I had one that was more similar to the one in the article, but it cooked itself to death the second time I used it. The one I have now is slightly larger but so far has stayed cool to the touch.
Blackmagic test speeds with a 2016 MacBook Pro Touch Bar are around 950 to 1K-ish each way. Not awesome, but double what I get with a SanDisk Extreme portable.
The Adwits one I've tried -- it was one of the ones that had major problems with thermals. Is yours any better than mine was with sustained transfers?
I dunno. I never seem to transfer more than 20-30GB to this particular unit. All the bigger transfers are between the Mac and the RAID. I'm willing to try cooking it in the interest of science though! I'll try running a session on it next time I'm doing something non-critical and see what happens.
Don't bake your hardware on our behalf. I'll talk to the vendor.
It’s ok, he’ll charge you for it.
Nope, no charge. Purely altruistic gesture intended to promote the evolution of storage devices. Here's how:
Have you ever noticed that devices work perfectly until the smoke escapes? Once the smoke is gone, the device doesn't work anymore. The power for electronic devices to perform their tasks is in the magic smoke.
There's a finite supply of magic smoke. The only way to create new devices is to recover and recycle the magic smoke from existing equipment. I'm proud to say my contribution to magic smoke emissions over the last two decades is approaching 1.21 metric buttloads. Admittedly not all of that has been voluntary. Okay, none of it has. But either way, my stubborn refusal to adopt careful habits has resulted in the release of enough magic smoke to generate scores of new devices.
Now we’re talking. Make the exact same enclosure but with a TB3 interface and I’m sold.
Yes, but then they will bump up the price several hundred dollars for the privilege, even-though the material costs are fairly small.
Yes, the cost would certainly be higher with TB3, but considering the major speed increase, many I think would justify the extra cost.
You're missing my point, if I recall, a Thunderbolt controller costs less than $20. That's more than what USB-C GEN II costs, but it doesn't justify the costs difference we see between Thunderbolt enclosures vs. equivalent USB-C enclosures with the same internal interface, such as NVMe.
Thunderbolt is just an ALT MODE of USB-C. The Thunderbolt controller by default a USB-C (3.1 GEN II) device with Thunderbolt added on, which requires a higher quality cable to achieve its maximum speed.
You are partially correct, and partially wrong.
Correct: TB3 is technically an alt mode of USB-C, and TB3 requires a higher quality cable and transceivers that USB 3.1 type C doesn't need.
Incorrect: The TB3 controller is NOT a USB 3.1 type C device with Thunderbolt added on. The entire communications protocol is different -- the TB3 controller encapsulates the USB 3.1 type C Gen 1 or 2 signal, and isn't something like an overclocked USB 3.1 signal. If it were so, then the USB 3.1 type A gen 2 connectors could physically carry a TB3 signal and they cannot, there wouldn't be a USB speed limitation with long, active Thunderbolt 3 cabling prior to the Titan Ridge controller and transceivers, and a "failover" of a Thunderbolt 3 device to connect at USB 3.1 type C speeds in the absence of a Thunderbolt cable would have been possible from day one, and also again not just with Titan Ridge.
Thunderbolt is an ALT mode of the USB-C port, not USB 3.1 GEN II. In fact, a USB-C port can be USB 2.0 ONLY, because it’s just a port. You’re conflating USB-C the port with USB the protocol or signal, such as USB 3.1.or USB 2.
Now we’re talking. Make the exact same enclosure but with a TB3 interface and I’m sold.
Yes, but then they will bump up the price several hundred dollars for the privilege, even-though the material costs are fairly small.
Yes, the cost would certainly be higher with TB3, but considering the major speed increase, many I think would justify the extra cost.
You're missing my point, if I recall, a Thunderbolt controller costs less than $20. That's more than what USB-C GEN II costs, but it doesn't justify the costs difference we see between Thunderbolt enclosures vs. equivalent USB-C enclosures with the same internal interface, such as NVMe.
Thunderbolt is just an ALT MODE of USB-C. The Thunderbolt controller by default a USB-C (3.1 GEN II) device with Thunderbolt added on, which requires a higher quality cable to achieve its maximum speed.
You are partially correct, and partially wrong.
Correct: TB3 is technically an alt mode of USB-C, and TB3 requires a higher quality cable and transceivers that USB 3.1 type C doesn't need.
Incorrect: The TB3 controller is NOT a USB 3.1 type C device with Thunderbolt added on. The entire communications protocol is different -- the TB3 controller encapsulates the USB 3.1 type C signal, and isn't something like an overclocked USB 3.1 signal. If it were so, then the USB 3.1 type A gen 2 connectors could physically carry a TB3 signal, and they cannot, there wouldn't be a USB speed limitation with long, active Thunderbolt 3 cabling prior to the Titan Ridge controller and transceivers, and a "failover" of a Thunderbolt 3 device to connect at USB 3.1 type C speeds in the absence of a Thunderbolt cable would have been possible from day one, and also again not just with Titan Ridge.
It is a hair to split, but an important one.
There is is no such thing as a “USB 3.1 type C signal”, because USB 3.1 is the signal and type C is a port, two entirely different things.
Now we’re talking. Make the exact same enclosure but with a TB3 interface and I’m sold.
Yes, but then they will bump up the price several hundred dollars for the privilege, even-though the material costs are fairly small.
Yes, the cost would certainly be higher with TB3, but considering the major speed increase, many I think would justify the extra cost.
You're missing my point, if I recall, a Thunderbolt controller costs less than $20. That's more than what USB-C GEN II costs, but it doesn't justify the costs difference we see between Thunderbolt enclosures vs. equivalent USB-C enclosures with the same internal interface, such as NVMe.
Thunderbolt is just an ALT MODE of USB-C. The Thunderbolt controller by default a USB-C (3.1 GEN II) device with Thunderbolt added on, which requires a higher quality cable to achieve its maximum speed.
You are partially correct, and partially wrong.
Correct: TB3 is technically an alt mode of USB-C, and TB3 requires a higher quality cable and transceivers that USB 3.1 type C doesn't need.
Incorrect: The TB3 controller is NOT a USB 3.1 type C device with Thunderbolt added on. The entire communications protocol is different -- the TB3 controller encapsulates the USB 3.1 type C signal, and isn't something like an overclocked USB 3.1 signal. If it were so, then the USB 3.1 type A gen 2 connectors could physically carry a TB3 signal, and they cannot, there wouldn't be a USB speed limitation with long, active Thunderbolt 3 cabling prior to the Titan Ridge controller and transceivers, and a "failover" of a Thunderbolt 3 device to connect at USB 3.1 type C speeds in the absence of a Thunderbolt cable would have been possible from day one, and also again not just with Titan Ridge.
It is a hair to split, but an important one.
There is is no such thing as a “USB 3.1 type C signal”, because USB 3.1 is the signal and type C is a port, two entirely different things.
Now we’re talking. Make the exact same enclosure but with a TB3 interface and I’m sold.
Yes, but then they will bump up the price several hundred dollars for the privilege, even-though the material costs are fairly small.
Yes, the cost would certainly be higher with TB3, but considering the major speed increase, many I think would justify the extra cost.
You're missing my point, if I recall, a Thunderbolt controller costs less than $20. That's more than what USB-C GEN II costs, but it doesn't justify the costs difference we see between Thunderbolt enclosures vs. equivalent USB-C enclosures with the same internal interface, such as NVMe.
Thunderbolt is just an ALT MODE of USB-C. The Thunderbolt controller by default a USB-C (3.1 GEN II) device with Thunderbolt added on, which requires a higher quality cable to achieve its maximum speed.
You are partially correct, and partially wrong.
Correct: TB3 is technically an alt mode of USB-C, and TB3 requires a higher quality cable and transceivers that USB 3.1 type C doesn't need.
Incorrect: The TB3 controller is NOT a USB 3.1 type C device with Thunderbolt added on. The entire communications protocol is different -- the TB3 controller encapsulates the USB 3.1 type C signal, and isn't something like an overclocked USB 3.1 signal. If it were so, then the USB 3.1 type A gen 2 connectors could physically carry a TB3 signal, and they cannot, there wouldn't be a USB speed limitation with long, active Thunderbolt 3 cabling prior to the Titan Ridge controller and transceivers, and a "failover" of a Thunderbolt 3 device to connect at USB 3.1 type C speeds in the absence of a Thunderbolt cable would have been possible from day one, and also again not just with Titan Ridge.
It is a hair to split, but an important one.
There is is no such thing as a “USB 3.1 type C signal”, because USB 3.1 is the signal and type C is a port, two entirely different things.
Agreed, just my fingers moving faster than the brain on that one particular part.
I still get it confused. That's why I'm glad Apple stuck with Thunderbolt across the board for all of the Mac USB-C ports, other than the MacBook which will either be eliminated or updated to TB-3. I really don't think Thunderbolt adds that much to the cost, so there is really no reason for it not to be universal. Not much need for it on iOS devices, so they could go all USB-C there.
Now we’re talking. Make the exact same enclosure but with a TB3 interface and I’m sold.
Yes, but then they will bump up the price several hundred dollars for the privilege, even-though the material costs are fairly small.
Yes, the cost would certainly be higher with TB3, but considering the major speed increase, many I think would justify the extra cost.
You're missing my point, if I recall, a Thunderbolt controller costs less than $20. That's more than what USB-C GEN II costs, but it doesn't justify the costs difference we see between Thunderbolt enclosures vs. equivalent USB-C enclosures with the same internal interface, such as NVMe.
Thunderbolt is just an ALT MODE of USB-C. The Thunderbolt controller by default a USB-C (3.1 GEN II) device with Thunderbolt added on, which requires a higher quality cable to achieve its maximum speed.
You are partially correct, and partially wrong.
Correct: TB3 is technically an alt mode of USB-C, and TB3 requires a higher quality cable and transceivers that USB 3.1 type C doesn't need.
Incorrect: The TB3 controller is NOT a USB 3.1 type C device with Thunderbolt added on. The entire communications protocol is different -- the TB3 controller encapsulates the USB 3.1 type C Gen 1 or 2 signal, and isn't something like an overclocked USB 3.1 signal. If it were so, then the USB 3.1 type A gen 2 connectors could physically carry a TB3 signal and they cannot, there wouldn't be a USB speed limitation with long, active Thunderbolt 3 cabling prior to the Titan Ridge controller and transceivers, and a "failover" of a Thunderbolt 3 device to connect at USB 3.1 type C speeds in the absence of a Thunderbolt cable would have been possible from day one, and also again not just with Titan Ridge.
It is a hair to split, but an important one.
It’s not even technically true. There are, as you know different lays. Level 1, 2 and 3. USB C is just what’s called the physical layer. Other layers are, for example, the transport layer. tB just uses the physical layer of the connector. It’s not proper then to say that TB is an alt mode. The USB C layer still functions as before. It doesn’t function differently. So it doesn’t have different modes. I’ve seen explanations that claim that, such as some of what he linked to, but it’s just wrong.
Now we’re talking. Make the exact same enclosure but with a TB3 interface and I’m sold.
Yes, but then they will bump up the price several hundred dollars for the privilege, even-though the material costs are fairly small.
Yes, the cost would certainly be higher with TB3, but considering the major speed increase, many I think would justify the extra cost.
You're missing my point, if I recall, a Thunderbolt controller costs less than $20. That's more than what USB-C GEN II costs, but it doesn't justify the costs difference we see between Thunderbolt enclosures vs. equivalent USB-C enclosures with the same internal interface, such as NVMe.
Thunderbolt is just an ALT MODE of USB-C. The Thunderbolt controller by default a USB-C (3.1 GEN II) device with Thunderbolt added on, which requires a higher quality cable to achieve its maximum speed.
You are partially correct, and partially wrong.
Correct: TB3 is technically an alt mode of USB-C, and TB3 requires a higher quality cable and transceivers that USB 3.1 type C doesn't need.
Incorrect: The TB3 controller is NOT a USB 3.1 type C device with Thunderbolt added on. The entire communications protocol is different -- the TB3 controller encapsulates the USB 3.1 type C Gen 1 or 2 signal, and isn't something like an overclocked USB 3.1 signal. If it were so, then the USB 3.1 type A gen 2 connectors could physically carry a TB3 signal and they cannot, there wouldn't be a USB speed limitation with long, active Thunderbolt 3 cabling prior to the Titan Ridge controller and transceivers, and a "failover" of a Thunderbolt 3 device to connect at USB 3.1 type C speeds in the absence of a Thunderbolt cable would have been possible from day one, and also again not just with Titan Ridge.
It is a hair to split, but an important one.
It’s not even technically true. There are, as you know different lays. Level 1, 2 and 3. USB C is just what’s called the physical layer. Other layers are, for example, the transport layer. tB just uses the physical layer of the connector. It’s not proper then to say that TB is an alt mode. The USB C layer still functions as before. It doesn’t function differently. So it doesn’t have different modes. I’ve seen explanations that claim that, such as some of what he linked to, but it’s just wrong.
It's only technically correct because the USB-C SIG says so, I'm afraid. Intel has a different opinion on the matter.
Now we’re talking. Make the exact same enclosure but with a TB3 interface and I’m sold.
Yes, but then they will bump up the price several hundred dollars for the privilege, even-though the material costs are fairly small.
Yes, the cost would certainly be higher with TB3, but considering the major speed increase, many I think would justify the extra cost.
You're missing my point, if I recall, a Thunderbolt controller costs less than $20. That's more than what USB-C GEN II costs, but it doesn't justify the costs difference we see between Thunderbolt enclosures vs. equivalent USB-C enclosures with the same internal interface, such as NVMe.
Thunderbolt is just an ALT MODE of USB-C. The Thunderbolt controller by default a USB-C (3.1 GEN II) device with Thunderbolt added on, which requires a higher quality cable to achieve its maximum speed.
You are partially correct, and partially wrong.
Correct: TB3 is technically an alt mode of USB-C, and TB3 requires a higher quality cable and transceivers that USB 3.1 type C doesn't need.
Incorrect: The TB3 controller is NOT a USB 3.1 type C device with Thunderbolt added on. The entire communications protocol is different -- the TB3 controller encapsulates the USB 3.1 type C Gen 1 or 2 signal, and isn't something like an overclocked USB 3.1 signal. If it were so, then the USB 3.1 type A gen 2 connectors could physically carry a TB3 signal and they cannot, there wouldn't be a USB speed limitation with long, active Thunderbolt 3 cabling prior to the Titan Ridge controller and transceivers, and a "failover" of a Thunderbolt 3 device to connect at USB 3.1 type C speeds in the absence of a Thunderbolt cable would have been possible from day one, and also again not just with Titan Ridge.
It is a hair to split, but an important one.
It’s not even technically true. There are, as you know different lays. Level 1, 2 and 3. USB C is just what’s called the physical layer. Other layers are, for example, the transport layer. tB just uses the physical layer of the connector. It’s not proper then to say that TB is an alt mode. The USB C layer still functions as before. It doesn’t function differently. So it doesn’t have different modes. I’ve seen explanations that claim that, such as some of what he linked to, but it’s just wrong.
It's only technically correct because the USB-C SIG says so, I'm afraid. Intel has a different opinion on the matter.
Well, we understand the turf battles these SIGs and working groups have. Intel was told to stop using DisplayPort for this. Eh! The USB SIG wants everyone to think that USB is paramount, even though it isn’t. I was on two working groups in the past, and vowed to never allow myself to be talked into another.
Comments
Have you ever noticed that devices work perfectly until the smoke escapes? Once the smoke is gone, the device doesn't work anymore. The power for electronic devices to perform their tasks is in the magic smoke.
There's a finite supply of magic smoke. The only way to create new devices is to recover and recycle the magic smoke from existing equipment. I'm proud to say my contribution to magic smoke emissions over the last two decades is approaching 1.21 metric buttloads. Admittedly not all of that has been voluntary. Okay, none of it has. But either way, my stubborn refusal to adopt careful habits has resulted in the release of enough magic smoke to generate scores of new devices.
You're welcome.
Correct: TB3 is technically an alt mode of USB-C, and TB3 requires a higher quality cable and transceivers that USB 3.1 type C doesn't need.
Incorrect: The TB3 controller is NOT a USB 3.1 type C device with Thunderbolt added on. The entire communications protocol is different -- the TB3 controller encapsulates the USB 3.1 type C Gen 1 or 2 signal, and isn't something like an overclocked USB 3.1 signal. If it were so, then the USB 3.1 type A gen 2 connectors could physically carry a TB3 signal and they cannot, there wouldn't be a USB speed limitation with long, active Thunderbolt 3 cabling prior to the Titan Ridge controller and transceivers, and a "failover" of a Thunderbolt 3 device to connect at USB 3.1 type C speeds in the absence of a Thunderbolt cable would have been possible from day one, and also again not just with Titan Ridge.
It is a hair to split, but an important one.
To clear up your basic misconception, read this.
https://www.cui.com/blog/usb-type-c-and-3-1-gen-2-clarified
https://www.cui.com/blog/usb-type-c-and-3-1-gen-2-clarified