Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. News

USB 3.2 brings superfast transfer speeds, but also lots of confusion

Add as a preferred source on Google
Image used with permission by copyright holder

The USB standard has come a bit far over the past few years, with many different generations and types to consider. Though speed differences are cited as the factors between each of the standards, it has become somewhat hard for some consumers to understand.

In the latest headache, the USB Implementers Forum recently announced a next-generation USB-3.2 specification, promising fast-transfer speeds of up to 20GB per second, but also bringing some confusing name changes to previous standards.

Recommended Videos

Though the changes aren’t necessarily straightforward, the new USB-3.2 specification introduces a three-speed tier. The previous USB 3.0-and USB-3.1 specifications are now gone but are still keeping the same exact transfer speeds under different naming.

The first tier— known as USB-3.2 Gen 1— (previously called USB 3.0,) is now upgraded in branding to SuperSpeed USB to indicate data transfer rates of up to 5GBps. A second tier— USB 3.2 Gen 2—(formerly known as USB 3.1,) gets the bump in naming to SuperSpeed USB 10 Gbps. The final and the newest tier— now known as USB 3.2 Gen 2×2— will be branded as SuperSpeed USB 20Gbps.

That newest tier doubles the maximum overall speed, by allowing for two lanes of 10GBps data speed over the previous generation. It also makes it so that manufacturers will be able to state that their devices will support USB-3.2. However, for users, there still needs to be a direct way of knowing which speeds they will be getting. As a workaround, it is being recommended for manufacturers to stick to the SuperSpeed branding when marketing new USB-3.2 products.

“When referring to a product that is based on and compliant with the USB-3.2 specification, it is critical for manufacturers to clearly identify the performance capabilities of that device separately from other product benefits and/or physical characteristics,” said the USB Implementors forum.

Still, these new specifications are all backward compatible with each other, so despite the inherent confusion, older devices will still work in any new laptop with USB-3.2. It is also being recommended for manufacturers to submit their products to the USB Implementors forum so that proper logos for better consumer recommendation. Combined with the frustrations of already having to deal with dongles when buying the latest laptops, this is an unwelcome development for consumers.

Arif Bacchus
Arif Bacchus is a native New Yorker and a fan of all things technology. Arif works as a freelance writer at Digital Trends…
Macbook Neo stress test shows Apple could’ve made it run cooler with a simple fix
This simple mod makes the MacBook Neo faster.
Apple MacBook Neo with users hands on it

Apple's MacBook Neo arrived as a shock to the industry. It is the new cheap MacBook that is designed to be silent, efficient, and affordable. But a new stress test suggests that it could have been noticeably better with a very simple change.

As per a recent test, the addition of a basic copper plate to the cooling setup can improve both thermals and performance by a meaningful margin. And the frustrating part? It isn't some complex engineering overhaul and is relatively straightforward.

Read more
The Mac Pro is dead at Apple, and I’ll miss the cheese-grater powerhouse
RIP Mac Pro. The Mac Studio is taking the throne, and we're okay with that.
Electronics, Computer, Pc

Apple has officially discontinued the Mac Pro. It’s been removed from Apple’s website, and Apple has confirmed to 9to5Mac that there are no plans to release a future version. The buy page now redirects to Apple’s Mac homepage, where the Mac Pro no longer exists.

Why did Apple kill the Mac Pro?

Read more
March Madness, Revisited: The AI Model Did Well. But Mad Things Still Happen
Stills from NCAA games.

(NOTE: This article is part of an ongoing series documenting an experiment with using AI to fill the NCAA brackets and see how it fares against years of human experience. The original article is as follows.)

A week ago, I wrote about entering an NCAA tournament pool with a more disciplined process than I usually use.

Read more