Interface latency: USB vs Thunderbolt ?

Discussion in 'Recording Studio' started by Oneirokritikos, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:44 AM.

  1. Oneirokritikos

    Oneirokritikos SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    212
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Location:
    Montpellier, France
    Hey all,

    For those who have tried both, is a Thunderbolt interface worth the extra cost for latency gains?
    I have a Macbook Air from 2013, so USB3 and Thunderbolt 1 only, and am thinking of getting an interface. I am usually pretty sensitive to latency. Are recent TB3 interfaces even compatible with TB1? If not, I was eyeing an Audient ID4 or Focusrite 2i2.
    Thanks for your advice!
     
  2. Jeff

    Jeff Banned from Reality

    Messages:
    4,546
    Likes Received:
    439
    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Location:
    Illinois
    Yes, a Thunderbolt interface (with a wel written driver) will have lower latency.
     
  3. Descent

    Descent SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    189
    Joined:
    May 7, 2014
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Yes...anything is better than USB :)
     
  4. Oneirokritikos

    Oneirokritikos SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    212
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Location:
    Montpellier, France
    Yes, I understand that TB has lower latency, but is the price difference worth it in your experience?
     
  5. Descent

    Descent SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    189
    Joined:
    May 7, 2014
    Location:
    Houston, TX
  6. Ed Fry

    Ed Fry SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    The difference between Thunderbolt and modern USB interfaces is very slight and the change is not really to affect latency in a broad sense. The 2i2 2nd gen will almost definitely be absolutely fine for your needs.

    The point of having the lower latency is to run higher buffer sizes to accomodate for more plugins and stability.

    As humans it is proven that below 10ms we're not really going to notice much difference between settnigs The latency between yourself and an amp whilst at rehearsal (lets say roughly 2-3m) is going to be 8.7ms between the speaker and your ear.

    Thunderbolt 3 has no latency benefit over Thunderbolt 1/2, just like USB 3.0 has no improvement in latency over USB 2.0. The difference is in bandwidth as opposed to speed of transfer.

    Here are some comparisons between USB and Thunderbolt latency between our (Focusrite) Clarett TBT and Scarlett/Clarett USB interfaces.

    Thunderbolt  Latency chart (1).png USB Latency chart (1).png
     
  7. Oneirokritikos

    Oneirokritikos SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    212
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Location:
    Montpellier, France
    Thank you Ed, very enlightening !
     
    Ed Fry likes this.
  8. Winspear

    Winspear Tom Winspear Vendor

    Messages:
    10,931
    Likes Received:
    1,514
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Location:
    Southend-on-Sea, Essex, U.K
    Indeed, it's more than fine and there are other things to consider. No way USB can be a problem for such a low number of channels.
    Audient would be a fantastic choice
     
  9. vejichan

    vejichan SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    98
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Location:
    New york
    Is the scarlet solo 2nd gen the same sound as the 2i2 2nd gen? no sound/quality differences?

     
  10. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    27,929
    Likes Received:
    3,271
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Yeah, I'm not an expert exactly, but especially on USB I undeerstand this is the major limitation, the amount of channels at a time you can send in either direction without having issues. If you're monitoring in stereo and only recording a couple tracks at a time, virtually anything will work - if you're monitoring four separate submixes while piping in 16 tracks of 24-bit 88.2khz audio, then you're going to need some serious bandwidth.

    But for most home studio applications USB3.0 should be able to keep up.
     
  11. Elric

    Elric SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    742
    Likes Received:
    128
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    While USB, theoretically, is capable of very low latency you will find that thunderbolt interfaces tend to be way lower latency in real life. This may very well be because thunderbolt hardware tends to be higher end and the manufacturer has put more R&D money into the overall package, or it is perhaps easier to create a low latency driver for a TBolt interface, or maybe there is some other reason I'm not familiar with that is limited USB interfaces from realizing all of their bandwidth potential; but honestly, if you want low latency Thunderbolt is the king regardless of theory.

    I have a Presonus Quantum 2 (Thunderbolt 2) and that interface is so fast the computer's speed is the only weak link. I can go down to like 5.3ms round trip but if the computer was even faster it could go even lower. A guy that build dedicated DAWs on TGP said he was able to get it down into the 2ms range which is the same level of latency you are going to hit with dedicated processors like Helix and AxeFx.

    The real question probably is, how much latency can you tolerate? There are lots of USB interfaces out there that perform well enough that latency is not a major issue for most people. I wanted real-time guitar processing so I was willing to spend a little more for the lowest latency possible. Not everyone needs that.

    USBC and Thunderbolt 3 may play out differently over the long term but this is sort of the current situation.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019 at 2:39 PM
    Flappydoodle likes this.
  12. spudmunkey

    spudmunkey SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,350
    Likes Received:
    891
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Location:
    Near San Francisco
    To be clear, I think you're confusing terms (or perhaps you know and just trying to simplify, but I think it's to a fault).

    USB-C is merely the connector shape standard. Similar to how "m.2 SSD" doesn't give you enough information (as it could be either the same SATA as the 2.5" SSD drives, or it could be the much faster NVME), USB-C doesn't tell you what it's actually carrying....and it can even include Thunderbolt 3. Or DisplayPort. Or PCI-E. But again, that's also simplifying and ignores a couple of caveats.
     
    Elric likes this.
  13. Oneirokritikos

    Oneirokritikos SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    212
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Location:
    Montpellier, France
    Speaking of connector shapes, I know there are TB3 to TB2 adapters, but are there TB3->TB2 or TB2->TB1 solutions existing?
     

Share This Page