A7V8X and USB 2.0 ports

[Lucius Snow]

Hello,

I own an A7V8X motherboard with a few USB peripherals plugged on it. All of
them are USB 1.1, they run correctly. I bought today a flash memory USB
(2.0). By seeing the transfer speed (around 1,3 MB/s), i noticed it ran in
USB 1.1. According the user's manual, the 4 USB ports of the motherboard are
2.0. Also, i don't need drivers for USB 2.0 since i'm running Windows XP.
All my system is up to date and stable. I looked in Sandra and it says that
the 4th USB controller only is USB 2.0. All the others are 1.1.

I wonder what's wrong ...
Any idea ? Thank you.

 

[DaveW]

The motherboard USB 2 chipset needs a driver installed from your motherboard
installation CD, I believe.

 

[Paul]

Hello,

I own an A7V8X motherboard with a few USB peripherals plugged on it. All of
them are USB 1.1, they run correctly. I bought today a flash memory USB
(2.0). By seeing the transfer speed (around 1,3 MB/s), i noticed it ran in
USB 1.1. According the user's manual, the 4 USB ports of the motherboard are
2.0. Also, i don't need drivers for USB 2.0 since i'm running Windows XP.
All my system is up to date and stable. I looked in Sandra and it says that
the 4th USB controller only is USB 2.0. All the others are 1.1.

I wonder what's wrong ...
Any idea ? Thank you.

http://www.usbman.com/Guides/checking_for_usb_2.htm

I presume Sandra is showing the run time binding of a USB2 logic
block to the port with the Flash Drive.

Note that, for USB 1.1 devices, while the theoretical transfer
rate is 1.5MB/sec (12Mb/sec), the practical rate is 1MB/sec or
so. This is due to protocol overhead, or at least that is what
I've read. Your 1.3MB/sec value suggests that maybe it _is_ running
in USB 2.0 mode.

When I look at this review, the best the five reviewed drives
can manage is 900KB/sec:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/storage/print/usb-flash-roundup.html

I think the limit is due to the maximum transfer rate of the flash chip.

A datasheet for the NAND flash pictured in the review is here:
http://www.samsung.com/Products/Semiconductor/Flash/NAND/1Gbit/K9K1G08U0M/K9K1G08U0M.PDF

What is shows, is the NAND flash has a mixture of fast and slow aspects
to its operation. The fastest operations take 50ns each, implying since
it is a x8 device, those ops could do 20MB/sec. But the setup phases to
get ready for a transfer like that take longer. I don't understand
what I read in there well enough, to calculate what kind of rate to
expect. In any case, I would expect writing to take longer than reading,
as electrically eraseable devices take a while to erase a block or to
write a location.

Perhaps you can find a review for your flash drive, in order
to understand what read/write rates to expect ? I wouldn't
expect the manufacturer to tell you what to expect

It is the same with USB scanners. Many proclaim their "USB2" capability,
when the scanner mechanism itself cannot even manage to produce data
at more than 1MB/sec - this makes the USB2 feature useless.

HTH,
Paul

 

[Lucius Snow]

The motherboard USB 2 chipset needs a driver installed from your
motherboard installation CD, I believe.

I think the drivers are for Windows 98 / ME only. Anyway i just checked the
into the device manager, and this is USB 2.0.

 

[Lucius Snow]

http://www.usbman.com/Guides/checking_for_usb_2.htm

Okay. So yes, it's configured for USB 2.0. I have the "enhanced" mention.

I presume Sandra is showing the run time binding of a USB2 logic
block to the port with the Flash Drive.

Note that, for USB 1.1 devices, while the theoretical transfer
rate is 1.5MB/sec (12Mb/sec), the practical rate is 1MB/sec or
so. This is due to protocol overhead, or at least that is what
I've read. Your 1.3MB/sec value suggests that maybe it _is_ running
in USB 2.0 mode.

I just did a few tests and my record is 1,4 MB/s. I'm a bit disapointed
though, i wish my flash driver was faster for USB 2.0.

When I look at this review, the best the five reviewed drives
can manage is 900KB/sec:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/storage/print/usb-flash-roundup.html

I think the limit is due to the maximum transfer rate of the flash
chip.

A datasheet for the NAND flash pictured in the review is here:
http://www.samsung.com/Products/Semiconductor/Flash/NAND/1Gbit/K9K1G08U0M/K9K1G08U0M.PDF

What is shows, is the NAND flash has a mixture of fast and slow
aspects
to its operation. The fastest operations take 50ns each, implying
since
it is a x8 device, those ops could do 20MB/sec. But the setup phases
to
get ready for a transfer like that take longer. I don't understand
what I read in there well enough, to calculate what kind of rate to
expect. In any case, I would expect writing to take longer than
reading,
as electrically eraseable devices take a while to erase a block or to
write a location.

Perhaps you can find a review for your flash drive, in order
to understand what read/write rates to expect ? I wouldn't
expect the manufacturer to tell you what to expect

It is the same with USB scanners. Many proclaim their "USB2"
capability,
when the scanner mechanism itself cannot even manage to produce data
at more than 1MB/sec - this makes the USB2 feature useless.

HTH,
Paul

Thanks for all these informations . Cheers.

 

[Dave B3650]

does the A7V8X-X allow use of ATHLON XP1600+ cpus

this is the cpu i have and the mobo that i want to get

Thanks

Dave b

 

[Pete Rixon]

does the A7V8X-X allow use of ATHLON XP1600+ cpus

this is the cpu i have and the mobo that i want to get

Thanks

Dave b

Should be fine. I have one here running an Athlon 2200 chip.