Thunderbolt - Future Use Cases?

[freshfeesh]

I tend to upgrade only every 3 or 4 generations, and am on the cusp of the next one, which I want to be as future proof as possible. The decision I'm mulling while waiting for C2 stepping to hit my boards of choice is whether to pay extra for a version with Thunderbolt. I understand that there's a dearth of devices on the market, but what about even theoretical use cases in the future? Ubiquity would be a good reason, but that looks unlikely to ever happen. Pro audio or video editing to a massive external drive array look like the only use case truly enabled by the tech. My workflow doesn't and won't involve that. I do want an external array for backup, but it will necessarily be on a server on my LAN. A wholesale change to the common computer architecture, a la the upcoming Mac Pro (most devices external and modular), is quite interesting, but I will be watching that from the sidelines for quite a while, and a single on board TB controller doesn't get one onto that playground. To simply display high res video, HDMI or Display Port out of a video card work great, and it's trivial to swap cards later. Finally, with Thunderbolt 2 and optical connections on the way, current built-in Thunderbolt doesn't seem to have much time to shine before it's outdated.

Q2: Is it correct that the built in Thunderbolt controllers are connected to the PCH over PCIe?, and if so, is there a disadvantage to just using a PCIe add-in card vs. built-in? There are a finite number of PCIe lanes from CPU and PCH to allocate, whether to on board devices or expansion slots.

Essentially, TB acts like ePCIe, like eSATA is external SATA, but if you can stuff everything you can ever want or think of into the box you have, there's no compelling reason for e[ither one].

 

[plugwash]

whether to pay extra for a version with Thunderbolt.

I'm going to say no, for a laptop I can see the attraction of thunderbolt since it's the fastest interface anyone has put on them but for a desktop there is much less attraction.

Pro audio or video editing to a massive external drive array look like the only use case truly enabled by the tech.

Even that can be done with SAS or fiber channel or iSCSI over 10 gigabit ethernet.

Q2: Is it correct that the built in Thunderbolt controllers are connected to the PCH over PCIe?

AIUI the thunderbolt controller is connected to the PCH over PCIe (for IO) and displayport (for graphics)

is there a disadvantage to just using a PCIe add-in card vs. built-in?

I'm not sure anyone is actually making thunderbolt add-in cards yet but if and when they do it wouldn't surprise me if they don't support video output.

There are a finite number of PCIe lanes from CPU and PCH to allocate, whether to on board devices or expansion slots.

Indeed which means to get thunderbolt you will probablly be sacrificing other more useful expansion options.

 

[SpongeBob]

You think Thunderbolt has a future? I dunno about you but I'm guessing usb devices outsell them 10,000 : 1

 

[freshfeesh]

Even that can be done with SAS or fiber channel or iSCSI over 10 gigabit ethernet.

Even though those are a few bucks more, good point. TB isn't "enabling" anything.

You think Thunderbolt has a future?

I guess I'm not sure. I admit to wanting it to be the future, just because it's fast and getting faster. If I meet one of the engineers that made it I'll but them a beer, but it looks like I'll vote against it for now with my hardware dollars.

 

[Skripka]

You think Thunderbolt has a future? I dunno about you but I'm guessing usb devices outsell them 10,000 : 1

Even though those are a few bucks more, good point. TB isn't "enabling" anything.


I guess I'm not sure. I admit to wanting it to be the future, just because it's fast and getting faster. If I meet one of the engineers that made it I'll but them a beer, but it looks like I'll vote against it for now with my hardware dollars.

I'm of the opinion now and was when it was released...that best case Thunderbolt will go the way of FireWire. Perhaps technologically superior but rendered irrelevant by commonplace USB (and soon DisplayPort)

 

[plugwash]

I think firewire is a good analogy, like firewire there will be niche's where it makes sense and like firewire I don't see it ever taking off in the mass market.

 

[silk186]

i think it's only real purpose is for connecting an notebook to a dock. For desktop I see no purpose.

 

[ccityinstaller]

I don't see it taking off at all, especially since USB 3.1 can pretty much do the same thing, but with better bandwidth on tap..Also USB isn't tied to a single company (Intel) for production/royalties.

 

[Skripka]

I don't see it taking off at all, especially since USB 3.1 can pretty much do the same thing, but with better bandwidth on tap..Also USB isn't tied to a single company (Intel) for production/royalties.

More importantly...USB doesn't use $50 cables that can only be gotten from Apple last I knew.

 

[freshfeesh]

I don't see it taking off at all, especially since USB 3.1 can pretty much do the same thing, but with better bandwidth on tap. Also USB isn't tied to a single company (Intel) for production/royalties.

I'm on board with your conclusion, but according to this Tom's HW article TB currently has 2X the bandwidth (10 Gb/s vs. 5 Gb/s) for data. I've also read that TB 2 will essentially pool currently discrete data and video channels for a total of 20 Gb/s by the end of the year. So it appears that it will stay a generation or two ahead of USB for a while. But there's no killer ap.

You're right on about the royalties.

 

[ragecase]

will go the way of firewire imo