 20Gbps bi-directionally, but Thunderbolt 2 devices are also expected to be significantly more expensive than USB. The new Mac Pro, expected sometime this fall, will be the first mass market device to come with Thunderbolt 2, with the device equipped with 6 ports across two separate control boards.

Top Rated Comments

baryon Avatar
171 months ago
So let me get this straight, USB 3.1 is much much cheaper, uses simple cables with no electronics inside, is fully backward compatible and is ubiquitous while Thunderbolt is expensive, exclusively high-end, rare and requires cables with fancy chips inside, without actually being faster?

Sure, Thunderbolt 2 will be even faster, but then so will USB 3.2 and so on...
Score: 28 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Tankmaze Avatar
171 months ago
I'm afraid this would make thunderbolt the "firewire part 2"
Score: 22 Votes (Like | Disagree)
171 months ago
I'll be honest. Most people commenting don't know about the underlying technologies and just go off the 'specs'.

USB 3.1 is fine and dandy, it doesn't hold a candle to Thunderbolt, v1 or v2.

USB is for consumers, Thunderbolt is for the Pro's.

I will never trade Thunderbolt for USB.
Score: 19 Votes (Like | Disagree)
GSPice Avatar
171 months ago
I'll be honest. Most people commenting don't know about the underlying technologies and just go off the 'specs'.

USB 3.1 is fine and dandy, it doesn't hold a candle to Thunderbolt, v1 or v2.

USB is for consumers, Thunderbolt is for the Pro's.

I will never trade Thunderbolt for USB.
+1000

I'll never say that thunderbolt and associated products are cheap, but the ignorance I'm seeing in these comments is a little discouraging.

No mention of the type of data being transmitted, source and destination, etc, to say nothing of the whole power and daisy-chaining thing, um yeah. Oh and that's if the average user is actually saturating the USB 3.x channel with a raid of HDDs? SSDs?
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
bb426 Avatar
171 months ago
Why don't these guys just team the f**# up and make it one mother***#$% port.

It's just the consumer that dies slowly in the end...
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
171 months ago
So let me get this straight, USB 3.1 is much much cheaper, uses simple cables with no electronics inside, is fully backward compatible and is ubiquitous while Thunderbolt is expensive, exclusively high-end, rare and requires cables with fancy chips inside, without actually being faster?

Sure, Thunderbolt 2 will be even faster, but then so will USB 3.2 and so on...
There's a difference between theoretical and real life performance (with USB the difference tends to be the biggest). Furthermore, Thunderbolt actually offers a lot more possibilities and is much more advanced than USB 3.
However I do agree that probably 95% of Mac users won't ever use Thunderbolt (except for Displayport adapters). It's even a lot less popular than FireWire used to be. It's a shame Apple pushed Thunderbolt in their 2011 Mac models before adopting USB 3, which people actually use.
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Popular Stories

iPhone Handoff Feature

iOS 27 Introduces New 'iPhone Handoff' Feature

Wednesday September 2, 2026 12:35 pm PDT by
Apple has added a new "iPhone Handoff" feature to iOS 27 that will allow you to switch between two iPhones while using the same phone number on each device. This functionality was briefly mentioned during the WWDC 2026 keynote in June, on a slide that listed hundreds of new features coming in iOS 27 and corresponding software updates, but Apple never shared any further details at the time. ...
Dynamic Island iPhone 18 Pro Feature

iPhone 18 Pro Prices Estimated Ahead of Apple Event Next Week

Thursday September 3, 2026 3:41 am PDT by
Less than a week before Apple debuts new iPhone 18 Pro models, research firm TrendForce has estimated the prices of the devices based on the latest hardware cost environment. TrendForce's price estimates compared to last year's models look like this: Model Starting Price Model Starting Price Change iPhone 17 Pro $1,099 iPhone 18 Pro $...
Apple Foldable Thumb

iPhone Ultra's Very High Price and Features Revealed in New Report

Thursday September 3, 2026 7:33 am PDT by
Ahead of Apple's event on Wednesday, September 9, where it is expected to unveil its first-ever foldable iPhone, Taiwanese research firm TrendForce today outlined the device's estimated price range, features, and some other key details. In the U.S., TrendForce estimated that the foldable iPhone will have a starting price of $2,099 to $2,299 and said the highest-end configurations could...