Why does Dualshock 4 use USB 2.0?

#1 Edited by ErEl (142 posts) -

The console itself has USB 3.0 ports. However, I can't help but be very disappointed in Sony's decision to use a USB 2.0 port on the Dualshock 4. It doesn't make any sense to me. Any possible reasons as to why?

#2 Posted by Fustigate (18 posts) -

Keep cost down?

#3 Edited by e30bmw (356 posts) -

What benefit would putting USB 2.0 on the controller give? That's a serious question, does it charge faster or something?

#4 Posted by believer258 (12201 posts) -

Keep cost down?

Probably this.

They also probably don't need the faster speeds of 3.0 and I don't think that 2.0 is obsolete yet. They may also be planning on releasing PC drivers for it, but I don't know if you could plug a 3.0 device in a 2.0 slot and still use it.

#5 Posted by AlexW00d (6444 posts) -

Cause why would a controller need USB 3.0?

#6 Edited by Bollard (5864 posts) -

Why on earth would a wireless controller need USB 3.0? It will charge the same speed either way...

#7 Posted by AlexW00d (6444 posts) -

@fustigate said:

Keep cost down?

Probably this.

They also probably don't need the faster speeds of 3.0 and I don't think that 2.0 is obsolete yet. They may also be planning on releasing PC drivers for it, but I don't know if you could plug a 3.0 device in a 2.0 slot and still use it.

You can.

#8 Posted by ErEl (142 posts) -

Why on earth would a wireless controller need USB 3.0? It will charge the same speed either way...

I believe 3.0 charges faster.

#9 Edited by The_Nubster (2356 posts) -

@erel said:

@chavtheworld said:

Why on earth would a wireless controller need USB 3.0? It will charge the same speed either way...

I believe 3.0 charges faster.

They've already said that the controller will charge when the console is in standby, though, right? They're probably counting on most people leaving the controller plugged in while they're not playing so that they can use a 2.0 to save some money.

#10 Posted by kaos_cracker (714 posts) -

Because the only time it will ever be connected is when it is off while it charges. Why are you complaining about this?

#11 Posted by ErEl (142 posts) -

@kaos_cracker said:

Because the only time it will ever be connected is when it is off while it charges. Why are you complaining about this?

Because it would be nice to only have 3.0 cables lying around which I can use across any hardware.

#12 Edited by Spoonman671 (4773 posts) -

Shhh.

#13 Posted by ErEl (142 posts) -
#14 Posted by jArmAhead (341 posts) -

@erel said:

@kaos_cracker said:

Because the only time it will ever be connected is when it is off while it charges. Why are you complaining about this?

Because it would be nice to only have 3.0 cables lying around which I can use across any hardware.

That's the nice think about 3.0, all of it works fine with 2.0 stuff. 3.0 cable works on 2.0 ports. It's basically the same cable with a little extra on the side. If the console is 3.0 out, you should be fine just using a 3.0 cable to the controller.

And I believe 3.0 can be "super charged" for putting more power through it for the purposes of charging, but lets be honest, it's not going to be a problem.

#15 Edited by mmzOne (278 posts) -
@erel said:

Any possible reasons as to why?

I bet one of the reasons is interference to wireless devices that USB 3.0 causes.

#16 Posted by tourgen (4542 posts) -

It's probably just a realistic consideration of what type of data throughput is necessary. The controller isn't going to need a 3.0 port.

#17 Posted by ErEl (142 posts) -

@erel said:

@kaos_cracker said:

Because the only time it will ever be connected is when it is off while it charges. Why are you complaining about this?

Because it would be nice to only have 3.0 cables lying around which I can use across any hardware.

That's the nice think about 3.0, all of it works fine with 2.0 stuff. 3.0 cable works on 2.0 ports. It's basically the same cable with a little extra on the side. If the console is 3.0 out, you should be fine just using a 3.0 cable to the controller.

And I believe 3.0 can be "super charged" for putting more power through it for the purposes of charging, but lets be honest, it's not going to be a problem.

A usb 3.0 type-B plug cannot enter a usb 2.0 type-B receptacle as it is slightly too big, but a usb 2.0 type-B plug can enter a usb 3.0 type-B receptable.

#18 Edited by BaconGames (3577 posts) -

If at any point you can plug that thing into a PC, using USB 2.0 is probably better for that too.

#19 Posted by kindone (2833 posts) -

Obviously the company chose to utilize 2.0 over 3.0 for some reason.

#22 Posted by flippyandnod (423 posts) -

The faster charging of USB 3.0 can be implemented on USB 2.0 devices and often is.

Honestly, the battery in the DS4 is unlikely to be much over 500mAh and Sony isn't going to charge the battery at over 1C (500mA) anyway. So higher powered charging probably wouldn't make a noticeable difference.

#23 Posted by ErEl (142 posts) -

The faster charging of USB 3.0 can be implemented on USB 2.0 devices and often is.

Honestly, the battery in the DS4 is unlikely to be much over 500mAh and Sony isn't going to charge the battery at over 1C (500mA) anyway. So higher powered charging probably wouldn't make a noticeable difference.

What about the fact a 3.0 micro-B port can connect with both a 2.0 and 3.0 cable, but a 2.0 micro-B can only take 2.0 cables of that format? In other words, the 3.0 version has wider compatibility.

#24 Posted by TheHBK (5563 posts) -

I can't think of any reason it should have 3.0 aside from faster charging, but they already did better than the PS3 with letting the controller charge when the console is on Standby. I haven't had a need for USB 3.0 yet.

#25 Posted by TrafalgarLaw (1373 posts) -

Cancel your preorder then.

#26 Posted by fleabeard (209 posts) -

Sony needs to get their act together. USB 2.0? Preorder cancelled.

#27 Posted by Sergio (2254 posts) -

The controller doesn't need it, so why add it if it may increase the cost to produce. Makes total sense to me. Some consumers having to keep both USB 2.0 and 3.0 cables around doesn't, and shouldn't, factor into their decisions.

#28 Posted by RonGalaxy (3267 posts) -

The console utilizes 3.0 for hard drives and such due to faster data transferring. A controller doesn't transfer data, its just getting its energy through the port. And as people have said, the port being 3.0 means then controller will charge just as fast as if IT had a 3.0 port. I.E. it doesn't matter

#29 Posted by Quantris (349 posts) -

It's going to come with the cable anyway right? I don't think we've removed the USB cable from the PS3 since we got it. Couldn't care less if it's 2.0 or 3.0 as long as it can charge the controller overnight.

#30 Posted by ShadowSkill11 (1783 posts) -

@erel: why do you think a controller needs to use USB 3.0? Its a controller. It isn't transferring large amounts of data like a hard drive. Do you understand what USB 3.0 is and what types of devices use it?

#31 Edited by II_SpadeX_II (67 posts) -

Keeping the cost down and faster charging I guess.. USB 3 on the PS4 was a good option for the other devices like your phone, keyboard, external hard drive, etc..

#32 Posted by Korwin (3034 posts) -

You only need USB 3.0 for storage, anything else is a waste of time and licensing money.

#33 Edited by Dagbiker (6978 posts) -

As believe said, I bet they will release drivers. I also disagree that you need 3.0 for storage as more on said. I can store the same amount of data using 2.0, it takes longer to write, but it's possible. The data flow might just not require it.

#34 Posted by egg (1469 posts) -

Keeping the cost down and faster charging I guess.. USB 3 on the PS4 was a good option for the other devices like your phone, keyboard, external hard drive, etc..

Wait, using 2.0 makes it charge faster? Burn! There could not possibly exist a better reason to use 2.0.

#35 Posted by ShadowSkill11 (1783 posts) -

I love these topics about computer hardware asked by console only gamers who don't understand how anything works. It's like an Amish person explaining how a cell phone works. They may understand it lets you speak to someone far away but if you start asking tech questions they will sound like idiots too.

#36 Posted by tsutohiro (364 posts) -

Keep cost down?

This.

Anything that controller needs to do can be done with 2.0, simple cost effectiveness.

#37 Posted by sometimesavowel (120 posts) -

As a non-amish console gamer who understands how cell phones work, I have to acknowledge that it seems kind of backwards for a new console to have old technology...but did someone on this thread just say he's canceling his preorder over this? huh.

#38 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (3789 posts) -

What would Brian Altano do?

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.