Cypress EZ-USB GX3 Controller Delivers Near-Gigabit Speed Over USB 3.0

6

With the advent of the USB Type-C connector, more consumer electronics manufacturers are opting to include it over traditional USB and mini-USB connections. USB Type-C is particularly attractive because of its slim profile and flippable design. Due to the connector's sleek size and shape, laptop manufacturers can make thinner systems. However, as laptops become thinner, I/O port trade-offs must be made, and one of the most useful amenities being omitted is the Gigabit Ethernet port. Cypress Semiconductors seeks to address this with the EZ-USB GX3 controller.

Cypress demonstrated the EZ-USB GX3 today at the Intel Developer Forum in San Francisco. While Gigabit Ethernet is capable of speeds up to 950 Mbps, traditional Gigabit Ethernet to USB 3.0 adapters provide a significantly reduced throughput. However, Cypress's EZ-USB GX3 controller was shown to be capable of 910 Mbps, thanks to a proprietary "burst transfer mechanism." This is a negligible difference in comparison to Gigabit Ethernet's maximum speeds. The following graphic shows how their burst transfer mechanism works:

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware

Tom's Hardware is the leading destination for hardcore computer enthusiasts. We cover everything from processors to 3D printers, single-board computers, SSDs and high-end gaming rigs, empowering readers to make the most of the tech they love, keep up on the latest developments and buy the right gear. Our staff has more than 100 years of combined experience covering news, solving tech problems and reviewing components and systems.

  • knowom
    gigabit isn't even fast now a days if this was close to 10 gigabit it would exciting hell if that later point would just come down in price significantly to the affordable sub $50 range it would be quite major
    Reply
  • jasonelmore
    yeah gigabit speed is 5x slower than USB 3.0 to put it in perspective.

    the industry needs to push for faster networking standards.

    Gigabit speed is only 100 MB/s. try streaming 4k with only 100 MB a second.. its not good and is only on par with Blu Ray 1080p..

    but this is not amped wireless's fault, just the industry in general and intel.
    Reply
  • Daniel Ladishew
    yeah gigabit speed is 5x slower than USB 3.0 to put it in perspective.

    the industry needs to push for faster networking standards.

    Gigabit speed is only 100 MB/s. try streaming 4k with only 100 MB a second.. its not good and is only on par with Blu Ray 1080p..

    but this is not amped wireless's fault, just the industry in general and intel.

    The purpose of this controller isn't to provide new and exciting speeds, but to provide a comparable internet connection for devices that don't/won't have a form factor allowing for a full ethernet port. Think phones, tablets, and netbooks. This chip helps the USB standard along the path of becoming the "one cable to rule them all."
    Reply
  • digitalgriffin
    16485036 said:
    yeah gigabit speed is 5x slower than USB 3.0 to put it in perspective.

    the industry needs to push for faster networking standards.

    Gigabit speed is only 100 MB/s. try streaming 4k with only 100 MB a second.. its not good and is only on par with Blu Ray 1080p..

    but this is not amped wireless's fault, just the industry in general and intel.

    A man with that much serious hardware, as yourself, has more money then computer brains apparently.

    You only need 20Mbps for 4K video with typical HEVC / VP9 codecs. You have plenty of bandwidth to spare on a 1 Gigabit connection. Even 4K Bluray is capped at 100Mbps.

    Reply
  • rwinches
    So it's an adapter from USB C to RJ 45 for systems that are too thin to allow an RJ 45 connector. Cool.

    Reply
  • bit_user
    I hate that this is even necessary. USB 3 should have addressed this problem in the standard.

    Note that this adapter will not work without proprietary drivers. And if there's a bug in the drivers, or it doesn't work for whatever linux kernel you're running, too bad.
    Reply