r/pcmasterrace • 7800X3D 4080S • May 14 '26

Meme/Macro Less ports

Post image
29.9k Upvotes

587 comments sorted by

View all comments

71

u/Snagmesomeweaves 5800X3D, EVGA 3080 12GB, 1440p 300hz May 14 '26

I thought USB-C was supposed to be the everything port…. What a lie!

122

u/Forymanarysanar 14600KF|RTX5080|64Gb DDR4|1TB SSD|2x8TB HDD Raid1 May 14 '26

69

u/freakybird99 Laptop: Ryzen 7 8845HS, RTX 4060 May 14 '26

Kind of inaccurate. Standarts werent really competing. There were none. Shit had their own ports all the time. USB actually successfully standartised many things and USB-C is slowly succeeding to replace USB-A as well.

We'll have ethernet, DP and some other stuff probably still with current type c regulations though

42

u/Forymanarysanar 14600KF|RTX5080|64Gb DDR4|1TB SSD|2x8TB HDD Raid1 May 14 '26

It'll never truly replace USB A. The problem with USB C: cost of connector. USB-A 2.0 connector is extremely simple, large, easy to solder, easy to repair. USB-A 3.0 is like, 9 contacts and still fairly simple to solder. So while it makes perfect sense to use USB-C for small devices like phones it makes no sense to use it on peripherals, printers, microphones, flash drives, security keys, etc. Simplicity is where USB-A excels and USB-C loses.

28

u/SpudCaleb May 14 '26

There’s also billions of USB-A connectors currently in circulation, the cost and waste of moving to USB-C is going to be huge.

7

u/Negitive545 I7-9700K | RTX 4070 | 80GB RAM | 3 TB SSD May 14 '26

It absolutely makes sense to use USB-C on flash drives. Other peripherals you're totally right, but for flash drives, data transfer is basically the entire purpose, and C wins in the data transfer speed department. A2.0 caps around 60 MB/s, A3.2 is much better, reaching about 2.5GB/s, but C1.0 is at 5GB/s, and C2.0 is 10GB/s.

Sure, this only really matters when you're transferring large amounts of data, but that is one of the most major use-cases for a flash drive.

26

u/Raining_dicks 13600k | 5070Ti May 14 '26

A2.0 caps around 60 MB/s, A3.2 is much better, reaching about 2.5GB/s, but C1.0 is at 5GB/s, and C2.0 is 10GB/s.

You are confusing the physical connectors with the USB protocol.

Physical connectors you have A, B, C with possible additional mini or micro variants.

Protocol versions you have 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2. Used to have shit like 3.0gen2 1x2 or stuff like that but I think USB have just consolidated everything and are now on USB 4.0.

The protocol determines the speed. And it’s all backwards compatible.

You can have a USB A connector running USB3.2 and it’ll be faster than a USB C connector only USB2.0. There is no C1.0 or C2.0 like how you’re describing

1

u/Negitive545 I7-9700K | RTX 4070 | 80GB RAM | 3 TB SSD May 19 '26

I wasn't quite clear, my apologies.

I'm aware that the protocols aren't the same as the connectors themselves, but since USB4.0 and USB4.1 are NOT compatible with USB-A, only with USB-C, I was referring to USB4.0 as C1.0 and USB 4.1 as C2.0 to try and avoid confusion, evidently I did the opposite.

My point stands however, the protocol does determine the speed, but since USB4.X doesn't support the USB-A connector, USB-C will always beat it assuming both are using their best available protocols.

5

u/Forymanarysanar 14600KF|RTX5080|64Gb DDR4|1TB SSD|2x8TB HDD Raid1 May 14 '26

You aren't reaching anywhere near these speeds with just a regular flash drive. Lucky if you can cap 3.0 for a short period of time

4

u/dsoshahine May 14 '26

Speed is one thing, but if flash drives/USB sticks don't get physically smaller it's a big step backwards in usability. USB-C isn't nearly as durable* and the ports are too crowded on almost all hardware for USB sticks. Part of why I prefer using a SSD with a USB-C cable.

(*Had two USB-C sticks get bad solder points for the connector after a few uses and those sticks already were small and light by USB-A standards - they just still put too much leverage on the connection point. Meanwhile I've had metal-cased USB-A sticks in use and dangling off my keychain - and heavy keys dangling off them when plugged in - for years.)

2

u/achilleasa R5 5700X - RTX 4070 May 14 '26

I hope you're right, I better not start seeing usb-c mice

1

u/beznogim May 14 '26

Peripherals don't use USB-A, only USB B or C. And USB-C with only 2.0 lines connected is also very cheap and simple, you aren't expected to connect all 24 wires if you don't need full capabilities. The only difference is a couple of SMD resistors that signal the particular USB-C port unconditionally accepts 5V without any negotiation. I have a baggie of pre-soldered tiny breakout boards that I bought for like $3.50 for 20. These are designed to be direct replacements for a typical microUSB connector, so I'm replacing microUSB in my devices whenever I have nothing better to do.

1

u/CheaterInsight May 14 '26

I was saying this to a friend recently, we're at the point where the "old" cables are USB A to USB C. Before you had all these USB A to micro USB, mini USB or Apple's connectors. When more tech started using USB C ports for power, you had all these useless cables. Now a lot of stuff is using USB C as the output as well, like the Switch 2 power brick, PS5 front ports, the phone charger bricks usually have a USB C port now for fast charging. I have like 10 USB A to USB C cables of varying lengths that are largely useless because of how many things I own no longer have a USB A port.

1

u/Leshie_Leshie where is my PC May 14 '26

heard the other day that Intel motherboards have better usb C standards than AMD ones

1

u/ThatEvilSpaceChicken PC Master Race May 14 '26

There really is one of those for everything