USB 3.0 Host or Slave?

[jasgot]

I noticed the USB ports on the side of the X2 are labeled Host and Slave.

Does this mean I CANNOT plug an External USB 3.0 Hard drive into the Mede8er and have it connect as USB 3.0?

The external hard drive must be plugged into the host port, right? and this port is USB 2.0?

Will the Mede8er ever be able to communicate with a USB 3.0 hard drive?

Thanks.

[jer1956]

Any usb 3.0 device will be backward compatible with usb 2.0, as usb 2.0 was with USB 1.1. So not only will your usb 3.0 drive connect the X2's usb 2.0 port, but the X2's USB 3.0 slave port will work  with the usb 2.0 ports most of us have.

[jasgot]

But will I ever get a USB 3.0 connection from the X2 to a USB 3.0 drive?

[jer1956]

The X2 only has usb 2.0 ports for external devices. Don't get carried away too much by the interface specs. All i/o is handled using drivers running on the support processor. The faster the interfaces become, the bigger the botleneck that is. Just look ar Lan for example.  The 500x could manage to copy at 4.4 mb/sec =  40 mbps = 40% of the 100 mbps lan interface. The x2 can copy at 8 mb/s = 75 mbps = 7.5% of the gigbit interface.  Interface specs are improved for the benefit of PC's, where the devices have the power to use them. Other devices use them becuase they the only inprovements available.

[swamibob]

Ok, i see in the specs which i never noticed before. I thought it just said USB 3.0

• USB - 2.0 HOST port x 2
• USB - 3.0 SLAVE port

So are you saying the if I plug it into my computer It will support USB 3.0 for transfer, but if I plug devices into it to stream from, it only supports usb 2.0?

Also, is NFS working with the the X2 now?

Thanks

[jer1956]

No, i was pointing out that USB 3.0 cannot be used to it's fil potential becuase of the processor bottleneck, just as gigbit can't be used to it's full potential. Designers can use the latest interface standard just to make integration easier.

So althought your drive will automatically run at the lower USB 2.0 speed it won't make that much difference.

[swamibob]

So even though it is a USB 3.0 connection to my computer, don't expect 80MB/s transfer rate to it? How fast will it transfer to it then or how much faster is it than the original MED500x?

[jer1956]

So even though it is a USB 3.0 connection to my computer, don't expect 80MB/s transfer rate to it? How fast will it transfer to it then or how much faster is it than the original MED500x?

Those speeds are possible, but are well within the maximum. IT might take a bit of tinkering at the pc end:-
http://www.mede8erforum.com/index.php/topic,5985.0.html

USB 2.0 is capable of 60 mb/s anyway. USB 3.0 far exceeds platter speeds, the rate at which data can be transffered off the actual  disk.

So USB 2.0 is perfectly adequate for streaming movies off an attached drive. Slave mode is the option meant for transferring files.

[swamibob]

Thanks for the quick response. It sounds like it will transfer at full speed then if connected to my computer. I have a couple of other USB 3.0 devices that all transfer at ~80MB/s average. I read the link you sent on the guy with the USB 3.0 expansion card. I have integrated USB 3.0 on my main board so it shouldn't have the problems that he did.

[swamibob]

I also appreciate that you gave some real world speeds on the 1000Mbs ethernet connection. I am kind of disappointed that it cannot do faster than 8MB/s since I can transfer 10x faster than that to my other computer with with Gigabit ethernet. I had hoped I could transfer directly without having to bring it to my computer room and plug it in, but I see that is not the case. 

What I am excited about from what you are saying is, it should be able to stream everything glitch free over my nfs server. Mine has been working ok over the 100Mbs connection that the MED500X has, but those movies that go over 40mbs do glitch and drop audio, like the extended directors cut of Avatar in 1080p and true-hd. The speeds you are saying it does over the gigabit network is about 75Mbs which no blu ray should ever exceed. I don't think blu ray ever goes over 48Mbs.

Thanks for giving out good info, it is hard to find in most forums.
Rob

[jer1956]

I don't move mine! I did when I first upgraded, copying everything I had via slave mode. Since then i'm happy to wait 30mins - 1 hour to transfer the odd new movie via Lan.

I can stream full bd.iso with the X2. That wasn't possible with the X. Complex package formats, such as .iso, have to be unwrapped by the same support processor which is hand shaking lan throughput. You have to have enough power to stream and unwrap at 40+ mbps. That was not possible with the 1073. It could stream m2ts at 40mbps becuase that  didn't need unwrapping.

[swamibob]

I have found the same issues with .mkv files also. I guess they have to be "unwrapped" as well since some movies that I had on .mkv that would just glitch a little bit would not do so if  I tested the .m2ts of the exact same movie. I am surprised it makes as much difference with an .mkv since it seems like having to get inside of an .iso would be much more difficult. Is it because .m2ts is more of a native format for the player?

[jer1956]

Mediaplyers are using bluray player chips. m2ts files are the native bluray format and  can be sent directly to  the codec chip.
MKV also creates probems using Header Compression. Supporting this  dosn't mean the codec chip uses it. It means the support processor has to put the headers back. So if you have problem MKV's, especially when streaming, you should try remuxing without header compression. This is especailly true of the 1073.