Firewire vs. PCI vs. USB?

[JLM]

This is definitely a newbie question but I need to know more. Which is best to use as an interface into the computer for audio recording? As far as soundcards, I know there are both firewire and PCI options. Which is best? Is USB mainly only used as a means of transferring data? Any help or direction on this would be appreciated. Thanks.

My specific setup will consist of external A/D/A converters but I can't decide on how I want to get that signal into my computer. Which would be the best to use between these three options?

[bennychico11]

most people are going to say PCI, firewire, USB is the order of most throughput to least....
but the way I see it, PCI is not a means of transferring data. at least not in relation to firewire and USB. firewire and USB are EXTERNAL busses while PCI is an internal bus. infact firewire and USB can be PCI cards. so what you need to look at is the connector and where it connects...because once it gets into the computer, they usually have all have the same pathway to travel.
i think when people say PCI soundcard they mean a general multi pin cable of somesort connecting from a device to the PCI card....and in this instance, you can transfer more information faster. Firewire and USB however are nice because they can provide power to peripheral devices at the same time they transfer data.

USB 2.0=12Mbps-480Mbps
Firewire=400Mbps-800Mbps

[genob]

Originally Posted by bennychico11

most people are going to say PCI, firewire, USB is the order of most throughput to least....
but the way I see it, PCI is not a means of transferring data. at least not in relation to firewire and USB. firewire and USB are EXTERNAL busses while PCI is an internal bus. infact firewire and USB can be PCI cards. so what you need to look at is the connector and where it connects...because once it gets into the computer, they usually have all have the same pathway to travel.
i think when people say PCI soundcard they mean a general multi pin cable of somesort connecting from a device to the PCI card....and in this instance, you can transfer more information faster. Firewire and USB however are nice because they can provide power to peripheral devices at the same time they transfer data.

USB 2.0=12Mbps-480Mbps
Firewire=400Mbps-800Mbps

PCI is the fastest due to the fact that the internal chipset it "basically" wired directly to the cpu/memory bus.

PCI runs on a 33mhz bus, USB 2.0 is 48mhz and firewire is a little slower (around 40mhz), but these numbers don't mean anything.

USB and Firewire all work on shared bandwidth busses which means the more devices the slower the bus. Also they are external which means they have to go into a controller before going into the pci bus which then leads to the processor.

There are many more software layers for FireWire and USB that also make the slower than PCI.

Granted PCI is the most difficult to install/load drivers/etc... it is the fastest way to communicate to the PC.

If you have the choice, go with PCI (most difficult, requires opening up case, installing card, blah blah blah), then FireWire, then USB....

(when it comes down to it, FireWire and USB 2.0 are about the same speed... you'll never notice the latency between them both if you only have 1 device each plugged into the PC).

[JLM]

Thanks for the info guys. This is exactly what I was looking for.

[manning1]

my choice....
1.pci
2.firewire










...usb

[SPINSTERWUN]

I've always used PCI.

Eventhough, I might purchase a FireWire interface device. Such as the Tascam FW-1884 or the MOTU 2408.

So, I would suggest the same choices as manning1.

Peace...

spin

[christiaan]

[QUOTE=genob]
PCI runs on a 33mhz bus, USB 2.0 is 48mhz and firewire is a little slower (around 40mhz), but these numbers don't mean anything.
[QUOTE]
Please, get your facts straight.

PCI is a 32 bits 33Mhz bus which results in a theoretical bandwidth of 133Megabytes/sec

Firewire (400) does 50MBytes/s (400MBits/s) max.

USB 2.0 = 60Megabytes/s (480MBits/s).


Does that make USB 2.0 faster than Firewire? Not necessarily. Theoretical bandwidth doesn't equal actual bandwidth.





I'm a satisfied Firewire user.

[genob]

[QUOTE=christiaan][QUOTE=genob]
PCI runs on a 33mhz bus, USB 2.0 is 48mhz and firewire is a little slower (around 40mhz), but these numbers don't mean anything.

Please, get your facts straight.

PCI is a 32 bits 33Mhz bus which results in a theoretical bandwidth of 133Megabytes/sec

Firewire (400) does 50MBytes/s (400MBits/s) max.

USB 2.0 = 60Megabytes/s (480MBits/s).


Does that make USB 2.0 faster than Firewire? Not necessarily. Theoretical bandwidth doesn't equal actual bandwidth.





I'm a satisfied Firewire user.

ok settle down... i wasn't quoting "MEGABYTES per SECOND" bandwidth issues...

And so you know I've been writing USB/PCI drivers for 4 years now and I think I have a decent understanding of what "THEORETICAL BANDWIDTH" means.

My man: PCI is the fastest period. Like I said, USB and FIREWIRE use shared bandwidth busses that (in some cases) attach to the PCI bridge with MULTIPLE layers of Firmware/low/functional drivers.

What does this mean you ask?

Latency.

I'm not saying anything bad about FIREWIRE or USB... I'm just spitting out a few facts about how things work and why PCI is the fastest.

USB (2.0) and FIREWIRE to me are about the same, firewire still probably a little faster due to the overall design... but their both still external busses which aren't truely meant for SUPER high speed intensive applications hence the reason why your 3d video card doesn't run through either meduim.

Don't be mouthy about getting facts straight... read my post a few more times.

[christiaan]

So both USB 2.0 and Firewire pump 10 bits per cycle through the bus?


Really?


You're the first one I see comparing PCI, Firewire and USB by using MHz. There must be a reason why everybody else does it per bit/byte.


Progamming drivers for 4 years doesn't mean much really.
A brilliant professor can still be a lousy teacher.

[genob]

Originally Posted by christiaan

So both USB 2.0 and Firewire pump 10 bits per cycle through the bus?


Really?


You're the first one I see comparing PCI, Firewire and USB by using MHz. There must be a reason why everybody else does it per bit/byte.


Progamming drivers for 4 years doesn't mean much really.
A brilliant professor can still be a lousy teacher.

Progamming drivers for 4 years doesn't mean much really.
A brilliant professor can still be a lousy teacher.

wow you're soooo clever



ok please stop argueing about things you don't truely understand...

ok this is my last post on this issue... you can bash me all you want after this is it makes you feel like a man...

numbers like 12 Mbits/sec are based on the core clocks of the host controller (bus). I was trying to explain how the theoretical bandwidth issue doesn't pertain to the TRUE bandwidth issue... USB uses huge frame headers when transferring data thus making the 12 MBits/sec (full speed usb 1.1) down to a more "realistic" level at say 10-8MBits/sec.

PCI doesn't have that type of problem because it is not a "packet" based external bus.

I like firewire/usb/ and pci, they all keep me employeed. And please remember that his original post is was asking about "which is better to buy of the 3" and PCI is the answer when it comes to latency issues...

If you want to continue argueing BIT'S versus BYTES.. blah blah blah, then take it out of this section because we are wasting space talking about this stuff.

[melodiousmonk]

Okay. You guys are getting more technical than it has to be. I have an M-Audio Mobile Pre USB to preamp and convert my instruments. If you plan on using multiple imputs into the same device then you want to look at FireWire or PCI. But, if you are recording one track at a time (like I'm doing) USB should work fine for that. It all depends on how much you want to spend.

[noisedude]

There's a long article in SOS this month where their computers guy basically says there's nothing wrong with USB 2.0 and it's not a huge step behind Firewire.

There have been comments about USB's stability for continuous throughput - saying that it can only achieve 480mbps in the occasional peak. But the SOS article says it's not a real worry in most applications.