Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Intel's Chief River Will Begin Support for USB 3.0

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 22 comments

After Huron River will come Chief River with USB 3.0 support... finally!

DigiTimes with its ears to the Taiwanese computer industry have once again found plans of what Intel has in store next year. According to the report, Intel will be following up on Huron River, the Sandy Bridge platform for notebooks expected for early 2011, with a platform codenamed Chief River.

Chief River will run the 22nm Ivy Bridge processors and will finally usher in Intel support for USB 3.0. Mass production of these products are expected to start in September 2011 but not officially rolled out until 2012 (unless the world ends, of course).

For the netbook market, Intel will supposedly have Cedar Trail-M in the second quarter 2011, which will leapfrog the Oak Trail Atom platform that's expected at the end of this year.

Discuss
Display all 22 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 18 Hide
    firebee1991 , November 4, 2010 4:42 PM
    greghomeI will watch 2012 in 2013 and laugh


    I watched 2012 in 2010 and laughed, right before I fell asleep.
  • 14 Hide
    lp231 , November 4, 2010 2:37 PM
    You're name is Chief River?
    My name is Wakiki Mushroom!!!

    Seriously, if Intel is adding USB 3.0 support to their Chief River platform, is Jobs going to add it as well or still say their users don't need it?
  • 12 Hide
    samely , November 4, 2010 2:38 PM
    braxis john"Mass production of these products are expected to start in September 2011 but not officially rolled out until 2012 (unless the world ends, of course)."Man i still laughting of this hahahaha !

    Given that the target date is December 21st 2012, I think we'll have some USB 3.0 prior to then.
Other Comments
  • -4 Hide
    braxis john , November 4, 2010 2:27 PM
    "Mass production of these products are expected to start in September 2011 but not officially rolled out until 2012 (unless the world ends, of course)."

    Man i still laughting of this hahahaha !
  • 14 Hide
    lp231 , November 4, 2010 2:37 PM
    You're name is Chief River?
    My name is Wakiki Mushroom!!!

    Seriously, if Intel is adding USB 3.0 support to their Chief River platform, is Jobs going to add it as well or still say their users don't need it?
  • 12 Hide
    samely , November 4, 2010 2:38 PM
    braxis john"Mass production of these products are expected to start in September 2011 but not officially rolled out until 2012 (unless the world ends, of course)."Man i still laughting of this hahahaha !

    Given that the target date is December 21st 2012, I think we'll have some USB 3.0 prior to then.
  • 5 Hide
    mavroxur , November 4, 2010 2:42 PM
    It sure is taking Intel a little while to get to the party... Mass production of a USB 3.0 compliant chipset in September 2011, and roll out in 2012? WTF?
  • 12 Hide
    cptnjarhead , November 4, 2010 2:49 PM
    2012? ... what is the deal with 3.0?
    My amd 870 came with USB 3... not sure why intel is so late to the game on that one.
  • 6 Hide
    Emperus , November 4, 2010 3:10 PM
    Where is LIGHT PEAK ..??
  • 5 Hide
    f-14 , November 4, 2010 3:29 PM
    lp231Seriously, if Intel is adding USB 3.0 support to their Chief River platform, is Jobs going to add it as well or still say their users don't need it?


    because video cameras don't have drivers for macs.
    so editing your videos on mac is not important to apple, other wise they'd put cameras on all their stuff and try to get video camera manufacturers to add driver support.
    therefore macs don't need large file tranfer capabilities thus meaning macs are only usefull for picture editing.
  • -6 Hide
    SchizoFrog , November 4, 2010 3:56 PM
    f-14because video cameras don't have drivers for macs.so editing your videos on mac is not important to apple, other wise they'd put cameras on all their stuff and try to get video camera manufacturers to add driver support.therefore macs don't need large file tranfer capabilities thus meaning macs are only usefull for picture editing.

    Never heard of HD video recorders and then transferring the files to the Mac for editing?
  • 18 Hide
    firebee1991 , November 4, 2010 4:42 PM
    greghomeI will watch 2012 in 2013 and laugh


    I watched 2012 in 2010 and laughed, right before I fell asleep.
  • 6 Hide
    jimmysmitty , November 4, 2010 5:09 PM
    cptnjarhead2012? ... what is the deal with 3.0?My amd 870 came with USB 3... not sure why intel is so late to the game on that one.


    Actually there is no chipset out that officially supports USB 3.0/ In fact all it is is a chip added to the mobo by the maker (Gigabyte/Asus) that gives you probably 2 USB 3.0 ports. But the 870 chipset from AMD can support up to 14 USB 2.0 ports, no USB 3.0 ports.

    If you look at current Intel based mobos, you will see 2 USB 3.0 ports just as you will find on current AMD mobos. But neither have naitive support for USB 3.0 in the chipset itself.
  • 5 Hide
    Specter0420 , November 4, 2010 5:29 PM
    Yea, the Mayans were off by about 11 years with the whole planets aligning thing (the main reason people believe the world will end, still incredible how close they were in their prediction). It already happened in 98 or 99. We are still here.
  • 3 Hide
    dgingeri , November 4, 2010 5:34 PM
    I've needed USB3 for over a year already. My backups take >36 hours through USB2. I had to go with an internal drive for my backups until I got the Asus U3S6 card. Now I'm happy with my USB3 drive.

    Intel should have have this with the P55 chipset, not putting it off for another 2 and a half years.
  • 1 Hide
    bourgeoisdude , November 4, 2010 6:52 PM
    All I need to say is:

    About. Freaking. Time.
  • 0 Hide
    jdamon113 , November 4, 2010 7:19 PM
    I agree, Lets get with light Peak
  • -1 Hide
    hellwig , November 4, 2010 8:17 PM
    Intel sat on USB 3.0 because of standards adoption delays (although, if they had submitted the standard themselves, it would currently be the only connectivity option available on all their products). Still, I don't see the problem with third-party USB 3.0 controllers. I'm not sure why USB 2.0 is part of the chipset anyway (yes, it means less chips on the board, but these aren't embedded systems here). gigE/eSATA/IDE/SATA6gbps/firewire/sound, these are all still add-on chips for many motherboards. As long as Intel keeps enough PCIe channels open for addons, motherboard makers can add as many USB 3.0 slots as they deem practical. One problem with including things on the chipset is you are bound to that number or require addon-chips anyway. Some motherboards from Gigabyte have 3 additional SATA controllers, 1 for eSATA, 1 for SATA 6gbps, and 1 that adds 2 SATA + IDE. At that point, you hardly need the 6 ports that come with the chipset. The same goes for USB. Many chipsets now come with 12 USB2.0 ports. How long before those 12 sit idle because most things get plugged into USB 3.0?

    In all honesty, I wish chipsets came with nothing but PCIe connectors, and lots of them. Let the mobo manufacturers decide if they attach SATA6, gigE, Firewire, USB 3.0, USB 2.0, etc...
  • 0 Hide
    dgingeri , November 4, 2010 8:35 PM
    hellwigISome motherboards from Gigabyte have 3 additional SATA controllers, 1 for eSATA, 1 for SATA 6gbps, and 1 that adds 2 SATA + IDE. At that point, you hardly need the 6 ports that come with the chipset. The same goes for USB. Many chipsets now come with 12 USB2.0 ports. How long before those 12 sit idle because most things get plugged into USB 3.0?


    Actually, I have a total of 10 SATA devices and 18 USB devices on my machine. Some of the USB cascade, so they only use 8 ports on my machine, but I like having my front ports available if I need to connect one my my 4 flash drives for loading up drivers, tool programs, patches, or transferring user data. I've got a 4 drive RAID 5 array, a 2 drive RAID 0 array, 2 SSDs for games, mirrored drives for the OS, and 2 DVD writers. (It's one heck of a behemoth.)

    So, current tech hardly keeps up with me. I think they ought to expand the abilities of the chipset. More PCIe lanes would be nice for getting a 3rd video card in my machine for better gaming. :) 
  • 0 Hide
    iLLz , November 4, 2010 9:17 PM
    The reason they are stalling for USB3.0 is twofold.

    1. LightPeak is coming out early 2011 -

    2. Also there aren't enough PCIe lanes to accommodate lots of USB3.0 ports. So perhaps they are waiting for PCIe3 to help ease the complexity of the boards in tracing the PCIe lanes out.

    Also, maybe they will piggyback USB3 over LightPeak? I heard it could be possible so maybe they want to do that. They could fit two USB3 ports on each LightPeak lane.
  • 0 Hide
    iLLz , November 4, 2010 9:18 PM
  • 0 Hide
    eugenester , November 4, 2010 11:22 PM
    cptnjarhead2012? ... what is the deal with 3.0?My amd 870 came with USB 3... not sure why intel is so late to the game on that one.


    There is no platform out on the market that NATIVELY supports USB 3.0.
    jimmysmittyActually there is no chipset out that officially supports USB 3.0/ In fact all it is is a chip added to the mobo by the maker (Gigabyte/Asus) that gives you probably 2 USB 3.0 ports. But the 870 chipset from AMD can support up to 14 USB 2.0 ports, no USB 3.0 ports.If you look at current Intel based mobos, you will see 2 USB 3.0 ports just as you will find on current AMD mobos. But neither have native support for USB 3.0 in the chipset itself.


    The chip that you speak of is actually made by NEC, which is the only supplier of USB3 controllers at the time. Other companies such as VIA have showcased their USB3 controllers at Computex, but they are very late to the game.
  • 0 Hide
    dEAne , November 5, 2010 5:10 AM
    finally hope it is much much faster.
Display more comments