Intel's Chief River Will Begin Support for USB 3.0

News
By
published

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.

Marcus Yam
Marcus Yam
Marcus Yam served as Tom's Hardware News Director during 2008-2014. He entered tech media in the late 90s and fondly remembers the days when an overclocked Celeron 300A and Voodoo2 SLI comprised a gaming rig with the ultimate street cred.
22 Comments Comment from the forums
  • 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 !
    Reply
  • lp231
    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?
    Reply
  • samely
    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.
    Reply
  • mavroxur
    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?
    Reply
  • cptnjarhead
    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.
    Reply
  • Emperus
    Where is LIGHT PEAK ..??
    Reply
  • f-14
    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.
    Reply
  • SchizoFrog
    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?
    Reply
  • firebee1991
    greghomeI will watch 2012 in 2013 and laugh
    I watched 2012 in 2010 and laughed, right before I fell asleep.
    Reply
  • jimmysmitty
    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.
    Reply