• Hi there, Wants & Wishes are better served in the General Discussion forum for better visibility, so we're retiring this subforum. All posts will be migrated to General Discussion!

True Thunderbolt 3 connection to Win 10 64B PC?

R

RockGeek

New Member
Hi,

New here, and looking to purchase an (true) Thunderbolt 3 interace with full 40Gb/s transfer rates.
Most interfaces are saying it's possible with a TB2 to TB3 connector - but then that doesn't make sense since it's not the 40Gb/s speed.

It looks like the Apollo Twin is true TB3 with full 40Gb/s transfer rates - am I correct? Just not sure. And if so which model?
I see this article: https://help.uaudio.com/hc/en-us/articles/215733823-Apollo-Twin-Thunderbolt-Windows-Compatibility but can't find the Apollow Twin Thunderbolt model anywhere. (or are they saying all Twins are TB3 compatible?)

I have an ASRock Z270 SuperCarrier motherboard with 2 TB3 ports and I'm having a seriously tough time finding a reasonably priced audio interface with full TB3 transfer rates.

Any help is much appreciated.
 
Don Schenk

Don Schenk

Administrator
Forum Admin
Moderator
Hi RockGeek,

Welcome to the forum.

AFAIK The UA interfaces all use TB2 on the interface. I haven't seen any interface units that use TB3, even from other interface manufactures. I couldn't find them with a Google search. Maybe Apogee or Presonus makes one, but I can't find one.

But since TB3 is backward compatible with TB1 and TB2, the various interface manufactures are recommending a TB3 to TB2 adapter to connect into Windows machines - Apollos and Satellites included.

Apparently the Apollo TB drivers work with Windows computers that have TB3, but as that article indicates, the Windows computer needs to have TB3, and a TB2 to TB3 adapter (for the Apollo or Satellites) must be used. The confusion can come into play, because the USB-C connector and the TB3 connector are the same connector. So a Windows computer with a USB-C connector might appear to have TB3, when in fact it doesn't.

HTH

:- Don
 
X

xgman

Active Member
The only TB3 one announced is from Foucsrite so far. I am hopeful that soon UAD will put TB3 on it's next line of Apollo updates.
 
T

tm3072

Member
I mentioned the need for UA to upgrade their Apollo’s with TB3 in another thread. I’m also in the market for a quality audio interface and the Apollo’s fit the bill but I’m not going to buy until they do.

Step up your game UA.
 
Don Schenk

Don Schenk

Administrator
Forum Admin
Moderator
Over the few years I've been here, UA has made a steady stream of new enhancements. Of course they never say what they are doing, and new features are always news to us. I really wouldn't be surprises if it takes anothr year or two before the UA interfaces have TB3. I definitely would be surprise if they come out with it within the next 6 months.

tm3072, don't hold your breath waiting. You won't look good with blue skin.

:- Don
 
Serenity

Serenity

Hall of Fame Member
I don't see any reason why UA would be in a hurry to change to TB3, especially not for the Twin.
TB3 is still new on the market and not that wide spread yet. TB3 is also backwards compatible with the use of an adaptor and since the Twin needs to be on the end of a chain it won't cause any issues in that regard.
And although you can connect TB3 devices to a TB2 port using the same adaptor it doesn't make sense for UA to make the switch while the majority is still on TB2.

All that said. Why are you so hooked on the idea of getting a TB3 interface? Apart from not needing an adaptor there's really no benefit to it. The difference in bandwidth will not make any performance improvements whatsoever. You can have a chain of several Apollos and still not max out the bandwidth of TB2. Audio streams doesn't use a whole lot of bandwidth.
 
DanButsu

DanButsu

Administrator
Forum Admin
Moderator
^ took the words right out of my mouth!
 
Matt Hepworth

Matt Hepworth

Master of the UADiverse
Forum Admin
Moderator
There's zero technical benefit for ANY interface to be TB3, or even TB2.

Theoretical limits of TB1 are over 11,000 simultaneous ins AND 11,000 outs at 192kHz (22,700ish simultaneous audio streams). A large scoring room at the biggest studio holds 150 people and instruments.

By comparison, the internal high-performance solid state drive will max out at around 500 tracks.

It's late, and my brain is tired, but I think I did all the math correctly.

Latency-wise, TB1, TB2, and TB3 are all identical.

Real-world performance will pan out to slightly lower numbers, but you get the idea.

In short, TB1 is beyond any interface requirements and provides enough I/O bandwidth to record everyone in a football stadium (with their own individual mics) simultaneously at 24/192.

Food for thought.

Here's a handy calculator to determine audio bandwidth and storage.
https://www.sounddevices.com/tech-notes/audio-recording-calculator
 
T

tm3072

Member
Ok then if not for bandwidth then just simple ease of use? If I plan on plugging an expensive piece of hardware into a Windows motherboard that doesn’t have a TB2 connection, I need an adapter. It’s like video standards: VGA, DVI, HDMI, display port and the monitor doesn’t match the computer you’re trying to connect it to. Imagine every time you go to plug an electrical appliance into a power socket only to find the the socket was European.

With USB 3.1 type C and TB3 at least sharing the same plug type, there’s interchangeability between Apple and Windows platforms. With all this talk about backwards compatibility between TB2 and TB3, one would still need an adapter.

Technology doesn’t need to be frustrating. There’s elegance in simplicity. Don’t underestimate its selling point.
 
Last edited:
Matt Hepworth

Matt Hepworth

Master of the UADiverse
Forum Admin
Moderator
tm3072 said:
Technology doesn’t need to be frustrating. There’s elegance in simplicity. Don’t underestimate its selling point.
Click to expand...
Well said! Unfortunately, we're not near that point. Everything USB-C requires an adapter. Video, TB, USB, FW, power....
 
Serenity

Serenity

Hall of Fame Member
tm3072 said:
Ok then if not for bandwidth then just simple ease of use?.
Click to expand...
I totally get your point. But things are not moving so quickly in the semi/pro audio world. I mean the Focusrite Saffire range is still being sold and those are Firewire (which can be used with a Thunderbolt adaptor). It's almost seven years since Thunderbolt was introduced and it's only in the recent couple of years that we have seen a wider selection of TB audio interfaces on the market. Likely the adaption of TB3 will be faster but you'll probably have to wait around a few years before you'll see a wide selection of products to choose from.

So if you are in need of an interface right now it doesn't seem wise to me to have TB3 as your main criteria, especially considering the minor benefits it would bring. Instead be happy that you'll be able to reap the benefits of Thunderbolt.

It does suck that Apple opted to use the Mini DisplayPort connector instead of the USB-C connector that was the original plan. I get why they made that decision at the time, but it wasn't very forward thinking of them.
 
Last edited:
X

xgman

Active Member
Need for whatever bandwidth notwithstanding, UAD went from Firewire to TB1 to TB2 and there is no reason to think they won't follow with TB3 sometime in 2018 if they release a refreshed Apollo line.
 
S

scratch17

Venerated Member
Matt, there is one reason to have your interface TB3 that has nothing to do with the need for the audio interface bandwidth or even convenient plug and play.

Some devices on the Thunderbolt bus will require the bandwidth TB3 provides in order to work properly. Here are some examples: Sonnet eGFX Breakaway Box and Sonnet's eGFX Puck. They will need to have only TB3 devices upstream of them on the bus.

Yes, a MBP or iMac with TB3 has two ports. But do you really want to have all of your TB2 devices on one bus? Or will you pay to upgrade your SSD enclosures, TB hubs, etc. to TB3?
 
DanButsu

DanButsu

Administrator
Forum Admin
Moderator
Yeah. Makes sense for that particular situation
 
Serenity

Serenity

Hall of Fame Member
scratch17 said:
Some devices on the Thunderbolt bus will require the bandwidth TB3 provides in order to work properly. Here are some examples: Sonnet eGFX Breakaway Box and Sonnet's eGFX Puck. They will need to have only TB3 devices upstream of them on the bus.

Yes, a MBP or iMac with TB3 has two ports. But do you really want to have all of your TB2 devices on one bus? Or will you pay to upgrade your SSD enclosures, TB hubs, etc. to TB3?
Click to expand...
It should not be an issue if you put your TB2 devices at the end of the TB3 chain. Which would make sense anyway since you would need two adaptors otherwise. And you can't have the Twin and the Sonnet eGFX devices on the same chain anyhow since both of them need to be at the end.
 
Last edited:
S

scratch17

Venerated Member
[MENTION=19023]Serenity[/MENTION] said:

It should not be an issue if you put your TB2 devices at the end of the TB3 chain. Which would make sense anyway since you would need two adaptors otherwise. And you can't have the Twin and the Sonnet eGFX devices on the same chain anyhow since both of them need to be at the end.
Click to expand...
Correct regarding the Twin because of the single TB port. That is one of the two reasons I will never buy a Twin. The other is the lack of an ADAT output.

However, the Apollo, Apollo 8, Apollo 8P and Apollo 16 could be placed anywhere on a TB bus, because they all have 2 TB2 ports.

All I was attempting to illuminate with my post is that technology moves on. At some point, UA will be able to source TB3 for less than TB2. In the meantime, for those who want to use certain TB3 devices, a single TB bus for all non-TB3 devices is a big limitation in my opinion.
 
Serenity

Serenity

Hall of Fame Member
scratch17 said:
[MENTION=19023]Serenity[/MENTION] said:



Correct regarding the Twin because of the single TB port. That is one of the two reasons I will never buy a Twin. The other is the lack of an ADAT output.

However, the Apollo, Apollo 8, Apollo 8P and Apollo 16 could be placed anywhere on a TB bus, because they all have 2 TB2 ports.

All I was attempting to illuminate with my post is that technology moves on. At some point, UA will be able to source TB3 for less than TB2. In the meantime, for those who want to use certain TB3 devices, a single TB bus for all non-TB3 devices is a big limitation in my opinion.
Click to expand...
In the real world though, how many thunderbolt devices do people have? How many people will use an eGFX box and an Apollo and be bothered by the fact that they need to use two ports? I could probably count them on my both hands. You can't please everyone. And you could just as well blame Sonnet for not having TB throughput. That would have solved the problem.

We can sit around and wait for the stars to align and reveal the perfect setup or we can make the best use of what's available and deal with the fact that it will never be perfect.
You can be sure that UA will switch to TB3 eventually, but as I wrote earlier it's no rush as it's not that wide spread yet. Hopefully we will be able to rely on USB-C/TB3 for some time to come now so these kind of situations become more rare.
 
F

fraz

Active Member
Thanks for the post Mat Hepworth about TH1 being more than capable of doing what ever we need to do - TH2 / TH3 = > TH 1 so no problems at all.

Some PC Windows motherboards do have TH3 @ 40 Gb/s Gigabyte X99 Designare is example of this - If a motherboard supports PCI-e GEN 3 x4 speed lanes via an x16 slot with TH card it should be totally TH3 @ 40 Gb/s but if the PCI-e x16 size slot is PCI-e GEN 2 @ x4 speed lanes it will be half so will be 20 Gb/s

Just having this available on PC is amazing - Some with integrated TH into motherboard and some via TH card
 
F

Free333

Active Member
tm3072 said:
Ok then if not for bandwidth then just simple ease of use? If I plan on plugging an expensive piece of hardware into a Windows motherboard that doesn’t have a TB2 connection, I need an adapter. It’s like video standards: VGA, DVI, HDMI, Video port and the monitor doesn’t match the computer you’re trying to connect it to. Imagine every time you go to plug an electrical appliance into a power socket only to find the the socket was European.

With USB 3.1 type C and TB3 at least sharing the same plug type, there interchangeability between Apple and Windows platforms. With all this talk about backwards compatibility between TB2 and TB3, one would still need an adapter.

Technology doesn’t need to be frustrating. There’s elegance in simplicity. Don’t underestimate its selling point.
Click to expand...
I agree, all i really want with my apollo 8 is a Thunderbolt 3 TB3 connection over the new standard of USB-C

You can do this universal audio. Please allow us to buy a card that replaces the thunderbolt 2 card with a Thunderbolt 3 USB-C connector.

Please no stupid adapter!

The Kanex TB3 - TB2 has been discontinued.

This leaves only the Startech with PC and the Apple with Mac

Im waiting here to buy this card or new updated apollo with better conversion and USB-C output
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
UAD Bundle Month
Top