With the continuous adjustment of prices, mobile SSDs have probably become the first choice or companion of many friends, and many friends may default to using the type-c interface, feeling that only in this way is it suitable. As for the type-a interface included with mobile SSD, it is probably compatible with old computers, right? You don't have to worry about it at all. But everyone may be wrong, type-c is really not the only choice for mobile SSDs.

This matter needs to be discussed from two aspects. Firstly, type-c does not necessarily mean it is the fastest interface. As we have already mentioned, it is just a style of interface, and the internal standard can even be as low as USB 2.0. For example, many mobile phones have type-c interfaces that meet this speed standard. In addition, some computers/motherboards may have a USB 3.1 (3.2 Gen2) standard type-a interface, but their type-c interface is only USB 3.0 (3.2 Gen1) standard.

On such a computer, if you use a mobile SSD with a speed of more than 500MB/s, you will find that type-c is not awesome at all, but type-a is more comfortable. So, why do we have the illusion that high-speed Portable storage device, especially mobile SSDs, are uncomfortable without type-c? This matter probably starts with the early high-speed mobile SSDs, especially the M.2 SSD hard drive case.

In the early days, almost all mobile Solid-state drive with more than 1000MB/s were built directly with M.2 SSD. The reason was that the USB controller directly connected to the high-speed SSD was not perfect, so the mode of transferring the USB controller from the SSD master to the USB controller had to be used. That's right, just the controller consumes an additional amount of power, let alone the high-speed M.2 SSD designed for computers, which consumes around 5W, far exceeding the power consumption of a laptop hard drive of the same capacity (usually less than 2W), directly "exploding" the power supply of a typical type-a (5V/1A).

So early high-speed mobile SSDs did require high power supply, and the only option was to choose a type-c interface that could provide at least 20W of power. But now it is different. Most of the new brand mobile SSDs use preferred particles and special control chips, and the power is greatly reduced. For example, the recent Seagate "Ming" series Portable storage device, when looking at its size, it can be seen that it is not directly using the M.2 SSD, just touching the surface, and it is also completely different from the previous all metal shell or the hot M.2 SSD hard disk box.

Run the test again, and there is no difference between using its built-in type-c and type-a. In short, for the new generation of branded high-speed mobile SSDs, type-a is really not compatible with old platforms. You can still consider giving it a try, perhaps the speed is really surprising, and you can leave behind many of the "unique" interfaces on computers to provide more needed high-speed and high power devices.

Can you tell which is type-a and which is the test score for the type-c interface?