Unfortunately "USB 3.2" is just a version of the standard, which does not give any information about the performance of a USB port or device.

USB 5 Gb/s = USB 3.2 gen 1, available on Type A or Type C connectors (or on devices on a special extended micro B connector)

USB 10 Gb/s = USB 3.2 gen 2, available on Type A or Type C connectors

USB 20 Gb/s = USB 3.2 gen 2x2, available only on Type C connectors

Moreover, "5 Gb/s" is a marketing lie. The so-called USB of 5 Gb/s has a speed of 4 Gb/s (the same as PCIe 2.0). On the other hand, 10 Gb/s and 20 Gb/s, have the claimed speeds, so USB of 10 Gb/s is 2.5 times faster than USB of 5 Gb/s, not 2 times faster.

10 Gb/s USB and Ethernet have truly the same speed, but the USB overhead is somewhat higher, leading to a somewhat lower speed. However, the speed shown in TFA, not much higher than 7 Gb/s seems too low, and it may be caused by the Windows drivers. It is possible that on other operating systems, e.g. Linux, one can get a higher transfer speed.

▲

mbreese 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The fact that you had to list all of the versions and speeds at the top of your post is illustrative of what the parent was trying to say. We can all look up what speed is associated with what version, but it’s not exactly a consumer friendly experience.

▲

adrian_b an hour ago | parent | next [-]

A few computer manufacturers do the right thing and they mark the speed on the USB ports, removing ambiguities, for example ASUS does this on my NUCs and motherboards.

Unfortunately, there are too many who do not do this, even among the biggest computer vendors.

▲

riobard an hour ago | parent [-]

> mark the speed on the USB ports, removing ambiguities

Unfortunately it's not true.

Quiz: what happens when a device capable of 20Gbps is plugged into a port marked as 40Gbps?

▲

ziml77 36 minutes ago | parent [-]

I can't tell if this is a trick question that has something to do with a quirk of USB running multiple lanes in parallel to get higher speeds.

Because if not then it's the same as any specification for connecting devices that allows for multiple speeds. It runs at the lowest of the max speeds supported of everything in the chain.

	▲	riobard 13 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		That's exactly the issue. I'm just pointing out that it's a fantasy to hope for simple numbering of max supported speeds will simplify the current USB mess. It will not. Consumers would expect plugging a 20Gbps device into a 40Gbps port should result in 20Gbps negotiated speed. In reality it will mostly likely end up at 10Gbps (or less) because of the mess.

▲

hypercube33 31 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Thats just port speed, charging and other features are all a crapshoot on USB making Thunderbolt the sane version of the "USB-C" family where it requires a set of things (speed, charging wattage)

▲

eqvinox 33 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> Moreover, "5 Gb/s" is a marketing lie.

It's not a lie, the b just stands for baud not bit ;-)