Review Index:

Inateck FE2005 USB 3.0 UASP External 2.5" SATA Enclosure Review

Subject: Storage
Manufacturer: Inateck

Introduction and Internals

We've seen USB 3.0 in devices for a few years now, but it has only more recently started taking off since controllers, drivers, and Operating Systems have incorporated support for the USB Attached SCSI ProtocolUASP takes care of one of the big disadvantages seen when linking high speed storage devices. USB adds a relatively long and multi-step path for each and every transaction, and the initial spec did not allow for any sort of parallel queuing. The 'Bulk-Only Transport' method was actually carried forward all the way from USB 1.0, and it simply didn't scale well for very low latency devices. The end result was that a USB 3.0 connected SSD performed at a fraction of its capability. UASP fixes that by effectively layering the SCSI protocol over the USB 3.0 link. Perhaps its biggest contributor to the speed boost is SCSI's ability to queue commands. We saw big speed improvements with the Corsair Flash Voyager GTX and other newer UASP enabled flash drives, but it's time we look at some ways to link external SATA devices using this faster protocol. Our first piece will focus on a product from Inateck - their FE2005 2.5" SATA enclosure:

View Full Size

This is a very simple enclosure, with a sliding design and a flip open door at the front.

View Full Size

Read on for our review!

You simply slide in an SSD or HDD, flip up the front door, and slide the assembly closed.

View Full Size

9.5mm devices are supported, but some may be a tight fit.

View Full Size

At the rear we have the USB 3.0 port, a power / access indicator (blue LED, but not overpowering), and a slide lock to keep the assembly closed once the drive has been installed.

View Full Size

The enclosure can be popped open without removing any screws. The bottom surface is felt lined and the top has a foam pad. Both should be more than sufficient to keep an SSD or HDD reasonably protected during transit.

View Full Size

After removing two screws, the (tiny) PCB can be flipped over to see what makes this device tick. The JMS567 is used to bridge from UASP-enabled USB 3.0 to SATA 6Gbps. Very simple design,with the only other devices needed are a 3.3V converter (left) and a 25 MHz crystal (right).

View Full Size

Finally, here's the controller block diagram. Two individual PHYs handle USB 3.0 or USB 2.0 connectivity. An 8051 handles device identification, etc. Some SRAM buffers between the USB PHY and the SATA PHY. Again, simple.

Video News

December 17, 2014 | 12:44 PM - Posted by Jack_Pearson (not verified)

How bad do the ATTO speeds drop when using Win7 that does not have the UASP support?

December 17, 2014 | 03:41 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Yes windows 7 has the largest installed base, and that is not likely to change depending how cloudy win 10 gets. How about Mint, or other Linux distros, what is the support for USAP?

December 17, 2014 | 04:20 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Most of the vendors have added UASP support (at the driver level) for Windows 7, but those wanting the best compatibility should consider upgrading.

December 24, 2014 | 02:57 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

They'll upgrade when they realize you don't have to even touch Metro to get the benefits Windows 8.1 offers... which is never because they are technologically blind, and only see the "trends".

December 17, 2014 | 07:49 PM - Posted by fuersliph

This seems slightly faster than the previous Inateck you tested.

I picked up the USAP version you mentioned in the article and have been happy with it so far. That desktop dock looks like a good replacement for the USB3 BlacX I have on the bench.

December 25, 2014 | 08:58 AM - Posted by Paul A. Mitchell (not verified)

> it's time we look at some ways to link external SATA devices using this faster protocol


Would USB 3.1 be a natural development for enhancing USB pathways to fast SATA devices?

See summary discussion of the PCIe 3.0 128b/130b "jumbo frame" here:

I believe the current USB 3.1 implementations use a 128b/132b "jumbo frame":

"changing the encoding scheme to 128b/132b"

Keep up the good work.

/s/ Paul

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.