USB Port Question

I just installed a USB 2.0 (NEC) card in an empty slot and fired up.
Windows XP seems to identify ok, installed it's own drivers and
everything "seems" to work. Now my question; I have a front USB port
which connects to the main board which was 1.1 (hence the reason for
the upgrade). I looked for an available (compatable) connector on the
new card to plug the front port into, but none are offered (there is
an internal USB connector). When running a comparison test of a timed
file download through the front port and then the new back ports, I
get similar results. Can I assume that the front port is now
connected through the main board to the new 2.0 USB and I have 2.0
everywhere? Is there any test that I can use to make sure my 2.0 is
working properly?
Thanks, Tim

<> wrote in message
news: ups.com...
>I just installed a USB 2.0 (NEC) card in an empty slot and fired up.
> Windows XP seems to identify ok, installed it's own drivers and
> everything "seems" to work. Now my question; I have a front USB port
> which connects to the main board which was 1.1 (hence the reason for
> the upgrade). I looked for an available (compatable) connector on the
> new card to plug the front port into, but none are offered (there is
> an internal USB connector). When running a comparison test of a timed
> file download through the front port and then the new back ports, I
> get similar results. Can I assume that the front port is now
> connected through the main board to the new 2.0 USB and I have 2.0
> everywhere? Is there any test that I can use to make sure my 2.0 is
> working properly?
> Thanks, Tim
You only have USB2 on the connectors on the new card.
Remember though that many things will gain little in speed from a USB2
connection. A lot of kit advertised as 'USB2', is only USB2 'Fast' mode
(12Mb/sec), and a lot of things like file transfers, suffer massive
limitations from the OS 'overhead', rather than the link itself. However
something is slightly 'screwy'. If the device you are attaching, is USB2,
and the USB2 connections are working right, Windoze, ought to put up a
'warning', when this is attached to the front port, saying that it would
perform faster on a USB2 connection.
What service pack level is your XP?. It needs to be SP2, to inherently
support USB2.

Best Wishes

On Feb 27, 11:18 am, "Roger Hamlett"
<rogerspamigno...@ttelmah.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> <ziegler....@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news: ups.com...>I just installed a USB 2.0 (NEC) card in an empty slot and fired up.
> > Windows XP seems to identify ok, installed it's own drivers and
> > everything "seems" to work. Now my question; I have a front USB port
> > which connects to the main board which was 1.1 (hence the reason for
> > the upgrade). I looked for an available (compatable) connector on the
> > new card to plug the front port into, but none are offered (there is
> > an internal USB connector). When running a comparison test of a timed
> > file download through the front port and then the new back ports, I
> > get similar results. Can I assume that the front port is now
> > connected through the main board to the new 2.0 USB and I have 2.0
> > everywhere? Is there any test that I can use to make sure my 2.0 is
> > working properly?
> > Thanks, Tim
>
> You only have USB2 on the connectors on the new card.
> Remember though that many things will gain little in speed from a USB2
> connection. A lot of kit advertised as 'USB2', is only USB2 'Fast' mode
> (12Mb/sec), and a lot of things like file transfers, suffer massive
> limitations from the OS 'overhead', rather than the link itself. However
> something is slightly 'screwy'. If the device you are attaching, is USB2,
> and the USB2 connections are working right, Windoze, ought to put up a
> 'warning', when this is attached to the front port, saying that it would
> perform faster on a USB2 connection.
> What service pack level is your XP?. It needs to be SP2, to inherently
> support USB2.
>
> Best Wishes

Should have the most current service pack but I will check that
tonight. Previously (before the card was installed) I did get that
warning when connecting certain devices. I have not seen the warning
since then however.
Thanks, Tim

Tim wrote:
> On Feb 27, 11:18 am, "Roger Hamlett"
> <rogerspamigno...@ttelmah.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> <ziegler....@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news: ups.com...>I just installed a USB 2.0 (NEC) card in an empty slot and fired up.
>>> Windows XP seems to identify ok, installed it's own drivers and
>>> everything "seems" to work. Now my question; I have a front USB port
>>> which connects to the main board which was 1.1 (hence the reason for
>>> the upgrade). I looked for an available (compatable) connector on the
>>> new card to plug the front port into, but none are offered (there is
>>> an internal USB connector). When running a comparison test of a timed
>>> file download through the front port and then the new back ports, I
>>> get similar results. Can I assume that the front port is now
>>> connected through the main board to the new 2.0 USB and I have 2.0
>>> everywhere? Is there any test that I can use to make sure my 2.0 is
>>> working properly?
>>> Thanks, Tim
>> You only have USB2 on the connectors on the new card.
>> Remember though that many things will gain little in speed from a USB2
>> connection. A lot of kit advertised as 'USB2', is only USB2 'Fast' mode
>> (12Mb/sec), and a lot of things like file transfers, suffer massive
>> limitations from the OS 'overhead', rather than the link itself. However
>> something is slightly 'screwy'. If the device you are attaching, is USB2,
>> and the USB2 connections are working right, Windoze, ought to put up a
>> 'warning', when this is attached to the front port, saying that it would
>> perform faster on a USB2 connection.
>> What service pack level is your XP?. It needs to be SP2, to inherently
>> support USB2.
>>
>> Best Wishes
>
> Should have the most current service pack but I will check that
> tonight. Previously (before the card was installed) I did get that
> warning when connecting certain devices. I have not seen the warning
> since then however.
> Thanks, Tim
>

When you look in Device Manager, is there a USB entry with the word
"Enhanced" in it ? That tells you the plugin card has a USB2 driver
loaded for it.

http://www.usbman.com/Guides/checking_for_usb_2.htm

Also, if you want a toy utility to play with, there is "UVCView" from
Microsoft. Download links are on the right of the page.

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device...VCViewdwn.mspx

Paul

First, no, installation of the USB 2 card does not make any ports other
than those on that card (or connected to ports on that card) USB 2.

Second, the difference between USB 1 and USB 2 is huge, you really cant
miss it, it's not two or three times faster, it's FORTY (40) times faster.

Of course, if the device connected to a USB port is only capable of USB
1.x speeds, the fact that the port is USB 2 won't matter.

The only real test I've found is to time the transfer from a known USB 2
device. A USB 2 flash drive works well for this purpose. USB 1
transfers will normally take 2 or 3 seconds per megabyte. USB 2
transfers should take 2 or 3 seconds per 25 to 50 megabytes.


wrote:
> I just installed a USB 2.0 (NEC) card in an empty slot and fired up.
> Windows XP seems to identify ok, installed it's own drivers and
> everything "seems" to work. Now my question; I have a front USB port
> which connects to the main board which was 1.1 (hence the reason for
> the upgrade). I looked for an available (compatable) connector on the
> new card to plug the front port into, but none are offered (there is
> an internal USB connector). When running a comparison test of a timed
> file download through the front port and then the new back ports, I
> get similar results. Can I assume that the front port is now
> connected through the main board to the new 2.0 USB and I have 2.0
> everywhere? Is there any test that I can use to make sure my 2.0 is
> working properly?
> Thanks, Tim
>

On Feb 27, 12:58 pm, Barry Watzman <WatzmanNOS...@neo.rr.com> wrote:
> First, no, installation of the USB 2 card does not make any ports other
> than those on that card (or connected to ports on that card) USB 2.
>
> Second, the difference between USB 1 and USB 2 is huge, you really cant
> miss it, it's not two or three times faster, it's FORTY (40) times faster.
>
> Of course, if the device connected to a USB port is only capable of USB
> 1.x speeds, the fact that the port is USB 2 won't matter.
>
> The only real test I've found is to time the transfer from a known USB 2
> device. A USB 2 flash drive works well for this purpose. USB 1
> transfers will normally take 2 or 3 seconds per megabyte. USB 2
> transfers should take 2 or 3 seconds per 25 to 50 megabytes.
>
>
>
> ziegler....@gmail.com wrote:
> > I just installed a USB 2.0 (NEC) card in an empty slot and fired up.
> > Windows XP seems to identify ok, installed it's own drivers and
> > everything "seems" to work. Now my question; I have a front USB port
> > which connects to the main board which was 1.1 (hence the reason for
> > the upgrade). I looked for an available (compatable) connector on the
> > new card to plug the front port into, but none are offered (there is
> > an internal USB connector). When running a comparison test of a timed
> > file download through the front port and then the new back ports, I
> > get similar results. Can I assume that the front port is now
> > connected through the main board to the new 2.0 USB and I have 2.0
> > everywhere? Is there any test that I can use to make sure my 2.0 is
> > working properly?
> > Thanks, Tim- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Therein lies the answer I think. I was using a Digital camera (a
couple years old) which may be limited on the rate of transfer and
therefore not show a change from front (1.1?) to back (2.0?). I'll
try a different device tonight and give an update. Thanks again, Tim