This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Computer Graphics with Photoshop > October 2004 > USB 2.0: How much faster ?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
USB 2.0: How much faster ?
|
|
|
| I'm scanning with an Epson 3170; my machine USB port is 1.1; how much do I
really gain in speed by putting in a USB 2.0 card ? worth it ? if so, any
recommendations for a PCI card ?
| |
|
| "...
any recommendations for a PCI card ?
...."
Adaptec
"Liz" <liz@tiredofspam.com> wrote in message
news:kmE7d.1943140$ic1.198804@news.easynews.com...
> I'm scanning with an Epson 3170; my machine USB port is
1.1; how much do I
> really gain in speed by putting in a USB 2.0 card ? worth
it ? if so, any
> recommendations for a PCI card ?
>
>
>
>
| |
|
|
"RSD99" <rsdwla.NOSPAM@gte.net> wrote in message
news:xBF7d.930$1g5.303@trnddc07...
> "...
> any recommendations for a PCI card ?
> ..."
>
> Adaptec
ok ... but am I going to scan much faster if I throw this in the machine ??
| |
| Bill Hilton 2004-10-02, 11:14 pm |
| >From: "Liz" liz@tiredofspam.com
>but am I going to scan much faster if I throw this in the machine ??
USB 2.0 is, in theory, 40x faster than USB 1.1 ... however, in real life with
real devices the speed improvement is typically much less. Just how much less
depends on the actual speed of the devices. As one example, I compared USB 1.1
vs 2.0 compact flash memory card readers and the 2.0 reader was about 5x
faster.
Dunno about your scanner, many of them are pretty slow so the data is
transferred in the background while the next line is scanned. So you may or
may not see a big improvement. One way to check is to ask if anyone has this
same scanner running on USB 2 and see if they're running a lot faster.
| |
|
|
"Bill Hilton" <bhilton665@aol.comedy> wrote in message
news:20041002185359.12217.00001079@mb-m21.aol.com...
>
>
> USB 2.0 is, in theory, 40x faster than USB 1.1 ... however, in real life
with
> real devices the speed improvement is typically much less. Just how much
less
> depends on the actual speed of the devices. As one example, I compared
USB 1.1
> vs 2.0 compact flash memory card readers and the 2.0 reader was about 5x
> faster.
>
> Dunno about your scanner, many of them are pretty slow so the data is
> transferred in the background while the next line is scanned. So you may
or
> may not see a big improvement. One way to check is to ask if anyone has
this
> same scanner running on USB 2 and see if they're running a lot faster.
well, you're right, Bill ... but I figured I'd be lucky if I got a few
answers at all ... much less from a bunch of Epson Perfection 3170 Photo
scanner owners who had switched from 1.1 to 2.0 and done timings ;)
I don't know what the relative percentages of time spent scanning vs.
transferring might be ... and, though your point seems well taken about
"interlinear transfer," if the scanner has a limited buffer (and of course
it DOES have some limit) then I assume that the scan process will wait for
the buffer to be sent ... if not, where is your data going ??
in any case, thanks for responding !
| |
|
|
"jjs" <jjs@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:10luj58jjpjd633@news.supernews.com...
> I may be wrong, but I think that scanner requires USB2. In any event, it
is
> unlikely that the scanner is sending data fast enough to challenge your
USB
> 1.1
no, it works fine with 1.1; my question is whether it's worth installing USB
2.0 on my host machine
| |
| Donald Link 2004-10-03, 4:14 am |
| On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 20:39:44 GMT, "Liz" <liz@tiredofspam.com> wrote:
>Epson 3170
If you use 2.0 you will have a very noticable increase. I found when
I upgraded an epson usb 1.1 scanner to a usb 2.0 Canon the speed was
at least 75% faster.
| |
| Bob Williams 2004-10-03, 4:14 am |
|
Liz wrote:
> I'm scanning with an Epson 3170; my machine USB port is 1.1; how much do I
> really gain in speed by putting in a USB 2.0 card ? worth it ? if so, any
> recommendations for a PCI card ?
>
>
>
>
You might check with Epson tech support on this device specific question.
They will certainly know.
I got some good/fast responses from them recently re: my printer.
Bob Williams
| |
| Waldo 2004-10-03, 12:14 pm |
| Liz wrote:
> I'm scanning with an Epson 3170; my machine USB port is 1.1; how much do I
> really gain in speed by putting in a USB 2.0 card ? worth it ? if so, any
> recommendations for a PCI card ?
>
>
>
>
Dunno about the Epson, but my Canon 1250 is able to scan A4 @ 600 DPI in
26 seconds (24 bits) via USB 2. With USB 1.1 is took ages.
As stated in another reply: Adaptec is excellent, but brands like
Sitecom etc. will also do. They may be a little slower.
Waldo
| |
| Andrew Morton 2004-10-04, 7:14 am |
| Liz wrote:
> I'm scanning with an Epson 3170; my machine USB port is 1.1; how
> much do I really gain in speed by putting in a USB 2.0 card ? worth
> it ? if so, any recommendations for a PCI card ?
If you're using Mac, then note that USB2 support was only added with OS
X.
Andrew
| |
| Donald Link 2004-10-04, 11:14 pm |
| On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 00:22:03 -0700, Bob Williams
<mytbobnospam@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>Liz wrote:
>You might check with Epson tech support on this device specific question.
>They will certainly know.
>I got some good/fast responses from them recently re: my printer.
>Bob Williams
Why would anyone check if usb2.0 is faster than 1.1 if the hardware
supports usb2.0. That is the question. Assuming he has to add a 2.0
card it can be assumed the computer is older. Does the 3170 have usb
2.0 support.
| |
|
|
"Donald Link" <linkd@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5fn3m09lqv3h2tr2tdidh9q42t66se5o8i@4ax.com...
do I[color=darkred]
any[color=darkred]
>
> Why would anyone check if usb2.0 is faster than 1.1 if the hardware
> supports usb2.0. That is the question. Assuming he has to add a 2.0
> card it can be assumed the computer is older. Does the 3170 have usb
> 2.0 support.
yes, if it didn't I wouldn't be asking ... let me try once more: with
regard to scanning operations -- in general -- is there enough speed
improvement to make it worthwhile to get a USB 2.0 card ?
or, to put it more generically, is USB 2.0 worth a damn in terms of scanning
? never mind what scanner, OS, etc is involved ...
| |
| Bob Williams 2004-10-05, 7:14 am |
|
Donald Link wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 00:22:03 -0700, Bob Williams
> <mytbobnospam@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Why would anyone check if usb2.0 is faster than 1.1 if the hardware
> supports usb2.0. That is the question. Assuming he has to add a 2.0
> card it can be assumed the computer is older. Does the 3170 have usb
> 2.0 support.
The 3170 has USB 1.1/2.0 support
His computer presently has USB 1.1 speed.
He can purchase a USB 2.0 PCI card which will allow his computer to
support USB 2.0 devices.
The Question is, will installing a USB 2.0 PCI card allow him to scan
1.5X...2X...3X...4X faster?
Nobody in this NG knows for sure.
Epson knows....Ergo,ask them.
Bob Williams
| |
|
|
"Bob Williams" <mytbobnospam@cox.net> wrote in message
news:4162532C.3040305@cox.net...
>
> The 3170 has USB 1.1/2.0 support
> His computer presently has USB 1.1 speed.
> He can purchase a USB 2.0 PCI card which will allow his computer to
> support USB 2.0 devices.
> The Question is, will installing a USB 2.0 PCI card allow him to scan
> 1.5X...2X...3X...4X faster?
> Nobody in this NG knows for sure.
> Epson knows....Ergo,ask them.
> Bob Williams
actually, Bob, SHE comes here looking for better advice than whatever Epson
has in the script book ...
but thanks for the summary :)
Liz
| |
| Hecate 2004-10-05, 11:14 pm |
| On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 01:59:52 GMT, "Liz" <liz@tiredofspam.com> wrote:
>
>"Donald Link" <linkd@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:5fn3m09lqv3h2tr2tdidh9q42t66se5o8i@4ax.com...
>do I
>any
>
>yes, if it didn't I wouldn't be asking ... let me try once more: with
>regard to scanning operations -- in general -- is there enough speed
>improvement to make it worthwhile to get a USB 2.0 card ?
>
>or, to put it more generically, is USB 2.0 worth a damn in terms of scanning
>? never mind what scanner, OS, etc is involved ...
>
Hi Liz,
Yes, it is. Cards are cheap - you don't need a named brand to get the
extra through put. I needed to get an extra USB/Firewire card for one
of our computers and it cost GBP10 for a card with 2 x Firewire and 3x
USB 2 (with separate controllers built-in of course) The make was
Innovision and it works well and has caused no problems whatsoever.
--
Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
| |
| Andrew Morton 2004-10-06, 12:14 pm |
| Liz wrote:
> I'm scanning with an Epson 3170; my machine USB port is 1.1; how
> much do I really gain in speed by putting in a USB 2.0 card ? worth
> it ? if so, any recommendations for a PCI card ?
If you're using Mac, then note that USB2 support was only added with OS
X.
Andrew
| |
| Hecate 2004-10-08, 7:14 pm |
| On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 01:59:52 GMT, "Liz" <liz@tiredofspam.com> wrote:
>
>"Donald Link" <linkd@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:5fn3m09lqv3h2tr2tdidh9q42t66se5o8i@4ax.com...
>do I
>any
>
>yes, if it didn't I wouldn't be asking ... let me try once more: with
>regard to scanning operations -- in general -- is there enough speed
>improvement to make it worthwhile to get a USB 2.0 card ?
>
>or, to put it more generically, is USB 2.0 worth a damn in terms of scanning
>? never mind what scanner, OS, etc is involved ...
>
Hi Liz,
Yes, it is. Cards are cheap - you don't need a named brand to get the
extra through put. I needed to get an extra USB/Firewire card for one
of our computers and it cost GBP10 for a card with 2 x Firewire and 3x
USB 2 (with separate controllers built-in of course) The make was
Innovision and it works well and has caused no problems whatsoever.
--
Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
| |
| Bob Williams 2004-10-11, 4:14 am |
|
Liz wrote:
> "Bob Williams" <mytbobnospam@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:4162532C.3040305@cox.net...
>
>
>
>
> actually, Bob, SHE comes here looking for better advice than whatever Epson
> has in the script book ...
>
> but thanks for the summary :)
>
> Liz
Mea Culpa!
With so many responses, it's hard to keep track of "who said what to whom".
I'd still give Epson a shot. This is a device specific question.
Epson's input is likely to be more reliable than guesstimates from our
colleagues who do not have this particular scanner.
Bob
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|