Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Intel's Panther Point to Bring USB 3.0 Support

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 34 comments

Get your blue USB plugs ready.

Intel hasn't been full-steam-ahead on its backing of USB 3.0, which has led some to wonder when the company would integrate native support for the standard in its chipsets.

According to a slide obtained by Engadget, it appears that USB 3.0 support could be coming in with the Panther Point chipset.

Engadget didn't specify any further details outside of what can be gleamed from the slide above, so it's just going to be the waiting game for those with Superspeed devices.

Display 34 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 2 Hide
    campb292 , April 13, 2011 4:51 PM
    Isn't that still another year away? The Sandy processors are great, but they are gimped by the lame chipset. 3rd party USB3? 2 SATA Gb/s ports? WHAT? Get moving INTEL!
  • 1 Hide
    ansar , April 13, 2011 4:58 PM
    I'm guessing they want to push their Thunderbolt more than usb 3.0.
  • 1 Hide
    dgingeri , April 13, 2011 5:35 PM
    campb292Isn't that still another year away? The Sandy processors are great, but they are gimped by the lame chipset. 3rd party USB3? 2 SATA Gb/s ports? WHAT? Get moving INTEL!


    get moving?? Remember the P4 fiasco? AMD couldn't compete with the Athlon FX series, so Intel stalled the whole industry for 3 years. in 3 years we got a whopping %30 increase in processor speed. it took them another 2 years after the Athlon 64 came out to bring up something to really compete.

    Now AMD doesn't have anything to compete again, and they're slowing down again. If Bulldozer doesn't compete with Ivybridge in performance, they'll continue to stall, and we'll have another 5-7 years before we see any significant performance increase while Intel rules the roost. If AMD dies, we'll never see improvement in processor performance in the desktop.

    Yes, AMD should have had Bulldozer out by now, but because of Intel's damage from their anti-competitive practices, AMD hasn't had the money to get the engineering staff to get the product ready.
  • 6 Hide
    Ogdin , April 13, 2011 5:52 PM
    dgingeriget moving?? Remember the P4 fiasco? AMD couldn't compete with the Athlon FX series, so Intel stalled the whole industry for 3 years. in 3 years we got a whopping %30 increase in processor speed. it took them another 2 years after the Athlon 64 came out to bring up something to really compete. Now AMD doesn't have anything to compete again, and they're slowing down again. If Bulldozer doesn't compete with Ivybridge in performance, they'll continue to stall, and we'll have another 5-7 years before we see any significant performance increase while Intel rules the roost. If AMD dies, we'll never see improvement in processor performance in the desktop. Yes, AMD should have had Bulldozer out by now, but because of Intel's damage from their anti-competitive practices, AMD hasn't had the money to get the engineering staff to get the product ready.


    Better watch out,all that feverish typing might dislodge your tinfoil hat.
  • 0 Hide
    LuckyDucky7 , April 13, 2011 5:56 PM
    "News Flash: Intel Gets With The Times (even though they're a technology company to begin with)".

    First of all, AMD's already ahead of Intel on this. They've already baked USB 3.0 into their Fusion chipsets (they're hitting the stores in about 3 months IIRC).

    Intel, on the other hand, is so eager to drag its butt on issues like upgradeability, that it has cost itself about a billion dollars. Not on USB 3.0, but on its unwillingness to incorporate new technology into its products and not rely on "good enough".

    Remember the issue that SATA II ports degrade in performance over time? If they had gone full-on SATA III when they had the chance they wouldn't have had this problem. They cost themselves a billion dollars because of their unwillingness to go completely to the new technology.

    So who cares? It's already here, and Intel is once again behind the game.
  • -3 Hide
    haplo602 , April 13, 2011 5:57 PM
    dgingeriget moving?? Remember the P4 fiasco? AMD couldn't compete with the Athlon FX series, so Intel stalled the whole industry for 3 years. in 3 years we got a whopping %30 increase in processor speed. it took them another 2 years after the Athlon 64 came out to bring up something to really compete. Now AMD doesn't have anything to compete again, and they're slowing down again. If Bulldozer doesn't compete with Ivybridge in performance, they'll continue to stall, and we'll have another 5-7 years before we see any significant performance increase while Intel rules the roost. If AMD dies, we'll never see improvement in processor performance in the desktop. Yes, AMD should have had Bulldozer out by now, but because of Intel's damage from their anti-competitive practices, AMD hasn't had the money to get the engineering staff to get the product ready.


    and what's so performance demanding that you complain about the current status ? for 95% of people an athlon II x3 is plenty. why should Intel bother ? except server market there's nothing much to improve that's realy needed.
  • 5 Hide
    pelov , April 13, 2011 5:59 PM
    haplo602and what's so performance demanding that you complain about the current status ? for 95% of people an athlon II x3 is plenty. why should Intel bother ? except server market there's nothing much to improve that's realy needed.


    I like to play my console ports with dual 6990's and i7 2600's at 5ghz.
  • 0 Hide
    johnh2005 , April 13, 2011 6:03 PM
    OgdinBetter watch out,all that feverish typing might dislodge your tinfoil hat.


    +1 That gave me a great chuckle. If you could have only seen the vision in my head...
  • 0 Hide
    geekapproved , April 13, 2011 6:04 PM
    Groundbreaking!
  • 0 Hide
    geekapproved , April 13, 2011 6:05 PM
    I can see it now:

    "Need help with Panther Point build".
  • 0 Hide
    phatboe , April 13, 2011 6:22 PM
    ...and yet still no PCIe 3.0.
  • -1 Hide
    DXRick , April 13, 2011 6:54 PM
    My X58 motherboard already has USB 3.0.

    So, Intel can kiss my
  • 1 Hide
    the associate , April 13, 2011 6:58 PM
    pelovI like to play my console ports with dual 6990's and i7 2600's at 5ghz.


    I lawled, +1

    At least we have Metro 2033, multi screen setups and 2560x1600 :) 
  • 0 Hide
    dgingeri , April 13, 2011 7:04 PM
    OgdinBetter watch out,all that feverish typing might dislodge your tinfoil hat.


    no tinfoil hat here. it's simple:

    Intel cares more about profits than their customers.

    In order to make more profits, they drive out competition, reduce spending on R&D, release technology slower for more cost effectiveness.

    This is quite simply their business plan. In a world without anti-trust laws, it is commonplace. Just look at the 1800-1930 time frame in business. this tactic was commonly used. The business leaders were just overly greedy that way.

    Normally, I'm pretty conservative about business and economic matters, but when it comes to competition, I'm in favor of a 2-5 party competition system with different parties changing up who is in the lead. It works better for everyone that way. Sure, it means business leaders don't make as much overall profit when there's competition, but money alone shouldn't be the goal of any businessman.

    Anyone who's goal is profit alone is going to drive everything he touches into the ground. It's like locusts. they eat and eat and move on. they are nothing but destroyers.

    as I said, not a conspiracy or anything secret. they're just greedy, and this is what greed brings. we need more engineers and less accountants in charge of the world's companies.
  • -1 Hide
    kenyee , April 13, 2011 7:25 PM
    Pretty funny that Panther Point doesn't have Thunderbolt built-in....guess all the media edit stuff will still be done on Macs unless USB 3.0 really is closer to firewire/thunderbolt speeds (USB2.0 was twice as slow because of all the handshaking in the protocol)-:
  • 0 Hide
    pelov , April 13, 2011 7:36 PM
    kenyeePretty funny that Panther Point doesn't have Thunderbolt built-in....guess all the media edit stuff will still be done on Macs unless USB 3.0 really is closer to firewire/thunderbolt speeds (USB2.0 was twice as slow because of all the handshaking in the protocol)-:


    That's actually quite interesting and I can see the application of something like that to be the future, but I also think it's a bit ahead of its time. I wouldn't blame them for not trying to pushing that in the next ~3-5 years. Don't get me wrong, I'll be the first to /drool when I see significant improvements in that tech, but it's just not ready/time for that stuff.
  • 0 Hide
    mariush , April 13, 2011 8:08 PM
    Apple (launch partner along with Sony and Lenovo) has "monopoly" over Thunderbolt (which is actually Light Peak from Intel) so you won't see it outside Apple laptops and desktop computers.

    It's a move designed to differentiate Apple and make them feel like "multimedia editing" machines again.

    Otherwise, Intel delayed USB 3 precisely for this. Now that Apple has managed to integrate it and launch the new generation, they can launch the chipsets.
  • 0 Hide
    audioee , April 13, 2011 8:10 PM
    @dgingeri

    So when Intel updates product lines every six months, you complain because you just bought the "old" tech. And when they want to extend the life of their product lines you complain because they are not updating fast enough. Please make up your mind.
  • 0 Hide
    kinggremlin , April 13, 2011 8:13 PM
    dgingerino tinfoil hat here. it's simple:Intel cares more about profits than their customers.In order to make more profits, they drive out competition, reduce spending on R&D, release technology slower for more cost effectiveness.This is quite simply their business plan. In a world without anti-trust laws, it is commonplace. Just look at the 1800-1930 time frame in business. this tactic was commonly used. The business leaders were just overly greedy that way.Normally, I'm pretty conservative about business and economic matters, but when it comes to competition, I'm in favor of a 2-5 party competition system with different parties changing up who is in the lead. It works better for everyone that way. Sure, it means business leaders don't make as much overall profit when there's competition, but money alone shouldn't be the goal of any businessman. Anyone who's goal is profit alone is going to drive everything he touches into the ground. It's like locusts. they eat and eat and move on. they are nothing but destroyers. as I said, not a conspiracy or anything secret. they're just greedy, and this is what greed brings. we need more engineers and less accountants in charge of the world's companies.



    As opposed to AMD, who only cares about you the customer, and has no interest in money. The goal of every company is money alone. That's why they exist. The only reason AMD isn't doing what you perceive Intel as doing, is because AMD is in a market position where they can do it. If Intel and AMD swapped places, AMD would be doing the exact same thing Intel is doing now. If AMD didn't exist, Intel wouldn't suddenly stop innovating, despite what the tinfoil hat club members like you want to think. It probably won't move along at the same pace, but it will still continue, because people aren't going to buy the same thing forever (or even more than once really). Microsoft has no real competition despite what the Apple fans might think, but MS still continues to regularly churn out new releases of their software. Why? Because in order to continue making money, they have to continue developing new products that the consumer will want to upgrade too.

    The same goes for Intel, no one is going to buy a new computer that uses the same parts as their current computer just because it is a few years old. There has to be incentive, be it greater performance, or more features, for the consumer to spend the money for a new computer.
  • 1 Hide
    kinggremlin , April 13, 2011 8:15 PM
    correction,
    I meant to say, AMD is NOT in a market position where they can do it.
Display more comments