USB or parallel?

[Konrad]

I'm installing a new printer (Lexmark Z42 - any opinions?), which has
USB & parallel ports. My motherboard (MSI K7T Pro2A) has them too.
Is any gain in performance of the printer with USB compared to parallel port, or not? I'm using USB for my keyboard & mouse, but
I don't see any difference from PS2 connection. I have parallel
cable from my old printer, which I can use, but I'll have to buy
USB cable, and I'm just not sure if is worth it?

 

[sohcrates]

of the usb printers i've used

1) most can be a pain to configure cause they add their own printer-specific parallel port adapter

2) printer slower than their parallel port counterparts

so i'd just stick with parallel...unless you're like me , and still use your parallel port for something OTHER than a printer

 

[Gk0r]

Hell, the speed of your printing will NOT increase with a buy of the USB connector (needless to say that USB port is faster, then parr.) When you talking about printing it's not that limiting factor, allthough it is when you talk about the scanners, digital cameras and stuff like that

 

[limsandy]

USB is faster than parallel connection!
Therefore, I recommend USB. Configuring a printer using USB connection does not necessarily be troublesome.

 

[NFS4]

<< of the usb printers i've used

1) most can be a pain to configure cause they add their own printer-specific parallel port adapter

2) printer slower than their parallel port counterparts

so i'd just stick with parallel...unless you're like me , and still use your parallel port for something OTHER than a printer >>



1) What are you talking about? It adds USB Printer support under device manager and there is NOTHING to configure. You just plug it in and install the drivers for the printer. I don't know what your're talking about concerning configuring anything. There's nothing to configure.

2) USB is faster than parallel printing. Not the printer itself, but sending data to the printer.

 

[Gk0r]

I agree with NFS4, but my first suggestion still stands

 

[randomlinh]

interesting, usb was easy for me... plug in, point to drivers, boom. prints nice and quick too.. no different than parallel. The big reason i don't use parallel is i got a free 16ft usb cable

it does have an odd issue that if you leave it on for a while, you gotta plug it back in... i don't know if that's an HP issue or what (my friends 895 does it too, i have an 832)

 

[sohcrates]

*oof*

oh well, luckily i can take criticism.

1) i've worked on at least 2 people's computers where the usb printer was screwed up, and it's been a pain to get it working. just plugging it in didn't work, it was really annoying. BUT, when i re-read my original post, i apologize if it sounded like ALL usb printers are a pain...i've also worked on some that are super easy.

2) there's a thread or two going on here where at least two people claim that their parallel printer is faster than using it's usb counterpart....

just my $.02

 

[John P]

Go USB if you it works for you, save an IRQ. I have had problems running my printer USB so I don't even bother, I just use parallel. Parallel is pretty much foolproof. USB (in my experience) tends to be a bit finicky if you have several USB things hooked up at once, probably just depends on your system setup.

 

[ImNoFun]

I've installed three printers with USB and two of them have been a pain and still don't work like they should. Stick with parallel unless you have a reason not to.

 

[larrymoencurly]

I read, on a website about parallel ports, that ECP was faster than USB 1.x, but this doesn't matter with printers.

I've always had more headaches with USB than parallel for printers, except for the nearly-free HP 930C, which took forever to set up with the parallel port of my old FIC PA2007 mobo.

 

[OS]

I would go USB, no need to dick around with the ECP/EPP/SPP modes in the bios and you save an IRQ.

As for speed, I think USB/parallel transfer rates are roughly equivalent (~1 meg/sec for both), but either way the limiting factor is the print mechanism and not the interface. I've yet to see a printer that can print stuff faster than a computer can feed it print jobs.

 

[MiniMe69]

installing drivers for USB printers used to be troublesome when they first came out...but now it is easy to use USB. unless u got your mouse and keyboard on USB...then might as well take advantage of the parallel port...your not gonna see that much difference between the speeds on the lexmark z42 anyways. just set the parallel port to epp then you don't have to worry about the dma channel thingy that ecp uses.

 

[HansXP]

I agree with NFS4, USB is super easy in most cases. Why not try USB, and if it doesn't work, use the paralle port? You've got nothing to loose, except an IRQ

 

[dullard]

<< USB is faster than parallel connection!
Therefore, I recommend USB. Configuring a printer using USB connection does not necessarily be troublesome. >>



Not so fast, my HP Laserjet 1200 is 40% faster when connected by the parallel port. This is true with several other printers in reviews I've seen. So I guess, you really need to try it both ways, and use which ever one you like.

 

[WildeBeast]

1) USB is supposed to transfer at peaks of 12Mbps (1.5 Mps) and parallel is only rated around 2Mbps (.25Mps).

2)USB = no IRQ = less system conflicts = better performance systemwide

3)USB is hot swappable, meaning that you can unplug/replug the printer without restarting. With parallel you have to reboot (I am not absolutely sure about this).

There shouldn't be any problems with USB printers anymore, although IMHO stay away from Epson and HP, the canons have the best photo quality and the Lexmarks have great quality, are cheap, and are slow. USB2 should be out soon too.

 

[sciencewhiz]

Actually, the peak speed for parallel is 2 MB/sec making it faster than USB which is 1.5 MB/sec. You won't notice a difference because both of those are much faster than your printer can physically print.

Since you have a parallel cable, use it. The differences are minimal. I wouldn't recommend going out and buying a USB cable since you have already have a printer cable.

 

[Blastman]

Sciencewhiz is right.

The current EPP (Extended Parallel Port) supports a maximum transfer rate of about (varies) 2.0 MBytes/s. which is a little faster than the USB standard = 12Mbits/s = 1.5MBytes/s

 

[dahoff]

I have a DeskJet 932C and have tried both parallel and USB. Both worked. The print speed was about the same, except that with USB, the printing started faster and the system wasn't choppy. When I use parallel, it takes longer to send the data, but the main factor is if I'm running other major apps at the same time, sometimes the printer stalls while it waits for more data.

Use whatever works best. Give USB a try and see if you notice a difference.

 

[Pretty Cool]

Just to clarify (from usb.org):

standard parallel port: .115MBYTES/s maximum transfer rate
ECP/EPP parallel port: 3MBYTES/s
USB: 1.5MBYTES/s

However, I believe that the speed will be determined not by the interface, but by the particular printer and driver your are using.

 

[armypants]

usb is faster but for printing it wont make a diffrence

 

[bonkers325]

usb

 

[RaymondY]

Personally I prefer to put the printer on a parallel port and keep my USB ports available for my webcam, mouse, pda, etc.

I don't think you gain much from using the USB port for a printer.