Gigabyte 333 Event - Details about SATA 6G and USB 3.0

Tradeshow & OC events by massman @ 2009-12-03

Last week we were able to escape Belgian´s rain to meet up with a lot of technical folk from Gigabyte in sunny Rome, Italy. During this presentation, we were given more information regarding the new technologies used by Gigabyte: USB 3.0, USB 3x Power and Sata 6GB.

  • next

Introduction

Introduction

Madshrimps (c)


Before we got the actual technical information, Sir Henry, president of Gigabyte shared a few words about Gigabyte's policy and philosophy. A lot of Gigabyte boasting, obviously, but also providing us an insight in why Gigabyte is releasing such a large amount of motherboards.

Madshrimps (c)
Src: HWbot


As explained by Sir Henry, Gigabyte wants to offer the latest technology to each segment of the market as they believe end-users should always be using the latest technology, even if their budget isn't that big. So, in contrary to some other vendors, Gigabyte applies new technology to the whole range of boards, from high-end to low-end.

Madshrimps (c)


At first sight, this is indeed a good thing, especially for the end-user, but it does make the Gigabyte product list look like total chaos. Agreed, the low-end user should be able to use the latest technology, but the same low-end user mostly has no clue about what's new and what's better. Confusing product names, at least from a non-IT point of view, doesn't help the end-user.

The main presentation was given by Jackson Hsu, global product manager. Let's start by explaining the first two threes in regard to USB innovation.

Madshrimps (c)
A photo of a Jackson Hsu presenting who's presenting the presentation of the motherboard!

  • next
Comment from Kougar @ 2009/12/04
Quote:
As USB is easier to use and can handle enough bandwidth to not completely bottleneck any data-transfer, why would we need Sata to connect harddisk drives? I presume compatibility may be an issue ... (Editor’s note : compatibility, reliability, but most important: industry standards.)
How about much lower CPU overhead?

 

reply