Mdthbs

Did the twin engined Lazair ultralight have a throttle for each engine?

Are objects subject to critical hits?

Is it allowable to use an organization's name to publish a paper in a conference, even after I graduate from it?

Does the Green Flame-Blade cantrip work with the Zephyr Strike spell?

Symlink to directory for easy access: .bashrc, usr/local/bin, something else?

What is the grammatical function of the word "y" in the following sentence?

Using は before 欲しい instead が

E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) - but how do I find the meaningful error messages in APT's output?

Moons that can't see each other

Story that includes a description: "Two concentric circles, intersecting at three points"

How can I pack my food so it doesn't smell?

How best to join tables, which have different lengths on the same column values which exist in both tables?

Can a Beast Master ranger choose a swarm as an animal companion?

Are unaudited server logs admissible in a court of law?

Can my Boyfriend, who lives in the UK and has a Polish passport, visit me in the USA?

Why should I pay for an SSL certificate?

Why didn’t Doctor Strange stay in the original winning timeline?

Output with the same length always

In xXx, is Xander Cage's 10th vehicle a specific reference to another franchise?

Is there such a thing as too inconvenient?

Nuclear decay triggers

Did Wernher von Braun really have a "Saturn V painted as the V2"?

Repurpose telephone line to ethernet

Is recepted a word?

Is a USB 3.0 device possible with a four contact USB 2.0 connector?

Few things about USB 3.0 AND USB 2.0 speed?Extend USB 3.0 cableUSB 3.0 and USB 2.0 motherboard headers compatibilityUnderstanding power and data bandwidth when using USB 2.0 devices on a USB 3.0 controllerUSB 3.0 port no longer recognizing USB 2.0 devices, seems to still work with USB 3.0 devicesCan USB 2.0 power a USB 3.0 external HDD?USB 3.0 flash drive doesn't work on USB 3.0 hub?

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}

15

2

I have a cheap USB flash drive here which is marketed as USB 3.0, has the typical USB 3.0 blue plastic, but only comes with the classic USB 2.0 four contacts on the inside and has speeds in the USB 2.0 range.

Is there anything in the USB 3.0 spec that allows that configuration or is that simply a fake?

usb usb-3

share|improve this question

edited Aug 16 at 13:38

JakeGould

34.7k1010 gold badges109109 silver badges150150 bronze badges

asked Aug 16 at 13:09

GrumbelGrumbel

2,24544 gold badges2121 silver badges3333 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  If it's too good to be true, it most likely is ;)
  
  – CustomX
  Aug 16 at 13:30
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I don't believe the color of the connector is specified in the USB standard. Razer for instance uses a green connector on their USB devices.
  
  – Ramhound
  Aug 16 at 18:28
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Was it specifically advertised as USB 3.0 SuperSpeed?
  
  – chrylis
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  And that's why you only buy sticks from the bigger companies. There are plenty of larger USB 3.0 sticks available from them at 0,10 - 0,20 Eurocent per GB. Don't bother with the cheap ones, they're not up to spec so not as fast as you'd want.
  
  – Mast
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Ramhound the USB spec recommends blue for USB 3, to make it clear if USB 3 is supported. But it's not required, and a lot of laptops (at least) seem to just use normal black USB ports to avoid the blue messing with their style.
  
  – Ian D. Scott
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

15

2

I have a cheap USB flash drive here which is marketed as USB 3.0, has the typical USB 3.0 blue plastic, but only comes with the classic USB 2.0 four contacts on the inside and has speeds in the USB 2.0 range.

Is there anything in the USB 3.0 spec that allows that configuration or is that simply a fake?

usb usb-3

share|improve this question

edited Aug 16 at 13:38

JakeGould

34.7k1010 gold badges109109 silver badges150150 bronze badges

asked Aug 16 at 13:09

GrumbelGrumbel

2,24544 gold badges2121 silver badges3333 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  If it's too good to be true, it most likely is ;)
  
  – CustomX
  Aug 16 at 13:30
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I don't believe the color of the connector is specified in the USB standard. Razer for instance uses a green connector on their USB devices.
  
  – Ramhound
  Aug 16 at 18:28
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  3
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Was it specifically advertised as USB 3.0 SuperSpeed?
  
  – chrylis
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  And that's why you only buy sticks from the bigger companies. There are plenty of larger USB 3.0 sticks available from them at 0,10 - 0,20 Eurocent per GB. Don't bother with the cheap ones, they're not up to spec so not as fast as you'd want.
  
  – Mast
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Ramhound the USB spec recommends blue for USB 3, to make it clear if USB 3 is supported. But it's not required, and a lot of laptops (at least) seem to just use normal black USB ports to avoid the blue messing with their style.
  
  – Ian D. Scott
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

I have a cheap USB flash drive here which is marketed as USB 3.0, has the typical USB 3.0 blue plastic, but only comes with the classic USB 2.0 four contacts on the inside and has speeds in the USB 2.0 range.

Is there anything in the USB 3.0 spec that allows that configuration or is that simply a fake?

usb usb-3

share|improve this question

edited Aug 16 at 13:38

JakeGould

34.7k1010 gold badges109109 silver badges150150 bronze badges

asked Aug 16 at 13:09

GrumbelGrumbel

2,24544 gold badges2121 silver badges3333 bronze badges

share|improve this question

edited Aug 16 at 13:38

JakeGould

34.7k1010 gold badges109109 silver badges150150 bronze badges

asked Aug 16 at 13:09

GrumbelGrumbel

2,24544 gold badges2121 silver badges3333 bronze badges

share|improve this question

edited Aug 16 at 13:38

JakeGould

34.7k1010 gold badges109109 silver badges150150 bronze badges

asked Aug 16 at 13:09

GrumbelGrumbel

2,24544 gold badges2121 silver badges3333 bronze badges

edited Aug 16 at 13:38

JakeGould

34.7k1010 gold badges109109 silver badges150150 bronze badges

edited Aug 16 at 13:38

JakeGould

34.7k1010 gold badges109109 silver badges150150 bronze badges

asked Aug 16 at 13:09

GrumbelGrumbel

2,24544 gold badges2121 silver badges3333 bronze badges

asked Aug 16 at 13:09

GrumbelGrumbel

2,24544 gold badges2121 silver badges3333 bronze badges

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

17

It could be a fake. USB 2.0 only requires 4 pins, but for the bandwidth of USB 3, you need the additional 5 pins.

However, make sure it doesn't have those five pins. They can be hard to see, and they wouldn't be visible on the angle your picture has.

On the female end, you have the five pins right up front, on the male end, you have the five pins shoved in the back. They're small and hard to see.

EDIT: According to telcoM, you might be able to technically call it USB 3, if it's getting some protocol improvements that can be applied to USB 2.0 and lower speeds. Can't say for certain if that's the case here, and it also wouldn't matter since it'd still be limited to USB 2.0 speeds.

So essentially, for most use cases, it's just USB 2.0, however it might have some protocol differences that technically allow them to call it USB 3.

USB 3.0 Female

USB 3.0 Male

share|improve this answer

edited 19 hours ago

answered Aug 16 at 13:26

udlpudlp

43211 silver badge1111 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Added another picture from a flatter angle, definitely no sign of those five pins.
  
  – Grumbel
  Aug 16 at 13:35
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  14
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Yeah, seeing the new picture, no way this can pull off USB 3.0, it's definitely a fake.
  
  – udlp
  Aug 16 at 13:48
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  6
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It could be technically not a fake, but also "not USB 3.0 in the sense most people care about", i.e. speed. The USB 3.0 specification also includes some protocol improvements that can also be applied with USB 2.0 and lower speeds. Implementing those can be essentially just a firmware change, and allows marketing to legitimately claim "USB 3.0" as long as they don't also claim "SuperSpeed". This is a case of "let the buyer beware" essentially built in to the specification.
  
  – telcoM
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @telcoM: Would such a device show up as being connected to the USB 3 host controller or the USB 2 host controller (e.g. in lsusb or Device Manager).
  
  – R..
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  On new systems and chipsets, there is no longer a separate USB 2 host controller, only the XHCI USB 3 host controller. However, there will still be two separate buses: one for the devices capable of 3.0 SuperSpeed or better, and the other for the slower devices. A non-SuperSpeed "fake USB 3.0" device would absolutely appear on the slower bus, together with the other slow devices.
  
  – telcoM
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

1

This is not a fake, but a cheap and ugly marketing trick. USB 3.0 specifications are backward compatible with HS, FS, and LS data rates. So formally any USB device can be called "USB 3.0 device running at 480 Mbps data rate", and it would be not illegal.

For example, there are plenty of MCUs on the market that say having "USB 2.0", and only reading deeper into specifications you will find out that the USB interface is "running at FS (12 Mbps) rate".

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Ale..chenskiAle..chenski

9,26844 gold badges1919 silver badges3333 bronze badges

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1472001%2fis-a-usb-3-0-device-possible-with-a-four-contact-usb-2-0-connector%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

17

It could be a fake. USB 2.0 only requires 4 pins, but for the bandwidth of USB 3, you need the additional 5 pins.

However, make sure it doesn't have those five pins. They can be hard to see, and they wouldn't be visible on the angle your picture has.

On the female end, you have the five pins right up front, on the male end, you have the five pins shoved in the back. They're small and hard to see.

EDIT: According to telcoM, you might be able to technically call it USB 3, if it's getting some protocol improvements that can be applied to USB 2.0 and lower speeds. Can't say for certain if that's the case here, and it also wouldn't matter since it'd still be limited to USB 2.0 speeds.

So essentially, for most use cases, it's just USB 2.0, however it might have some protocol differences that technically allow them to call it USB 3.

USB 3.0 Female

USB 3.0 Male

share|improve this answer

edited 19 hours ago

answered Aug 16 at 13:26

udlpudlp

43211 silver badge1111 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Added another picture from a flatter angle, definitely no sign of those five pins.
  
  – Grumbel
  Aug 16 at 13:35
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  14
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Yeah, seeing the new picture, no way this can pull off USB 3.0, it's definitely a fake.
  
  – udlp
  Aug 16 at 13:48
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  6
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It could be technically not a fake, but also "not USB 3.0 in the sense most people care about", i.e. speed. The USB 3.0 specification also includes some protocol improvements that can also be applied with USB 2.0 and lower speeds. Implementing those can be essentially just a firmware change, and allows marketing to legitimately claim "USB 3.0" as long as they don't also claim "SuperSpeed". This is a case of "let the buyer beware" essentially built in to the specification.
  
  – telcoM
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @telcoM: Would such a device show up as being connected to the USB 3 host controller or the USB 2 host controller (e.g. in lsusb or Device Manager).
  
  – R..
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  On new systems and chipsets, there is no longer a separate USB 2 host controller, only the XHCI USB 3 host controller. However, there will still be two separate buses: one for the devices capable of 3.0 SuperSpeed or better, and the other for the slower devices. A non-SuperSpeed "fake USB 3.0" device would absolutely appear on the slower bus, together with the other slow devices.
  
  – telcoM
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

17

It could be a fake. USB 2.0 only requires 4 pins, but for the bandwidth of USB 3, you need the additional 5 pins.

However, make sure it doesn't have those five pins. They can be hard to see, and they wouldn't be visible on the angle your picture has.

On the female end, you have the five pins right up front, on the male end, you have the five pins shoved in the back. They're small and hard to see.

EDIT: According to telcoM, you might be able to technically call it USB 3, if it's getting some protocol improvements that can be applied to USB 2.0 and lower speeds. Can't say for certain if that's the case here, and it also wouldn't matter since it'd still be limited to USB 2.0 speeds.

So essentially, for most use cases, it's just USB 2.0, however it might have some protocol differences that technically allow them to call it USB 3.

USB 3.0 Female

USB 3.0 Male

share|improve this answer

edited 19 hours ago

answered Aug 16 at 13:26

udlpudlp

43211 silver badge1111 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Added another picture from a flatter angle, definitely no sign of those five pins.
  
  – Grumbel
  Aug 16 at 13:35
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  14
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Yeah, seeing the new picture, no way this can pull off USB 3.0, it's definitely a fake.
  
  – udlp
  Aug 16 at 13:48
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  6
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It could be technically not a fake, but also "not USB 3.0 in the sense most people care about", i.e. speed. The USB 3.0 specification also includes some protocol improvements that can also be applied with USB 2.0 and lower speeds. Implementing those can be essentially just a firmware change, and allows marketing to legitimately claim "USB 3.0" as long as they don't also claim "SuperSpeed". This is a case of "let the buyer beware" essentially built in to the specification.
  
  – telcoM
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @telcoM: Would such a device show up as being connected to the USB 3 host controller or the USB 2 host controller (e.g. in lsusb or Device Manager).
  
  – R..
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  On new systems and chipsets, there is no longer a separate USB 2 host controller, only the XHCI USB 3 host controller. However, there will still be two separate buses: one for the devices capable of 3.0 SuperSpeed or better, and the other for the slower devices. A non-SuperSpeed "fake USB 3.0" device would absolutely appear on the slower bus, together with the other slow devices.
  
  – telcoM
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

It could be a fake. USB 2.0 only requires 4 pins, but for the bandwidth of USB 3, you need the additional 5 pins.

However, make sure it doesn't have those five pins. They can be hard to see, and they wouldn't be visible on the angle your picture has.

On the female end, you have the five pins right up front, on the male end, you have the five pins shoved in the back. They're small and hard to see.

EDIT: According to telcoM, you might be able to technically call it USB 3, if it's getting some protocol improvements that can be applied to USB 2.0 and lower speeds. Can't say for certain if that's the case here, and it also wouldn't matter since it'd still be limited to USB 2.0 speeds.

So essentially, for most use cases, it's just USB 2.0, however it might have some protocol differences that technically allow them to call it USB 3.

USB 3.0 Female

USB 3.0 Male

share|improve this answer

edited 19 hours ago

answered Aug 16 at 13:26

udlpudlp

43211 silver badge1111 bronze badges

share|improve this answer

edited 19 hours ago

answered Aug 16 at 13:26

udlpudlp

43211 silver badge1111 bronze badges

answered Aug 16 at 13:26

udlpudlp

43211 silver badge1111 bronze badges

answered Aug 16 at 13:26

udlpudlp

43211 silver badge1111 bronze badges

1

This is not a fake, but a cheap and ugly marketing trick. USB 3.0 specifications are backward compatible with HS, FS, and LS data rates. So formally any USB device can be called "USB 3.0 device running at 480 Mbps data rate", and it would be not illegal.

For example, there are plenty of MCUs on the market that say having "USB 2.0", and only reading deeper into specifications you will find out that the USB interface is "running at FS (12 Mbps) rate".

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Ale..chenskiAle..chenski

9,26844 gold badges1919 silver badges3333 bronze badges

add a comment | 

1

This is not a fake, but a cheap and ugly marketing trick. USB 3.0 specifications are backward compatible with HS, FS, and LS data rates. So formally any USB device can be called "USB 3.0 device running at 480 Mbps data rate", and it would be not illegal.

For example, there are plenty of MCUs on the market that say having "USB 2.0", and only reading deeper into specifications you will find out that the USB interface is "running at FS (12 Mbps) rate".

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Ale..chenskiAle..chenski

9,26844 gold badges1919 silver badges3333 bronze badges

add a comment | 

This is not a fake, but a cheap and ugly marketing trick. USB 3.0 specifications are backward compatible with HS, FS, and LS data rates. So formally any USB device can be called "USB 3.0 device running at 480 Mbps data rate", and it would be not illegal.

For example, there are plenty of MCUs on the market that say having "USB 2.0", and only reading deeper into specifications you will find out that the USB interface is "running at FS (12 Mbps) rate".

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Ale..chenskiAle..chenski

9,26844 gold badges1919 silver badges3333 bronze badges

share|improve this answer

answered yesterday

Ale..chenskiAle..chenski

9,26844 gold badges1919 silver badges3333 bronze badges

answered yesterday

Ale..chenskiAle..chenski

9,26844 gold badges1919 silver badges3333 bronze badges

answered yesterday

Ale..chenskiAle..chenski

9,26844 gold badges1919 silver badges3333 bronze badges