<strong>I have heard conflicting reports that Firewire 2 will have 800Mbps and 1200Mbps throughput. Can someone please clarify which one is correct? Thanks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
800Mbps should be what we'll get
1200Mbps should be what highend servers will get when they use fiber optics.
"IEEE 1394b allows extensions to 800Mbit/sec., 1.6Gbit/sec. and 3.2Gbit/sec., all over copper wire. It supports long-distance transfers to 100 meters over a variety of media: CAT-5 unshielded cable at 100Mbit/sec., existing plastic optical fiber at 200Mbits/sec., next-generation plastic optical fiber at 400Mbit/sec. and 50-micron mulitmode glass optical fiber at up to 3.2Gbit/sec. The improved speed and distance capabilities of 1394b result from two major improvements: overlapped arbitration and advanced data encoding."
So Firewire 2 will support several speeds then. From what I gather your article says, it'll depend on the type of wiring used to connect. Thanks for your help.
ummm, what practical applications will this speed have for regular consumers?
Imean as it is most hard drives cannot even saturate the 400 mbs bus... what are we going to do with the extra bandwth besides have more devices on the bus?
<strong>ummm, what practical applications will this speed have for regular consumers?
Imean as it is most hard drives cannot even saturate the 400 mbs bus... what are we going to do with the extra bandwth besides have more devices on the bus?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Paul...
Great minds think alike!
I started a thread about a month ago asking the very same question do a search and you should find it... It was last month I think...
Anyway, I got a few examples but none that were what I call 'killer apps'. With bandwidth like that you can pretty much use firewire for PCI type card devices and with bandwidth like that you can have ALOT more devices all talking at the same time without maxing out the cable.
1) it always pays to be forward thinking and prepare for the future.
2) americans (especially techie americans) don't require practicality. does a regular consumer have a need for a 2.4GHz processor to check their email and write a letter to uncle bob? well... yes! for the same reason we need a 200mph car where the top speed limit is 70mph.
3) the real beauty of firewire II is that it doesn't require a host. this means that even though, as you say, a single device can't saturate the bus, several can. theoretically you could be download your video onto your fw hard disk while simultaneously burning a cd on a fw cdrw and/or backing up your fw raid to your fw dvd burner, etc...
4) the regular consumer may also see a benefit from economies of scale. rather than using a fw I chipset in consumer models and fw II in pro models, it would probably cost apple more for each (even though they own the company).
I started a thread about a month ago asking the very same question do a search and you should find it... It was last month I think...
Anyway, I got a few examples but none that were what I call 'killer apps'. With bandwidth like that you can pretty much use firewire for PCI type card devices and with bandwidth like that you can have ALOT more devices all talking at the same time without maxing out the cable.
<strong>ummm, what practical applications will this speed have for regular consumers?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
None that exist now. But wouldn't it be great if in the future, rather then having to have AGP, or PCI slots, we could juts plug a little box onto the end of the 'super firewire' and get the same effect? For instance, I'd love to put a Geforce 4 processor box (yes I know it'd need an external power supply) onto my firewire port on my Blue & White G3. They have firewire buck lack AGP. This is one of the only applications I could think of. Anybody else think about this?
Ha, looks like USB2 hits a wall at 14MB/sec (what?s that, like 112Mbps) Far cry from the 480Mbps they "claim". Where as Firewire was clearing 40MB/sec in some cases...
I know which one I would rather have. Let alone F2.
None that exist now. But wouldn't it be great if in the future, rather then having to have AGP, or PCI slots, we could juts plug a little box onto the end of the 'super firewire' and get the same effect? For instance, I'd love to put a Geforce 4 processor box (yes I know it'd need an external power supply) onto my firewire port on my Blue & White G3. They have firewire buck lack AGP. This is one of the only applications I could think of. Anybody else think about this?</strong><hr></blockquote>
alternatively should the length of the cable not come into play concerning the time it takes to process (that is an irrational dream), it is possible that 'processor boxes' could be added instead of multiprocessor within the cpu case...
1600 to 3200Mbps (200 to 400MBps) firewire would easily be the match of current PCI 32 and 64, and even 64bit/66Mhz (a little slower here 400 vs 533, but close enough).
You could bridge all kinds of PCI expansion to the firewire bus. Suddenly iMac is truly 'expandable'. Imagine a graphics card that just sits 'in-line' between your firewire port and a second monitor? You now have dual monitor solutions for virtually any firewire computer. Sound cards, decoders/encoders, video capture/hardware assisted rendering. Plenty of good stuff faster firwire could be used for right now. Sure, powermacs/pros have PCI slots at their disposal, but Powerbook Pros don't. And a lot of Pro laptop users could get some cool use out of such a firewire spec.
How the hell are we supposed to know? Firwiree two doesnt exist, there are no leaked models, apple deny's weather its in production or not, and NO BODY KNOWS WHAT SPEED IT IS AT. It is mearly an educated guess. Its like saying.
When is the G5 going to come out?
or
What speed with the G5 run at?
No body knows.
Why do people ask questions to which nobody, who happens to know, is willing to answer?
Sorry, i just had to vent a bit. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow were you wrong... Anyone who has followed the ieee 1394b working group knows exactly what the speed is and what I quoted on the 1st page of this thread from "Johas Teener" was directly from the man who invented Firewire. Johas worked at Apple in the 80's/90's then he left and started up a company of his own (firewire related) that Apple just purchased... So he is back working for Apple again.
Speeds on FW2 are as follows:
100Mb/s
200Mb/s
400Mb/s
800Mb/s
1600Mb/s
3200Mb/s
Different speeds based on the quality and the length of the cable being used.
Cheap (Cat5e) will give you 100Mb/s over a long run - 300 feet.
Better (what we use now) will give you up to 3200Mb/s over short run - 12 feet.
Best (multimode glass fiber) will also give you up to 3200Mb/s over long runs - 300+ feet.
<strong>How the hell are we supposed to know? Firwiree two doesnt exist, there are no leaked models, apple deny's weather its in production or not, and NO BODY KNOWS WHAT SPEED IT IS AT. It is mearly an educated guess.</strong><hr></blockquote>
we are supposed to know because of the standard. admittedly, the standard is not final yet. one must make an educated guess, as you say. but since this portion of the standard has changed very little (if at all) since the inception of the standard, it really isn't much of a guess.
btw, you can download a pdf version of the 0.9 version of the standard at <a href="http://www.zayante.com/p1394b/"; target="_blank">zayante</a>.
we are supposed to know because of the standard. admittedly, the standard is not final yet. one must make an educated guess, as you say. but since this portion of the standard has changed very little (if at all) since the inception of the standard, it really isn't much of a guess.
btw, you can download a pdf version of the 0.9 version of the standard at <a href="http://www.zayante.com/p1394b/"; target="_blank">zayante</a>.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Agreed and the only (and I think major) thing that has changed was the ability to hit the high speed 3.2Gb/s over the type cable we use now. IIRC 3.2Gb/s was 1st only set for MMF (glass fiber).
Comments
<strong>I have heard conflicting reports that Firewire 2 will have 800Mbps and 1200Mbps throughput. Can someone please clarify which one is correct? Thanks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
800Mbps should be what we'll get
1200Mbps should be what highend servers will get when they use fiber optics.
<strong>
800Mbps should be what we'll get
1200Mbps should be what highend servers will get when they use fiber optics.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Where did you get those figures?!?!
1394b (FWII)
800Mb/s
1600Mb/s
future (maybe now?)
3200Mb/s
All three speeds ARE (or will be) possible over all/most cable types. Better cable type gives you LONGER distance.
Either way
800Mb/s
1.6Gb/s
3.2Gb/s
That is what 1394b is...
<a href="http://www.1394ta.com/"; target="_blank">http://www.1394ta.com/</a>;
Here is a quote from Johas Teener (father of FW)
"IEEE 1394b allows extensions to 800Mbit/sec., 1.6Gbit/sec. and 3.2Gbit/sec., all over copper wire. It supports long-distance transfers to 100 meters over a variety of media: CAT-5 unshielded cable at 100Mbit/sec., existing plastic optical fiber at 200Mbits/sec., next-generation plastic optical fiber at 400Mbit/sec. and 50-micron mulitmode glass optical fiber at up to 3.2Gbit/sec. The improved speed and distance capabilities of 1394b result from two major improvements: overlapped arbitration and advanced data encoding."
Dave
Imean as it is most hard drives cannot even saturate the 400 mbs bus... what are we going to do with the extra bandwth besides have more devices on the bus?
<strong>ummm, what practical applications will this speed have for regular consumers?
Imean as it is most hard drives cannot even saturate the 400 mbs bus... what are we going to do with the extra bandwth besides have more devices on the bus?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Paul...
Great minds think alike!
I started a thread about a month ago asking the very same question do a search and you should find it... It was last month I think...
Anyway, I got a few examples but none that were what I call 'killer apps'. With bandwidth like that you can pretty much use firewire for PCI type card devices and with bandwidth like that you can have ALOT more devices all talking at the same time without maxing out the cable.
Dave
1) it always pays to be forward thinking and prepare for the future.
2) americans (especially techie americans) don't require practicality. does a regular consumer have a need for a 2.4GHz processor to check their email and write a letter to uncle bob? well... yes! for the same reason we need a 200mph car where the top speed limit is 70mph.
3) the real beauty of firewire II is that it doesn't require a host. this means that even though, as you say, a single device can't saturate the bus, several can. theoretically you could be download your video onto your fw hard disk while simultaneously burning a cd on a fw cdrw and/or backing up your fw raid to your fw dvd burner, etc...
4) the regular consumer may also see a benefit from economies of scale. rather than using a fw I chipset in consumer models and fw II in pro models, it would probably cost apple more for each (even though they own the company).
<strong>
Paul...
Great minds think alike!
I started a thread about a month ago asking the very same question do a search and you should find it... It was last month I think...
Anyway, I got a few examples but none that were what I call 'killer apps'. With bandwidth like that you can pretty much use firewire for PCI type card devices and with bandwidth like that you can have ALOT more devices all talking at the same time without maxing out the cable.
Dave</strong><hr></blockquote>
knew i read that somewhere....
<strong>ummm, what practical applications will this speed have for regular consumers?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
None that exist now. But wouldn't it be great if in the future, rather then having to have AGP, or PCI slots, we could juts plug a little box onto the end of the 'super firewire' and get the same effect? For instance, I'd love to put a Geforce 4 processor box (yes I know it'd need an external power supply) onto my firewire port on my Blue & White G3. They have firewire buck lack AGP. This is one of the only applications I could think of. Anybody else think about this?
Firewire came out on top every time and in some cases 'smoked' USB 2.0.
<a href="http://www.digit-life.com/articles/usb20vsfirewire/"; target="_blank">http://www.digit-life.com/articles/usb20vsfirewire/</a>;
Ha, looks like USB2 hits a wall at 14MB/sec (what?s that, like 112Mbps) Far cry from the 480Mbps they "claim". Where as Firewire was clearing 40MB/sec in some cases...
I know which one I would rather have.
Blizaine
<strong>
None that exist now. But wouldn't it be great if in the future, rather then having to have AGP, or PCI slots, we could juts plug a little box onto the end of the 'super firewire' and get the same effect? For instance, I'd love to put a Geforce 4 processor box (yes I know it'd need an external power supply) onto my firewire port on my Blue & White G3. They have firewire buck lack AGP. This is one of the only applications I could think of. Anybody else think about this?</strong><hr></blockquote>
alternatively should the length of the cable not come into play concerning the time it takes to process (that is an irrational dream), it is possible that 'processor boxes' could be added instead of multiprocessor within the cpu case...
You could bridge all kinds of PCI expansion to the firewire bus. Suddenly iMac is truly 'expandable'. Imagine a graphics card that just sits 'in-line' between your firewire port and a second monitor? You now have dual monitor solutions for virtually any firewire computer. Sound cards, decoders/encoders, video capture/hardware assisted rendering. Plenty of good stuff faster firwire could be used for right now. Sure, powermacs/pros have PCI slots at their disposal, but Powerbook Pros don't. And a lot of Pro laptop users could get some cool use out of such a firewire spec.
<strong>5 trillion billion terrabytes per second!
How the hell are we supposed to know? Firwiree two doesnt exist, there are no leaked models, apple deny's weather its in production or not, and NO BODY KNOWS WHAT SPEED IT IS AT. It is mearly an educated guess. Its like saying.
When is the G5 going to come out?
or
What speed with the G5 run at?
No body knows.
Why do people ask questions to which nobody, who happens to know, is willing to answer?
Sorry, i just had to vent a bit.
Wow were you wrong... Anyone who has followed the ieee 1394b working group knows exactly what the speed is and what I quoted on the 1st page of this thread from "Johas Teener" was directly from the man who invented Firewire. Johas worked at Apple in the 80's/90's then he left and started up a company of his own (firewire related) that Apple just purchased... So he is back working for Apple again.
Speeds on FW2 are as follows:
100Mb/s
200Mb/s
400Mb/s
800Mb/s
1600Mb/s
3200Mb/s
Different speeds based on the quality and the length of the cable being used.
Cheap (Cat5e) will give you 100Mb/s over a long run - 300 feet.
Better (what we use now) will give you up to 3200Mb/s over short run - 12 feet.
Best (multimode glass fiber) will also give you up to 3200Mb/s over long runs - 300+ feet.
Dave
[ 06-24-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</p>
<strong>How the hell are we supposed to know? Firwiree two doesnt exist, there are no leaked models, apple deny's weather its in production or not, and NO BODY KNOWS WHAT SPEED IT IS AT. It is mearly an educated guess.</strong><hr></blockquote>
we are supposed to know because of the standard. admittedly, the standard is not final yet. one must make an educated guess, as you say. but since this portion of the standard has changed very little (if at all) since the inception of the standard, it really isn't much of a guess.
btw, you can download a pdf version of the 0.9 version of the standard at <a href="http://www.zayante.com/p1394b/"; target="_blank">zayante</a>.
<strong>
we are supposed to know because of the standard. admittedly, the standard is not final yet. one must make an educated guess, as you say. but since this portion of the standard has changed very little (if at all) since the inception of the standard, it really isn't much of a guess.
btw, you can download a pdf version of the 0.9 version of the standard at <a href="http://www.zayante.com/p1394b/"; target="_blank">zayante</a>.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Agreed and the only (and I think major) thing that has changed was the ability to hit the high speed 3.2Gb/s over the type cable we use now. IIRC 3.2Gb/s was 1st only set for MMF (glass fiber).
Dave