Hi,
I was hoping someone could answer this for me as I can't find an answer anywhere.
I was just wondering whether to buy the Google USB C cable that is stated to transfer at USB 2.0 speeds (480Mbps) or whether to buy a faster USB 3.0 (5Gbps) or 3.1 (10Gbps) cable (A to C).
I've found a few compliant USB C cables including a Belkin USB 3.1 A to C cable that transfers at 10Gbps and was hoping to take advantage of the USB 3.1 ports on my new Z170 based motherboard.
Thanks
Rambler76 said:
Hi,
I was hoping someone could answer this for me as I can't find an answer anywhere.
I was just wondering whether to buy the Google USB C cable that is stated to transfer at USB 2.0 speeds (480Mbps) or whether to buy a faster USB 3.0 (5Gbps) or 3.1 (10Gbps) cable (A to C).
I've found a few compliant USB C cables including a Belkin USB 3.1 A to C cable that transfers at 10Gbps and was hoping to take advantage of the USB 3.1 ports on my new Z170 based motherboard.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not believe the port in the Pixel C is USB 3.0. Therefore, it wouldn't be necessary to get a USB 3.1 cable. It should still work, but you wouldn't exceed USB 2.0 speeds, which is probably why Google's cable is only USB 2.0.
Thanks for the response.
Is anyone able to do a quick transfer with a USB 3.0/3.1 based Type C cable to see if it maxes out at USB 2.0 speeds.
It would be much appreciated.
charesa39 said:
I do not believe the port in the Pixel C is USB 3.0. Therefore, it wouldn't be necessary to get a USB 3.1 cable. It should still work, but you wouldn't exceed USB 2.0 speeds, which is probably why Google's cable is only USB 2.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most tech sites report the Pixel C has USB 3, but the fastest read speed I can get on a USB-C /3.0 flash drive is 27MB/s which leads me to believe even tech sites are confused and don't understand that USB-C does not automatically mean USB 3.
I think it was confirmed by Benson Leung, in the Reddit AMA, it's full host/client USB c spec so it's full speed port. Maybe another way to test would be to mount a USB 3 drive to pixel and storage benchmark it
I thought that the USB 3.1 host and client related only to the ability to charge the Pixel C as well as the ability to charge other devices from the Pixel C and to use the USB port for other devices such as an ethernet adapter.
beardymcgee said:
I think it was confirmed by Benson Leung, in the Reddit AMA, it's full host/client USB c spec so it's full speed port. Maybe another way to test would be to mount a USB 3 drive to pixel and storage benchmark it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's pretty much what I did. A USB 3 USB-C MicroSD flash drive. On my PC it reads at 80MB+, on the Pixel it is 25MB
I'm a bit confused now.
Recently I read a review by Benson Leung on a USB 2.0 A to C cable here http://www.amazon.com/review/R1AF6ZHBZRQFHV/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B018HUOMYE&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=2335752011&store=wireless on Amazon and at the end of the review states:
In conclusion, this is a Good cable for your Nexus 6P/5X to use with all of your older USB Type-A chargers, hubs, and PCs. It also works great with Chromebook Pixel 2015 and will work great on USB Type-C spec compliant devices to come! However, it is NOT a SuperSpeed USB 3.1 5gbps cable. Look elsewhere if you are specifically looking for a 5gbps cable for use with MacBook or Pixel C.
Is this implying that the Pixel C is capable of USB 3.0 speeds, but perhaps not at the moment?
Or is it just a typo as a Superspeed USB 3.1 cable should be capable of 10Gbps and not 5Gbps (USB 3.0).
That is interesting. I'd suspect he'd know what the C is. I however, have never gotten more than USB 2 speeds out of it.
Grims said:
That is interesting. I'd suspect he'd know what the C is. I however, have never gotten more than USB 2 speeds out of it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just don't think it fully enabled yet same with HDMI out as well
This is interesting. Basically this guy is saying USB-C doesn't support proprietary charging above 5 volts which is why Google didn't use Quick Charge for the Nexus 6P.
Maybe this is also why Samsung didn't use USB-C because they wanted to safely use Quick Charge?
http://phandroid.com/2016/04/21/lg-g5-htc-10-usb-type-c/
This is going to be posted all over and its basically nonsense. The current QC 2.0 over micro usb are also using 9-12volts. And micro usb also only supports 5v. So. It's no different then it's ever been.
Get a QC3.0 compatible charger/cable and be done.
regalpimpin said:
This is going to be posted all over and its basically nonsense. The current QC 2.0 over micro usb are also using 9-12volts. And micro usb also only supports 5v. So. It's no different then it's ever been.
Get a QC3.0 compatible charger/cable and be done.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quoted for truth.
Quickcharge checks before sending down higher voltages. It's fully backwards compatible even if it's not part of the USB specs. There is no additional danger from what you had before.
I follow
https://plus.google.com/+BensonLeung/posts
for his tested products and I think everyone will be fine.
Qualcomm has a list as well
https://www.qualcomm.com/documents/q...ge-device-list
chazall1 said:
I follow
https://plus.google.com/+BensonLeung/posts
for his tested products and I think everyone will be fine.
Qualcomm has a list as well
https://www.qualcomm.com/documents/q...ge-device-list
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Qualcomm link isn't working.
jsaxon2 said:
Qualcomm link isn't working.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://www.qualcomm.com/documents/quick-charge-device-list
This is total BS!!
I have the HTC 10 in my hands, it is quick charging with no issues.
Also, take the Apple Macbook as an example, the laptop uses an USB-C port to charge, it inputs 14.5V with 2A.
If the USB-C meets the USB-Power-Delivery standard, it can transfer up to 100W of power. Don't believe the BS article.
Edit: It seems that Qualcomm uses their own implementation, but still it is transferring voltage over 5 volts
Is the article supposed to say that not all USB-C cables can support it? Maybe the cheap ones can't?
Didn't Amazon just yank a bunch of cheaply made USB-C cables from their marketplace?
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Here's my take. I have always been under the impression the device dictates the watts and volts not the charger. The charger has a range it will draw power, and the phone tells the charger how much it needs. QC standard is UP TO and is not absolute. So if the device tells the charger I want 15W/5V that's what it'll get.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
I've been trying to research and I have come up with a conclusion. This is only my opinion, but I have based it off of hours of research. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Is QC QuickCharge 3.0 charger going to hurt my phone or anyy other devices I may plug into it?
Best I can figure is no. QC 3.0 chargers are designed to only fast charge if it is connected to a QC 3.0 device. Before it starts fast charging, it does a negotiation withh the device to verify if it supports QC 3.0. "Also, since Quick Charge is compatible and interoperable, a certified adapter can be used with a non-Quick Charge device, though the fast charging benefits of Quick Charge will not be available. " : Source
Can my HTC 10 be charged qith a non QC 3.0 charger?
The simple answer is yes. If you use one of the many non-QC 3.0 chargers that you have laying around, it will charge your phone just fine. This is as long as you use a compliant cable with the 56k ohm resistor. More on that next.
Does it matter which USB cable I use?
This one is tricky. I do not have an HTC 10 yet, but I have heard that it comes with a USB 2.0 Type A to USB 3.0 Type C cable. I can't find the source now, but it was in the Mega Thread. If this is true, than you should be able to use any cable this spec or better. By better I mean a USB 3.0 Type A to USB 3.1 Type 3 cable should work fine. The most important part is that the USB cable MUST have a 56k ohm resister. There have been some cheap cables using a 10k ohm resister that could cause problems. These problems could result in the port on the device or the charger getting damaged.
Will the HTC 10 work with a USB-PD charger?
Well first, USB-PD stands for USB-Power Delivery. This is the new USB fast charging standard set by the USB gods. This technology allows devices to receive more power and thus would allow a phone to charge more quickly. This is NOT the same as QC 3.0. QC 3.0 is a proprietary charging system and only available on certain Qualcomm powered devices. So can the HTC 10 use USB-PD? My guess is no but I could be wrong. According to GSMArena, the HTC 10 has aa USB 3.1 port. USB 3.1 supports USB-PD for quick charging. This would lead me to beleive that the HTC 10 supports both methods of fast charging. Unfortunately, I have been unable to find anywhere on HTC's site that specifies what the USB port actually is. My guess is that it is USB 3.1 compatible but not USB 3.1 compliant. by USB 3.1 compatible I am saying it will do everything that a compliant port will do except the USB-PD charging. We actually know that the port is not USB 3.1 compliant as the USB standard does not allow the method of fast charging that QC 3.0 utilizes.
I hope this helps to clear some things up. Once again I am no expert, but this is the way it appears to work as far as I can tell. If there is anything that I have wrong, please let us know and I can change it.
Thanks
jsaxon2 said:
I've been trying to research and I have come up with a conclusion. This is only my opinion, but I have based it off of hours of research. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Is QC QuickCharge 3.0 charger going to hurt my phone or anyy other devices I may plug into it?
Best I can figure is no. QC 3.0 chargers are designed to only fast charge if it is connected to a QC 3.0 device. Before it starts fast charging, it does a negotiation withh the device to verify if it supports QC 3.0. "Also, since Quick Charge is compatible and interoperable, a certified adapter can be used with a non-Quick Charge device, though the fast charging benefits of Quick Charge will not be available. " : Source
Can my HTC 10 be charged qith a non QC 3.0 charger?
The simple answer is yes. If you use one of the many non-QC 3.0 chargers that you have laying around, it will charge your phone just fine. This is as long as you use a compliant cable with the 56k ohm resistor. More on that next.
Does it matter which USB cable I use?
This one is tricky. I do not have an HTC 10 yet, but I have heard that it comes with a USB 2.0 Type A to USB 3.0 Type C cable. I can't find the source now, but it was in the Mega Thread. If this is true, than you should be able to use any cable this spec or better. By better I mean a USB 3.0 Type A to USB 3.1 Type 3 cable should work fine. The most important part is that the USB cable MUST have a 56k ohm resister. There have been some cheap cables using a 10k ohm resister that could cause problems. These problems could result in the port on the device or the charger getting damaged.
Will the HTC 10 work with a USB-PD charger?
Well first, USB-PD stands for USB-Power Delivery. This is the new USB fast charging standard set by the USB gods. This technology allows devices to receive more power and thus would allow a phone to charge more quickly. This is NOT the same as QC 3.0. QC 3.0 is a proprietary charging system and only available on certain Qualcomm powered devices. So can the HTC 10 use USB-PD? My guess is no but I could be wrong. According to GSMArena, the HTC 10 has aa USB 3.1 port. USB 3.1 supports USB-PD for quick charging. This would lead me to beleive that the HTC 10 supports both methods of fast charging. Unfortunately, I have been unable to find anywhere on HTC's site that specifies what the USB port actually is. My guess is that it is USB 3.1 compatible but not USB 3.1 compliant. by USB 3.1 compatible I am saying it will do everything that a compliant port will do except the USB-PD charging. We actually know that the port is not USB 3.1 compliant as the USB standard does not allow the method of fast charging that QC 3.0 utilizes.
I hope this helps to clear some things up. Once again I am no expert, but this is the way it appears to work as far as I can tell. If there is anything that I have wrong, please let us know and I can change it.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it is compliant.... This is why USB 2.0 devices were able to have quick charging. The type C port is no different.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8539/...ard-device-class-v10-specifications-finalized
Version 3.1 now supports 5 V, 12 V, and 20 V on the pins to allow the higher power output without excessive current, but even the current has been increased to a maximum of 5 A which is much higher than before.
The HTC 10 does support 3.1 as their tech page says it support USB 3.1 gen 1
http://www.htc.com/us/go/buy-htc-10/#unlocked
Buttons Keys and Connection Ports
3.5 mm stereo audio jack, USB 3.1 Gen 1, Type-C, Capacitive keys
---------- Post added at 03:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:19 PM ----------
I wanted to add if you are part of the Elevate program you can see the white papers and it shows it is USB 3.1 Gen 1 type-c
If someone wants to host the file I will gladly upload it.
Tidbits said:
Yes it is compliant.... This is why USB 2.0 devices were able to have quick charging. The type C port is no different.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8539/...ard-device-class-v10-specifications-finalized
Version 3.1 now supports 5 V, 12 V, and 20 V on the pins to allow the higher power output without excessive current, but even the current has been increased to a maximum of 5 A which is much higher than before.
The HTC 10 does support 3.1 as their tech page says it support USB 3.1 gen 1
http://www.htc.com/us/go/buy-htc-10/#unlocked
Buttons Keys and Connection Ports
3.5 mm stereo audio jack, USB 3.1 Gen 1, Type-C, Capacitive keys
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your kinda missing the point. The the HTC 10 is NOT compliant. It goes against the USB-C spec, "These, and any charger you see that supports QC3.0 over USB Type-C, might be QC3.0 certified but they're not following the USB-C spec." Source. If you are not following the spec, you are not compliant. You can be compatible without being compliant. Anyway, I don't care if you want to call it compliant or not. What I am getting at is that it most likely does not support the USB Power Delivery for fast charge. And if it does not support USB-PD, than it is not a USB 3.1 compliant port. USB 3.1 standard includes USB-PD Source. So the HTC whitepapers say it is a USB 3.1 port. That is great. If it does USB-PD fast charging, than that would be awesome.
jsaxon2 said:
Your kinda missing the point. The the HTC 10 is NOT compliant. It goes against the USB-C spec, "These, and any charger you see that supports QC3.0 over USB Type-C, might be QC3.0 certified but they're not following the USB-C spec." Source. If you are not following the spec, you are not compliant. You can be compatible without being compliant. Anyway, I don't care if you want to call it compliant or not. What I am getting at is that it most likely does not support the USB Power Delivery for fast charge. And if it does not support USB-PD, than it is not a USB 3.1 compliant port. USB 3.1 standard includes USB-PD Source. So the HTC whitepapers say it is a USB 3.1 port. That is great. If it does USB-PD fast charging, than that would be awesome.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benson assumes it isn't compliant because
1. He doesn't have the device.
2. He can't find what USB port is being used
So since he can't find this information that he can't recommend something is on the basis that he doesn't want to approve something because he doesn't know. I bet if he saw the information I just showed and he sees the white paper he'll change what he said.
Why would it not be compliant when USB 2.0 devices can charge using the exact same voltage yet a 3.1 port can't? Think about it for a minute. It would be cheaper if they were not compliant to NOT use, and not give a QC 3.0 charger... Much like Google did with the 5X and 6P probably to save on costs.
Tidbits said:
Benson assumes it isn't compliant because
1. He doesn't have the device.
2. He can't find what USB port is being used
So since he can't find this information that he can't recommend something is on the basis that he doesn't want to approve something because he doesn't know. I bet if he saw the information I just showed and he sees the white paper he'll change what he said.
Why would it not be compliant when USB 2.0 devices can charge using the exact same voltage yet a 3.1 port can't? Think about it for a minute. It would be cheaper if they were not compliant to NOT use, and not give a QC 3.0 charger... Much like Google did with the 5X and 6P probably to save on costs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, I wait for him to get the device then. You still can't be compliant and break the rules though. You can be compatible though. As for the 5x and 6p, they support the USB-PD fast charging. This kept google with the USB standard. HTC chose to go with the QC 3.0 proprietary solution most likely because it works better. QC 3.0 only has to work with select QC devices and therefore can be tailored to exactly what they need. USB-PD will have to work across multiple device types from multiple manufacturers. This leaves room for inefficiencies. That would be my opinion.
jsaxon2 said:
Okay, I wait for him to get the device then. You still can't be compliant and break the rules though. You can be compatible though. As for the 5x and 6p, they support the USB-PD fast charging. This kept google with the USB standard. HTC chose to go with the QC 3.0 proprietary solution most likely because it works better. QC 3.0 only has to work with select QC devices and therefore can be tailored to exactly what they need. USB-PD will have to work across multiple device types from multiple manufacturers. This leaves room for inefficiencies. That would be my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That shows to me it doesn't support USB-PD 2.0 which supports up to 20V to the pins
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8539/u...ions-finalized
When USB was first introduced, the thought was that it would be primarily a data interface, with a limited amount of power delivery which was generally used to power the electronics of certain devices. The initial specification for USB only had provisions for 0.75 watts of power – 150 mA at 5 V. USB 2.0 bumped that to 500 mA, or 2.5 watts, and USB 3.0 specified 900 mA at 5 V, or 4.5 watts. All of these specifications allow for power as well as data transmission at the same time. In addition, there was also a Battery Charging specification which allows up to 1.5 A at 5 V for a maximum of 7.5 watts of power but with no data transmission available. The jump from 7.5 watts to 100 watts of the new specification is a huge increase, and one that cannot be done with just an amperage increase on the system as was done in the previous versions of USB. Version 3.1 now supports 5 V, 12 V, and 20 V on the pins to allow the higher power output without excessive current, but even the current has been increased to a maximum of 5 A which is much higher than before.
That right there makes it possible for QC 3.0 to happy while staying PD 2.0 compliant.
Tidbits said:
That shows to me it doesn't support USB-PD 2.0 which supports up to 20V to the pins
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8539/u...ions-finalized
When USB was first introduced, the thought was that it would be primarily a data interface, with a limited amount of power delivery which was generally used to power the electronics of certain devices. The initial specification for USB only had provisions for 0.75 watts of power â?? 150 mA at 5 V. USB 2.0 bumped that to 500 mA, or 2.5 watts, and USB 3.0 specified 900 mA at 5 V, or 4.5 watts. All of these specifications allow for power as well as data transmission at the same time. In addition, there was also a Battery Charging specification which allows up to 1.5 A at 5 V for a maximum of 7.5 watts of power but with no data transmission available. The jump from 7.5 watts to 100 watts of the new specification is a huge increase, and one that cannot be done with just an amperage increase on the system as was done in the previous versions of USB. Version 3.1 now supports 5 V, 12 V, and 20 V on the pins to allow the higher power output without excessive current, but even the current has been increased to a maximum of 5 A which is much higher than before.
That right there makes it possible for QC 3.0 to happy while staying PD 2.0 compliant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everything you posted is usb-pd specs. I agree. The difference is that qc 3.0 uses the data pins as well where usb-pd does not. They are two different approaches to achieving a common goal. While QC 3.0 does not apply more power than the spec allows, is does supply the power in a way that goes against the spec.
jsaxon2 said:
Everything you posted is usb-pd specs. I agree. The difference is that qc 3.0 uses the data pins as well where usb-pd does not. They are two different approaches to achieving a common goal. While QC 3.0 does not apply more power than the spec allows, is does supply the power in a way that goes against the spec.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have the papers showing this? I haven't seen anything that says it goes through the data channels.
Either way the fact that PD2.0 rates 20V debunks the cable or connector can only handle 5V arguments.
I'm not sure if it was said but USB 3.1 =/= USB 3.1 Gen 1.
Especially in response to "The HTC 10 does support 3.1 as their tech page says it support USB 3.1 gen 1"
USB 3.1 with it's 10Gbit/s speed along other specs, features etc. was originally called USB 3.1.
USB 3.0 with it's 5Gbit/s speed along other specs, features etc. was originally called USB 3.0.
USB 3.0 =/= USB 3.1
Got that?
USB 3.0 > USB 3.1 Gen 1
USB 3.1 > USB 3.1 Gen 2
Why? Because retards.
Also marketing wankers. "Looky looky, our product has USB 3.1 Gen 1 which means it's better than USB 3.0."
Same story happened with LTE and 4G. Carriers/ISP's begged/forced the 3GPP to allow them to call LTE as 4G when LTE-Advanced is what 4G is.. LTE is more like 3.9G
And if I'm not mistaken, you Americans also had 3G HSPA+ disguised as 4G when it's actually 3.75G? And when LTE rolled out they just called it LTE.
tl;dr? HTC 10 has a USB 3.1 Gen 1 port or in other words USB 3.0.
lagittaja said:
I'm not sure if it was said but USB 3.1 =/= USB 3.1 Gen 1.
Especially in response to "The HTC 10 does support 3.1 as their tech page says it support USB 3.1 gen 1"
USB 3.1 with it's 10Gbit/s speed along other specs, features etc. was originally called USB 3.1.
USB 3.0 with it's 5Gbit/s speed along other specs, features etc. was originally called USB 3.0.
USB 3.0 =/= USB 3.1
Got that?
USB 3.0 > USB 3.1 Gen 1
USB 3.1 > USB 3.1 Gen 2
Why? Because retards.
Also marketing wankers. "Looky looky, our product has USB 3.1 Gen 1 which means it's better than USB 3.0."
Same story happened with LTE and 4G. Carriers/ISP's begged/forced the 3GPP to allow them to call LTE as 4G when LTE-Advanced is what 4G is.. LTE is more like 3.9G
And if I'm not mistaken, you Americans also had 3G HSPA+ disguised as 4G when it's actually 3.75G? And when LTE rolled out they just called it LTE.
tl;dr? HTC 10 has a USB 3.1 Gen 1 port or in other words USB 3.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
USB 3.1 gen 1 only works with type C connectors on eqch end to get those speeds. That's why you don't see USB 3.0 type C cables or USB 3.1 A to C cables.
My laptop makes that distinction as well. All my ports are 3.0, but my type C ports are USB 3.1 gen 2.
Even Monoprice for example. All their C to C are 3.1, but as soon as one is a different connector they are all 3.0.
http://www.monoprice.com/pages/usb_31_type_c
Of course this is my understanding and what my laptop maker explained to me.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Tidbits said:
USB 3.1 gen 1 only works with type C connectors on eqch end to get those speeds. That's why you don't see USB 3.0 type C cables or USB 3.1 A to C cables.
My laptop makes that distinction as well. All my ports are 3.0, but my type C ports are USB 3.1 gen 2.
Even Monoprice for example. All their C to C are 3.1, but as soon as one is a different connector they are all 3.0.
http://www.monoprice.com/pages/usb_31_type_c
Of course this is my understanding and what my laptop maker explained to me.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The USB spec etcetera is a deep rabbit hole and the renaming of USB 3.0 didn't help things at all.
You don't need type C-C cable for USB 3.1 Gen 1. USB 3.1 Gen 1 is what we used to know as USB 3.0. You can have USB 3.0 or USB 3.1 Gen 1 with USB A-A or A-microB (the weird 3.0 micro) or A-B or A-C or C-C or whatever the variation you can think of.
The reason you don't see USB 3.0 C-C cables is because chicken and the egg. The original USB 3.0 spec was released before the type C..
Type C was developed at the same time as the now finalized USB 3.1 spec, which absorbed the original USB 3.0 spec as USB 3.1 Gen 1 and the USB 3.1 we knew before is now known as USB 3.1 Gen 2, and was (C spec) released alongside the USB 3.1 spec which it supplements.
No USB 3.1 A-C cables? Ahem. http://www.belkin.com/us/p/P-F2CU029/
Also, just please try and forget the USB x.x with the type C.
Type C is type C. It is a physical connector, it's a cable/connector standard.
Just like mini B or micro B or B or A for that matter..
USB x.x is a technology standard.
USB-PD is a technology standard.
They are not the same thing.
They are not dependent on each other.
In other words, you can have type C with USB 2.0 if you so wish, look at the Nexus 5X and 6P..
http://www.usb.org/developers/usbty...ge_Product_and_Packaging_Guidelines_FINAL.pdf
Please note the following:
USB Type-C™ is not USB 3.1
The USB Type-C™ cable and connector specification is a supplement to the USB 3.1 specification, however USB Type-C™ is not USB 3.1.
These terms are not interchangeable.
USB Type-C™ is not USB Power Delivery
USB Power Delivery is a protocol/hardware solution that increases USB power capabilities up to 100W.
These terms are not interchangeable.
If a product features USB Type-C™ it does not necessarily support USB Power Delivery and/or USB 3.1
Device manufacturers can choose to support USB Power Delivery and/or USB 3.1 performance but it is not required for USB Type-C™ products
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Our stock charger works well and all, but does anyone know of a USB C QC3 charger? I just want to be able to use C at both ends.
http://www.amazon.com/PowerIQ-Anker...-2&keywords=type+c+to+type+c+quick+chARGE+3.0 is a example, amazon has many
I thought only Type A was officially supported for QC 3.0?
Haldi4803 said:
I thought only Type A was officially supported for QC 3.0?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, this is incorrect.
Q6: Does it matter what type of charging cable is used with a Quick Charge adapter?
A: Quick Charge is designed to be connector-independent. Quick Charge can be implemented with a variety of formats, including USB Type-A, USB micro, USB Type-C, and other proprietary connectors.
Quick Charge high-voltage operation is designed to minimize charging issues associated with long or thin cables, allowing for a superior charging experience, independent of cable type.
Source: https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon/quick-charge/faq
The reason most cables/charges are A is backward compatibility with older devices and cables as only new USB-C devices will come with USB-C cables so it's easier to have A terminals on the end for the widest variety of accessory compatibility.
afuller42 said:
http://www.amazon.com/PowerIQ-Anker...-2&keywords=type+c+to+type+c+quick+chARGE+3.0 is a example, amazon has many
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the one I have. It powers up to 24w but the 10 charges at quickcharge 2.0 speeds lol.
Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk
Hi Dev´s and Kernel Hackers,
i just sit in front of my PC and have my OP3 plugged ...
thinking about possibility to hack my archlinux kernel to
mek DASH Charge for OP3 work through USB.
What do u think about this? I am not a dev but i thought
now that oneplus released sources it should be possible to do so ...
Whilst i like the idea of that, i don't think you will get 3-4 Amps out of your USB port without damaging it, even if it is possible. Computer USB's are 500ma tops if i remember correctly.
In the USB 1.0 and 2.0 specs, a standard downstream port is capable of delivering up to 500mA (0.5A); with USB 3.0, it moves up to 900mA (0.9A). The charging downstream and dedicated charging ports provide up to 1,500mA (1.5A).
valkyrix said:
In the USB 1.0 and 2.0 specs, a standard downstream port is capable of delivering up to 500mA (0.5A); with USB 3.0, it moves up to 900mA (0.9A). The charging downstream and dedicated charging ports provide up to 1,500mA (1.5A).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What about USB c?
ahrion said:
What about USB c?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm not sure don't have any usb c ports yet
I have a USB c port on my PC. Idk how is test amps though.
ahrion said:
I have a USB c port on my PC. Idk how is test amps though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
USB type C is just a form factor, you may have an USB 2.0, 3.0 or 3.1 behind it, so between 0.5 and 0.9 Amps
So not safe at all IMO, you'll just fry your PC motherboard.
I just bought my first Google pixel tablet with a USB C charging point. Is it faster to charge USB C to USB C?
Or is USB 3.0 2 USB C the same speed?
Thanks
I know with my lg v20 if I use my USB c pd charger with it. It charges faster than my 3.0 USB A to USB c charger. So I would guess same holds true with the pixel c.
Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
USB-C and USB 3.0 are two completely separate things. USB-C is merely a connector type. The default protocol for USB-C is USB 3.1, but if anything in the connection is incompatible with 3.1 then it will reduce down to whatever the lowest is. For instance using a USB 3.0 cable on a 3.1 connection results in 3.0 speeds/power. Likewise, if you use a tablet/phone whose physical port is USB 2.0 with a 3.0 cable it will still only go at 2.0 speeds.
What really matters here is your power source. The Pixel C supports USB Power Delivery for fast charging. The included charger is not PD-capable and will charge at 15W ([email protected]). The Google 60W USB Type C charger (included with the 2015 Chromebook Pixel) will charge the Pixel C at 24W ([email protected]) Another thing to keep in mind when considering chargers is that Qualcomm's Quick Charge isn't the same as what the Pixel C uses and likely will always default to 5V/2.4A charging so make sure you use a PD-capable charger if you want to get the fastest charging speeds.
tkoreaper said:
USB-C and USB 3.0 are two completely separate things. USB-C is merely a connector type. The default protocol for USB-C is USB 3.1, but if anything in the connection is incompatible with 3.1 then it will reduce down to whatever the lowest is. For instance using a USB 3.0 cable on a 3.1 connection results in 3.0 speeds/power. Likewise, if you use a tablet/phone whose physical port is USB 2.0 with a 3.0 cable it will still only go at 2.0 speeds.
What really matters here is your power source. The Pixel C supports USB Power Delivery for fast charging. The included charger is not PD-capable and will charge at 15W ([email protected]). The Google 60W USB Type C charger (included with the 2015 Chromebook Pixel) will charge the Pixel C at 24W ([email protected]) Another thing to keep in mind when considering chargers is that Qualcomm's Quick Charge isn't the same as what the Pixel C uses and likely will always default to 5V/2.4A charging so make sure you use a PD-capable charger if you want to get the fastest charging speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's very informative. How quickly does the pixel charge when at 12V/2A?
All very useful information. Thank you.
I have a feeling that fast charges can eventually cause damage to a battery or at least reduce its life expectancy.
I don't know why but I have the impression that slower charging – if one isn't in a hurry, such as overnight will eventually give longer battery life – especially interesting in a unit which doesn't have a user rechargeable battery.
Got any comments about this?
I would suggest this reading: http://www.fpvforme.com/charging-lipo-batteries/
Just make 100% positive you're buying a good USB C Power Delivery compatible charger+cable, if not you risk damaging your Pixel C.
Reference this spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vnpEXfo2HCGADdd9G2x9dMDWqENiY2kgBJUu29f_TX8/pubhtml