News & Analysis
Comment
jaybus
Don't overlook the obvious. Thunderbolt can readily do USB, Ethernet, and ...
mikejt
Hey Rick ... like the beard! Anyway ... yes, Thunderbolt is cutting USB 3 off at ...
Apple MacBook debuts Thunderbolt I/O
Rick Merritt
2/24/2011 11:05 AM EST
SAN JOSE, Calif. – Apple announced its latest MacBook Pro notebooks will build in Thunderbolt, the new high speed systems interface from Intel formerly known as Light Peak. The move will send shock waves through a PC community gearing up to support USB 3.0.
Intel said it developed the technology but collaborated with Apple on bringing it first to the MacBook Pro. The interface sports two bi-directional 10 Gbit/second channels and has a flexible range of uses.
The interconnect supports two protocols, PCI Express and DisplayPort, Intel said. Apple suggested it can also handle Ethernet, FireWire or USB traffic for external peripherals such as RAID arrays and works with adapters for HDMI, DVI and VGA.
The interconnect supports copper or optical cables, daisy-chaining of up to seven devices and has its own native protocol drivers, Intel said. It can also support power over the cable.
The copper versions support three meter lengths at 10W and optical links support tens of meters, Intel said. Thunderbolt supports 8 nanosecond synchronization.
"Thunderbolt technology is expected to be widely adopted as a new standard for high performance I/O," Apple said in a press release. “Thunderbolt is a revolutionary new I/O technology that can support every important I/O standard which is ideal for the new MacBook Pro,” added Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of worldwide product marketing.
Apple has a mixed history of embracing new system interconnects.
The Cupertino company was among the first to champion FireWire which never gained traction beyond a niche of professional A/V systems and high end disk drives, eclipsed by USB. However, Apple was also among the early adopters of Wi-Fi now standard across all notebooks.
Intel first announced Light Peak in September 2009 as an optical interconnect positioned as a successor to USB 3.0. Last September it said it had accelerated its work and would deliver a controller chip by the end of 2010.
Then Intel went quiet about its plans. Reports emerged it had revised its work to focus on a copper-based implementation. The adoption by Apple, which apparently sought an exclusive deal to be the first OEM to use the I/O, likely required Intel to keep its plans quiet.
The new interconnect could leapfrog work on USB 3.0 which aims to deliver about 5 Gbits/s max and has no capabilities for flexibly supporting multiple protocols.
USB is assured a long life based on its broad adoption across computer and consumer peripherals. However Thunderbolt could eclipse USB as the new high-end interconnect in a similar fashion to what observers once expected would happen with FireWire.
After lengthy delays, mainly attributed to foot dragging by Intel, both Intel and AMD are now preparing PC chip sets that integrate support for USB 3.0 and are expected to be in production in early 2012.
For that scenario to play out, Thunderbolt will have to establish a broad ecosystem of chips and supporting systems and peripherals. Intel is expected to detail its Thunderbolt technology and plans later today.
Intel said companies planning to support Thunderbolt include Aja, Apogee, Avid, Blackmagic, LaCie, Promise and Western Digital. Intel aims to enable the interface for use on other computers, displays, storage devices, audio/video devices, cameras, docking stations and more, the company said.
The Apple MacBooks have also adopted Intel's latest dual- and quad-core SandyBridge processors. They also sport Apple's FaceTime integrated camera and video conferencing capabilities.
The new MacBook line includes a 13-inch model starting at $1,199 which uses Intel Core i5 and Core i7 dual-core processors up to 2.7 GHz and Intel HD Graphics 3000. Models with 15- and 17-inch displays use quad-core Core i7 processors up to 2.3 GHz and AMD Radeon HD graphics processors at prices up to $2,499.
The MacBooks use Apple's Mac OS X Snow Leopard operating system.
Intel said it developed the technology but collaborated with Apple on bringing it first to the MacBook Pro. The interface sports two bi-directional 10 Gbit/second channels and has a flexible range of uses.
The interconnect supports two protocols, PCI Express and DisplayPort, Intel said. Apple suggested it can also handle Ethernet, FireWire or USB traffic for external peripherals such as RAID arrays and works with adapters for HDMI, DVI and VGA.
The interconnect supports copper or optical cables, daisy-chaining of up to seven devices and has its own native protocol drivers, Intel said. It can also support power over the cable.
The copper versions support three meter lengths at 10W and optical links support tens of meters, Intel said. Thunderbolt supports 8 nanosecond synchronization.
"Thunderbolt technology is expected to be widely adopted as a new standard for high performance I/O," Apple said in a press release. “Thunderbolt is a revolutionary new I/O technology that can support every important I/O standard which is ideal for the new MacBook Pro,” added Philip Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of worldwide product marketing.
Apple has a mixed history of embracing new system interconnects.
The Cupertino company was among the first to champion FireWire which never gained traction beyond a niche of professional A/V systems and high end disk drives, eclipsed by USB. However, Apple was also among the early adopters of Wi-Fi now standard across all notebooks.
Intel first announced Light Peak in September 2009 as an optical interconnect positioned as a successor to USB 3.0. Last September it said it had accelerated its work and would deliver a controller chip by the end of 2010.
Then Intel went quiet about its plans. Reports emerged it had revised its work to focus on a copper-based implementation. The adoption by Apple, which apparently sought an exclusive deal to be the first OEM to use the I/O, likely required Intel to keep its plans quiet.
The new interconnect could leapfrog work on USB 3.0 which aims to deliver about 5 Gbits/s max and has no capabilities for flexibly supporting multiple protocols.
USB is assured a long life based on its broad adoption across computer and consumer peripherals. However Thunderbolt could eclipse USB as the new high-end interconnect in a similar fashion to what observers once expected would happen with FireWire.
After lengthy delays, mainly attributed to foot dragging by Intel, both Intel and AMD are now preparing PC chip sets that integrate support for USB 3.0 and are expected to be in production in early 2012.
For that scenario to play out, Thunderbolt will have to establish a broad ecosystem of chips and supporting systems and peripherals. Intel is expected to detail its Thunderbolt technology and plans later today.
Intel said companies planning to support Thunderbolt include Aja, Apogee, Avid, Blackmagic, LaCie, Promise and Western Digital. Intel aims to enable the interface for use on other computers, displays, storage devices, audio/video devices, cameras, docking stations and more, the company said.
The Apple MacBooks have also adopted Intel's latest dual- and quad-core SandyBridge processors. They also sport Apple's FaceTime integrated camera and video conferencing capabilities.
The new MacBook line includes a 13-inch model starting at $1,199 which uses Intel Core i5 and Core i7 dual-core processors up to 2.7 GHz and Intel HD Graphics 3000. Models with 15- and 17-inch displays use quad-core Core i7 processors up to 2.3 GHz and AMD Radeon HD graphics processors at prices up to $2,499.
The MacBooks use Apple's Mac OS X Snow Leopard operating system.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
rick.merritt
2/24/2011 12:02 PM EST
I know Thunderbolt won't kill USB--USB is too brosadly entrenched in evgery sort of consumer and computer system. But will Thunderbolt eclipse USB 3.0 and become the new high end interconnect--what we thought Firewire would do years ago.
Sign in to Reply
mikejt
2/26/2011 6:16 AM EST
Hey Rick ... like the beard! Anyway ... yes, Thunderbolt is cutting USB 3 off at the pass. It's *so* much better a match to the internal connections *within* the system (PCI-E). Systems already have to bridge from PCI-E to USB, and the process is really ugly, resulting in lots of software overhead and truly ugly latency numbers. One of the reasons USB 2, which is nominally 20% faster than FW400, is actually 50% slower in the real world is that poor match between the USB architecture and the memory-bus model of PCI-E, while Firewire *is* a memory bus, so bridging the two is much easier with *much* less software overhead.
Sign in to Reply
hm
2/24/2011 12:49 PM EST
If new iPhone and iPad also employs this Thunderbolt, chances of its getting popular are very high. Also, this type of communication pipe was long overdue.
Sign in to Reply
fdunn
2/24/2011 7:38 PM EST
Thunderbolt amounts to 10Gb ethernet.
Big whoop, we can do it across 10G ethernet as well as this interface.
It's not optical like Apple and Intel discussed and that was the major criteria that Jobs wanted to differentiate it from USB3.
USB 3 is already shipping. I'm with Rick on this one. It may be faster after it ramps up but so was firewire and it lost to USB. I'm not saying it's not around but not nearly as prevelant.
You ask any mom or pop that uses a computer what USB is and they will know. On the other hand unless they got in early and needed it for the "old" Videocams (you know the ones that used tape ;) they won't know what you are talking about.
Fred
Sign in to Reply
mikejt
2/26/2011 5:38 AM EST
Actually, I know a *lot* of moms and pops that have no idea what *any* of the connectors are for, except for power. Their kids know about USB as the "iPod" connector. Aside from that, connectors and cables are geek territory, I'm afraid ... and among the semi-geeky types, the USB connector is hated because they can't figure out which way to plug it in. Of course, the truely geek know that the USB symbol has to be "up" (or whichever direction "up" might be for vertical orientations, or the bizarre way they are mounted on my NEC display). Anyway, USB has run out of steam, and USB 3 is really kind of an embarrassment (something that I tried very hard to reorient into a more reasonable direction, but the Intel USB guys didn't want to listen). Thunderbolt, on the other hand, is really a great combination of Intel technology and technomarketing muscle and Apple's sense of style and what a *consumer* might like.
Sign in to Reply
mikejt
2/26/2011 6:05 AM EST
Oh, and Apple could care less if it's optical or not ... it had to be *inexpensive*, *robust mechanically*, *low latency*, *consumer friendly*, *cool* and *not stupid* ... so USB 3 was right out.
Sign in to Reply
chanj
2/24/2011 2:49 PM EST
It's not going to be easy to convince consumer to adopt a new I/O technology given the mass market has accepted USB. What would be Apple strategy to bring thunderbolt into market? Will Apple be willing to risk the sales or profit margin of iPhone and of iPad? I can't wait to see the I/O interfaces of new Macbook pro.
Sign in to Reply
wilber_xbox
2/25/2011 12:52 PM EST
quite true. It will take some effort to convince customers, which have been listening to Apple dearly for sometime. But it will be the industry players, which will be the make or break of any technology. Widespread support is required for any technology to be successful.
Sign in to Reply
mikejt
2/26/2011 5:42 AM EST
Apple will do just fine. I think Steve & co learned their lesson with Firewire (technical superiority can't compete with lower cost and wide adoption) ... similar to the Sony Betamax lesson. Note that this is NOT an Apple initiative ... it's an Intel initiative with *input* from Apple. Apple could have just as easily adopted USB 3, another Intel initiative ... but they have way too much sense to buy into that particular boondoggle.
Sign in to Reply
hm
2/24/2011 3:16 PM EST
When one use Apple devices Apple prefers them to use Apple peripherals to get the best results. Many more Apple product will soon follow with Thunderbolt interface and will add to Apple market share and earnings.
Also, Apple engineers' introduces most novel products and for that they need complete freedom in their design goals. To suit their current design goals and future design needs of next decade, USB 3.0 may not be a good choice. We applaud Apple designers’ alchemist approach and management foresight and their bold initiatives.
Sign in to Reply
fdunn
2/24/2011 7:45 PM EST
If they are so innovative then why are they essentially copying 10Gb ethernet?
I think they are still using a copper interconnect because an optical interconnect at that bandwidth is expensive and power hungry, especially if it has to drive that bandwith any significant distance.
There is nothing new about this, except the protocol, otherwise everything was already here and available.
Just put another NIC in the device and have it run 10Gb ethernet, you can do the same thing as with (oooohhh) THUNDERBOLT!
I'm sorry but who ever thought up that name at Apple should be canned.
Fred
Sign in to Reply
mikejt
2/26/2011 6:01 AM EST
Sigh. No ... it's not 10GbE ... it's a fairly generic serdes, but one that is closer to that used in PCI-E. And yes, they could have used an Ethernet infrastructure, but that's not the point ... the point was to have an I/O interconnect that is *software* compatible with the highest speed interface *inside* the system, and that's PCI-E. (The video interface is a great addon, and allowed them to repurpose an existing high speed serial link (Display Port) and a nice small connector (mini-DP).
So, yes, there is little that is *really* new here, it's a wonderful way to bring really high bandwidth *and* low latency I/O to the outside of the box without a big change in software architecture.
And I *really* know what I'm talking about here, since I was Apple's tech lead for Firewire back in the days, *and* I did some USB 2 work after that, *and* I'm now working with the most leading-edge Ethernet stuff around (which is still the best way to do high speed *networking*, but not necessarily I/O).
And I think "Thunderbolt" is a great name. USB, blech ... eSATA, give me a break ... FibreChannel, *so* geeky ... "LightPeak", better but still blah ... remember that "Firewire" was a name that people still remember, while "iLink" (the Sony term) has been thankfully forgotten ... more details (if you care) at http://johasteener.com/firewire_FAQ.html#Why_all_these_names
Sign in to Reply
BobsUrUncle
2/24/2011 3:34 PM EST
Who cares? What problem are they trying to solve? It won't make a difference in sales for the Macbook. It's already 2X the price of an equivalent windows laptop. The Apple tax is ridiculous. Google should get serious about making a replacement OS for Intel platforms. An Android on steroids.
Sign in to Reply
DickH
2/24/2011 5:48 PM EST
an Android on steroids? An Android half-crippled, more like. ARM, not intel, will win the market.
Sign in to Reply
rick.merritt
2/24/2011 3:37 PM EST
Some say PCI Express links are power higs, m aking use in iPad and other tablet devices tricky at best...and let's remember Apple was a big supporter of Firewire, too.
Sign in to Reply
clay_modeling
2/24/2011 4:00 PM EST
It is primarily a high-bandwidth external link, fast enough for high-resolution monitors and for box to box communications, when you need to send fast data more than 1 meter away. USB will still handle audio, non-critical memory storage, etc., and PCIe will handle internal links in the box. I remember that USB used to be called Unused Serial Bus for years until it took off. This could be a replacement for HDMI.
Sign in to Reply
epobirs
2/24/2011 4:17 PM EST
Don't forget why FireWire never went much of anywhere. Steve Jobs insisted on excessive royalties that prompted the development of USB 2.0 to take over the roles FireWire would otherwise have owned. Apple doesn't have that sort of control over Light Peak aka Thunderbolt.
The real question becomes how best to allocate transistor real estate. Would it be more cost effective to have USB 3.0 implemented as a Thunderbolt to USB hub device on the motherboard, along with software to do much of the heavy lifting? I can foresee a system in a few years that appears to have a full complement of ports but they all connects to Thunderbolt controllers under the hood.
Sign in to Reply
JmS
2/24/2011 4:20 PM EST
PCIE may be a power hog, but just ask video card manufacturers if 10Gb/s is enough for them. Those companies currently make 16 lane PCIE Gen2 cards. That's 5GT/s * 16 lanes * 4/5 (due to 8B/10B coding) = 64Gb/s. And PCIe Gen3 is coming this year (that will be 8GT/s * 16 * 128/130 = 126Gb/s)! So I agree that Light Peak should be a good high speed external interface, but PCIE is not threatened yet inside the box.
Sign in to Reply
mranderson
2/24/2011 4:53 PM EST
Thunderbolt costs significantly more than USB3. Most technology companies are not interested in having Intel dictate what they do, specifically in the cell phone industry and SoC business. Apple has a remarkable track record over the past 5 years with consumers. Beyond that, the support list is not strong since it lacks major OEMs. It sounds like Thunderbolt will be successful depending on what Apple has coming out in the next year or two. USB3 will have a large following. Many OEM products in the pipeline have support for both USB3 and USB2. Overall, I think both USB3 and Thunderbolt are strong contenders.
Sign in to Reply
Dave.Dykstra
2/24/2011 8:15 PM EST
Some interesting comments here, especially from the detractors. However, how many display devices will use a USB3 interface to the PC? And can you run HDMI over USB3?
I think there's plenty of room for both Thunderbolt and USB, especially since USB already has such a wide acceptance (but then so did the floppy disc...).
Sign in to Reply
jbreher
2/25/2011 1:45 AM EST
I'm unsure how this will pan out. However, Thunderbolt is architected in a manner to extend PCIe protocol outside the box (high bandwidth, low (8ns!) latency). This is a significant differentiator for many new usage models, whereby a laptop (an increasingly large share of the computing market) could provide the brains for a stationary expansion chassis at each work area.
To the comparison with 10 GbE - no, it is not identical. Without going into the protocol improvements in relation to Ethernet, 10GbE is 10 gigabits/s, but _half_duplex_. Thunderbolt is full duplex, with 10 Gb in each direction simultaneously.
USB3? Fixed master/slave relationship makes it unsuitable for many scenarios that Thunderbolt would be a good fit.
Lastly, Thunderbolt is now what Intel is calling this technology - it is not an Apple-owned name. 'Light Peak' is now officially a 'project code name'.
No, another point - the transport protocol is as important as the fact it runs at 10Gb (x2). This data rate will doubtless increase as time goes by. BTW, what's a 10GbE link cost today? Is it anywhere near the price of a 13" MacBook Pro with (admittedly only one end of) a Thunderbolt link ($1199)?
OK, one final point - the so-called Mac Tax seems to have vanished. When I was last looking at laptops, any first-tier i7, 17", decent graphics, comparably equipped laptop from HP, Lenovo, etc. cost as much or more as the MacBook Pro I ended up with (my first-ever purchase of an Apple as a main machine, BTW). No, Apple doesn't make a $300 laptop. But apples to apples ;) they're competitive in several market segments.
Sign in to Reply
eewiz
2/25/2011 7:46 AM EST
Without backward compatibility with existing USB 2.0 devices, no hope. Mistake by Apple. With USB 3 ports you can totally remove USB 2.0 ports. With Thunderbolt, you still need to keep them.
My guess is, Intel Bribed Apple big time to adopt this non standard tech. Something like 25$ + Free chip/mac for every thunderbolt deployment.
Sign in to Reply
jimcondon
2/25/2011 9:13 AM EST
I think this a huge win for Intel and Thunderbolt. Thunderbolt is a technology with a huge upside especially when you look at the optical implementation. While USB 3.0 is competitive at this point, Thunderbolt is at the beginning of the growth curve and we are squeezing the last bits of performance out of USB.
For Intel to have this in the market and out of R&D, starts to validate it and give it legs. If we remember how long it took for USB to gain penetration, Thunderbolt needed a win to start the process of acceptance.
Sign in to Reply
rick.merritt
2/25/2011 6:05 PM EST
I am looking for any PC or CE maker beyond Apple who will use Thuderbolt...please chime in!
Sign in to Reply
jaybus
2/26/2011 8:17 AM EST
Don't overlook the obvious. Thunderbolt can readily do USB, Ethernet, and several other protocols. Apple has always been big on square white box adapters to plug into their more obscure i/o interfaces, for example iPod-to-USB, DisplayPort-to-HDMI, etc. Thunderbolt is all about the PHY. For Intel, it is getting the market primed for the new interface by introducing it using copper. That just means they don't yet have their on-die optical components up to production quality. Once that happens, optical controllers will be cheap and lower power, and they can release optical Thunderbolt into an existing market. That will scale Thunderbolt to at least 100 Gbps, probably to 1 Tbps, and without greatly increasing power consumption / thermal envelope and without decreasing cable distances. Copper interfaces will not be able to compete. Apple will sell a Thunderbolt-to-multiple-USB3 white box adapter to accomodate legacy devices.
Sign in to Reply