POST A COMMENT

8 Comments

Back to Article

  • Tanclearas - Thursday, September 29, 2011 - link

    The DL-3900 is what I've been looking for. We have quite a few laptop users that want docking stations. We end up having to order the model-specific docking stations, most of which are over $150. USB 2.0 docking stations are just painful.

    Bandwidth shouldn't be too much of an issue. Most of the monitors in the offices are 1920 x 1080.
    Reply
  • barich - Thursday, September 29, 2011 - link

    USB 3.0 is faster than AGP 4X. I'm not sure why you'd need any compression. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, September 29, 2011 - link

    AGP x8 is good for up to 8.5Gb/s, which is 3.5Gb/s more than USB 3.0. Reply
  • Tanclearas - Thursday, September 29, 2011 - link

    2560 x 1600 x 24 (bit) x 60 (fps) = 5898240000 bps, or nearly 6Gbps. That is assuming a software-based video driver outputting the frames over USB. Reply
  • IvanAndreevich - Tuesday, October 04, 2011 - link

    All the data is loaded to the graphics memory which is an order of magnitude faster. Try gaming at 2560x1600 on integrated graphics where the bandwidth is limited by system RAM and graphics bus, and you'll understand why you need compression :) Reply
  • ChristophWeber - Thursday, September 29, 2011 - link

    This is a nice stopgap solution, but I'd be weary of CPU load. USB generates a lot of CPU interrupts because of its lack of direct memory access. Reply
  • The_Countess - Friday, September 30, 2011 - link

    I'm not sure about this but with HDD/SSD's usb3.0's CPU use was only 0.5% higher then that of Sata, getting similar transfer speeds, and far less then USB2.0 which got lower transfer speeds. Reply
  • Filiprino - Friday, September 30, 2011 - link

    Bulk transfers do not generate so much interrupts. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now