I think this depends on your internet connection. You can check your download (and upload) speeds at speedtest.net.
Since USB 2.0 has a maximum speed of 480Mbit/s, your internet speed will have to be faster than this to make it useful to get a USB 3.0 adapter (which supports up to 4.8Gbit/s).
This doesn’t make sense to me.
Is there any reason for this?
I noticed this as well when I upgraded my Mac Mini to a model with USB 3.0 ports on it; my older USB 2.0 drives would copy data noticeably faster. The logic I believe is not all USB 2.0 controllers are the same.
The way I understand it, USB 2.0 speed is spec’ed to be a max speed; not a minimum and not a promised consistent speed. Meaning when USB 2.0 first came around, it was faster than USB 1.1 but nowhere near the speed of 480 Mbit/s promised. As USB 2.0 chipsets improved, speed and compatibility improved.
Simply put not all USB 2.0 controllers are the same. Heck, no kinds of controllers—SCSI, FireWire, PCI, etc…—of any and all types are the same. Or a better direct tech analogy is why can some gigabit ethernet controllers transfer speed better & faster than others? It’s simply improvements in the controller.
So looking at USB 3.0 specs, it simply seems that USB 3.0 controllers just perform better overall and the benefit is that the USB 2.0 standard it downgrades to is a better performing implementation of USB 2.0.
This is all anecdotal and conversational, but I did find this AnandTech article on “USB 2.0 flash drive performance in a USB 3.0 port” that supports this claim:
The real-world transfer times show that while USB 2.0 flash drives do,
in fact, perform faster when 'up-plugged,' this improvement is very
minor, to the point of being nearly or not at all perceptible. That
said, if you have USB 3.0 ports available, you can shave a few seconds
off your transfer times by sticking your USB 2.0 flash drives into
them.
And this answer on another Super User question backs that up as well; mind you the accepted answer to this question says there is no difference but it’s clear to me there definitely is is:
Actually, yes, it will be faster by a small margin. You will only see
gain if the device in question can dish out a higher bandwidth over
another interface like ExpressCard or PCIe. for instance a modern 7200
hard drive in a external enclosure could more than saturate the USB
2.0 port. If the enclosure is a USB 2.0 device, it will be operate with more of its bandwidth when plugged into a USB 3.0 hub, but not
nearly as much as if it was a USB 3.0 to USB 3.0 device to hub link
(with a USB 3.0 cable).
Best Answer
Generally no. Most phones will only charge at 500mA (about half of what a DC charger for a modern smartphone outputs) if it detects it is a USB port. The official standard sets USB 2.0 current levels at 500mA and 3.0 at 950mA. It is not uncommon for USB ports to support 1A or higher though, especially on laptops.
The problem lies with the phones. Some phones can use a modified kernel that allows you to tell the phone to ignore the 500mA limit on USB. This is often known as USB fast charge. Without this, most phones will simply charge at 500mA regardless of the USB flavor you choose. I can't say for sure about the Galaxy Note 3, however, as it is the only device with an actual USB 3.0 interface. Theoretically this could charge at 950mA but I haven't seen anything to confirm it. Devices other than phones, who knows. It would depend on the device. You would have to test it and see.
Use your USB 3.0 ports for USB 3.0 devices and buy a charger for your phone. Or if you must, charge with USB but it will be much slower than a dedicated charger.