<p>Firewire is better for video, because firewire is a more sophisticated interface. Firewire provides for device to device communication, DMA transfers and other performance features that USB does not. Therefore Firewire does not rely on the host computer's CPU. USB does not provide DMA transfers. All data on the USB bus must be managed by the CPU loading it down and potentially slowing the databus if the CPU is busy with other tasks. Since Firewire can keep transferring data without assistance from the CPU, it's better suited for continuous data streams, such as video.</p>

<p>Firewire does have a downside. Firewire interfaces are more sophisticated and therefore more costly. Firewire devices cost more. Firewire computer interfaces cost more. USB trades off performance and flexibility for low cost.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-10-12T12:22:04.943Z
2012-10-12T12:22:04.943Z
Christina
<p>For the best quality and/or High Definition you want to use the fastest computer input you have that your streaming app will accept. That would normally be Firewire. Most online streaming sites will accept both USB or Firewire.</p>

<p>Take a look at <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/TEDxTalks/search?query=tedxsanantonio+2011" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/user/TEDxTalks/search?query=tedxsanantonio+2011</a>. These are TEDx Talks we shot using a SONY PMW-EX1 with HD/SDI out and a few other SONY HDV cameras with SDI adapters ($200 each I think) into a Newtek Tricaster that was streaming and recording 1080i. The HD files were uploaded to YouTube.</p>

<p>Hope that helps</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-02-28T20:42:03.780Z
The speed doesn't make any difference, because you will NEVER even START TO REACH that ceiling with HD... (That's just 2 megapixels..)
Friend of Kim
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-03-01T10:59:39.017Z
Unfortunately it does make a difference in practice - I have only ever had problems with HD video through USB. I agree that you shouldn't saturate a USB 2 link, so it may be down to the way USB and Firewire drivers differ, but across 8 different PCs and various different video hardware, firewire is the only one which has worked 100% for me.
Dr Mayhem
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-03-14T21:23:09.630Z
Isn't Thunderbolt now replacing Firewire? If so, what Thunderbolt capacity devices are essential for video creators?
user610620
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-02-28T20:12:00.610Z
2012-02-28T20:12:00.610Z
doingmedia
<p>I am building a 2 camera, 4 mic webcasting setup. </p>

<p>Using firewire to connect the 2 cameras to a laptop is more involved as it requires 2 analog to digital converts and 2 firewire ports, whereas most laptops usually have at least 2 usb ports.</p>

<p>I need the video quality to be good (possibly HD), stable and reliable.</p>

<p>Which route should i take?</p>

<streaming><usb><firewire>
Is firewire better than USB for live webcasting - Video
Webdevbytes
# Is firewire better than USB for live webcasting - Video

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-02-28)

I am building a 2 camera, 4 mic webcasting setup.

Using firewire to connect the 2 cameras to a laptop is more involved as it requires 2 analog to digital converts and 2 firewire ports, whereas most laptops usually have at least 2 usb ports.

I need the video quality to be good (possibly HD), stable and reliable.

Which route should i take?

**Tags:** streaming, usb, firewire


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2012-02-28. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

For the best quality and/or High Definition you want to use the fastest computer input you have that your streaming app will accept. That would normally be Firewire. Most online streaming sites will accept both USB or Firewire.

Take a look at <http://www.youtube.com/user/TEDxTalks/search?query=tedxsanantonio+2011>. These are TEDx Talks we shot using a SONY PMW-EX1 with HD/SDI out and a few other SONY HDV cameras with SDI adapters ($200 each I think) into a Newtek Tricaster that was streaming and recording 1080i. The HD files were uploaded to YouTube.

Hope that helps

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: The speed doesn't make any difference, because you will NEVER even START TO REACH that ceiling with HD... (That's just 2 megapixels..)  
> **username_4**: Unfortunately it does make a difference in practice - I have only ever had problems with HD video through USB. I agree that you shouldn't saturate a USB 2 link, so it may be down to the way USB and Firewire drivers differ, but across 8 different PCs and various different video hardware, firewire is the only one which has worked 100% for me.  
> **username_5**: Isn't Thunderbolt now replacing Firewire? If so, what Thunderbolt capacity devices are essential for video creators?  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2012-10-12. Score: 4

Firewire is better for video, because firewire is a more sophisticated interface. Firewire provides for device to device communication, DMA transfers and other performance features that USB does not. Therefore Firewire does not rely on the host computer's CPU. USB does not provide DMA transfers. All data on the USB bus must be managed by the CPU loading it down and potentially slowing the databus if the CPU is busy with other tasks. Since Firewire can keep transferring data without assistance from the CPU, it's better suited for continuous data streams, such as video.

Firewire does have a downside. Firewire interfaces are more sophisticated and therefore more costly. Firewire devices cost more. Firewire computer interfaces cost more. USB trades off performance and flexibility for low cost.


---

