# Printer cable. Parallel vs. USB

**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [June 22, 2003, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546 "2003-06-22T03:52:31Z")
**Posts on this page:** 9
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Peanuthead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peanuthead/32/360_2.png) [@Peanuthead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peanuthead)
#### Post date: [June 22, 2003, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546/1 "2003-06-22T03:52:31Z")

</div>

I just bought a new Canon i550 printer. Will performance or print quality improve if I change from parallel to USB cable?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Mirage](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Mirage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mirage)
#### Post date: [June 22, 2003, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546/2 "2003-06-22T04:00:23Z")

</div>

USB is fast, and the new ECP parallel ports are twice as fast (though the old printer ports are about 1/12 the speed of USB). However both the USB and ECP ports are probably faster than the printing engine of your printer so I wouldn’t worry about it. Of course USB gives you the option of networking multiple printers and stuff.

Check out this cite

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Peanuthead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peanuthead/32/360_2.png) [@Peanuthead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peanuthead)
#### Post date: [June 22, 2003, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546/3 "2003-06-22T04:54:57Z")

</div>

Thanks **Mirage**. Guess I’ll just stick with the parallel cable then.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Alereon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@Alereon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alereon)
#### Post date: [June 22, 2003, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546/4 "2003-06-22T06:13:38Z")

</div>

Using a USB cable will result in much lower system overhead during printing, which means your computer “feels” faster. It also means a much more manageable, and hot swappable, cable. Overall, I’d go with USB if you have the choice. There will be no effect on print quality.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![FyreFiend](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/919ad9/32.png) [@FyreFiend](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FyreFiend)
#### Post date: [June 22, 2003, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546/5 "2003-06-22T07:02:11Z")

</div>

I second going with USB. Hot-swapping is nice at times, if nothing else is on your parallel port then you can turn it off in the BIOS and save a IRQ (not as big a deal with modern OSs but still), and if something else is on your parallel port (like a scanner) you don’t need to deal with honky compatability issues.  
USB won’t effect print quality or speed but it beats out the parallel port in all other respects (IMO)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)
#### Post date: [June 22, 2003, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546/6 "2003-06-22T11:15:17Z")

</div>

I will have to disagree with the above posters. I have found that connecting the printer to the parallel port is far less problematic. It has been a standard for decades and usually works w/o a hitch, usb OTOH, well lets just say I had my problems with dual mode printers connecting to usb. Also I did notice a faster print time using the parallel connection using a particular printer (some hp laser IIRC).

As far as greater overhead of a parallel port printer, maybe but I have not noticed any difference, but then again I was not looking for any.

If you do go with USB and connect the printer to a hub, all connections will fall to the lowest speed. I have a usb mouse and scanner that when I plugged both into the same port (via a hub) the scanner would go very slowly but when I plugged the scanner into it’s own usb port it went much faster, YMMV. And before any of you jump in I don’t have any USB-2 devices, hubs or ports.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![handy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5a626/32.png) [@handy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handy)
#### Post date: [June 22, 2003, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546/7 "2003-06-22T15:57:26Z")

</div>

I like parl mode too, it was made for printing & keeps out USB conflicts. But be sure your parl port mode in the bios is set right Peanuthead, some modes are faster than others.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)
#### Post date: [June 22, 2003, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546/8 "2003-06-22T16:03:01Z")

</div>

Right – sometimes a dual USB/parallel printer will give you grief when trying to run it in one or another mode if the settings are not right.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)
#### Post date: [June 22, 2003, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/printer-cable-parallel-vs-usb/183546/9 "2003-06-22T16:55:48Z")

</div>

if you connect the printer to the USB port you have a free parallel port which is not very useful for anything else. If you connect it to the parallel port you free a USB port which is more useful. In any case the communication is faster than the printer can print so. . .
