During recent in-depth technical discussions with clients, a representative technical question emerged: Is video streaming functionality exclusive to facial recognition modules, or can it also be implemented within a USB module architecture? This query stems from ambiguities observed in product documentation regarding the binding relationship between functional implementation and technical protocols. To address this, a more rigorous technical explanation is necessary to clarify the misconception.
From a system architecture perspective, video streaming—as a fundamental data transmission form—relies on the underlying logic of hardware interface bandwidth capabilities and data transmission protocol compatibility. It is not exclusively tied to specific module types. Facial recognition modules, due to their application scenarios often involving complex image processing, naturally integrate video streaming functionality. However, this does not imply that USB interface modules face technical barriers in supporting this capability.
In fact, USB modules, with their mature interface standards and broad compatibility, are fully capable of handling video streaming transmission. The two protocols mentioned in the relevant product documentation serve precisely as descriptions of technical implementation paths, not limitations on functional applicability. Specifically, when a module declares support for a specific data transmission protocol, it implies that its underlying hardware design is prepared for audio-visual data transmission. Here, the protocol acts as a “channel rule,” determining how data is encapsulated, transmitted, and parsed. Therefore, supporting relevant protocols is actually the necessary technical condition and explicit technical identifier for a module to possess video streaming capability.
Delving deeper into the technical foundation, both facial recognition modules and USB modules follow similar signal processing and transmission workflows to achieve video streaming. Raw data captured by the image sensor undergoes processing by the ISP (Image Signal Processor), is then encapsulated via specific interface protocols (such as UVC, the USB Video Class protocol), and finally transmitted to the host device through the physical layer (e.g., the USB bus). Within this chain, USB modules can also integrate high-performance ISP units and fully comply with universal protocols like UVC, delivering video streaming experiences as smooth and clear as dedicated facial recognition modules. The primary distinction lies in their algorithmic focus: facial recognition modules may prioritize localized facial feature extraction and analysis, while USB modules emphasize efficiently delivering raw video streams to host computers for processing without loss.
In summary, video streaming capability is not an exclusive feature of any specific module type but rather a fundamental capability enabled by standardized protocols in modern smart modules. When selecting products, customers need not limit video streaming functionality to facial recognition modules. Instead, they should prioritize the protocol types supported, ISP processing capabilities, and compatibility with their system platforms. This trend also suggests that as interface technologies and protocol standards continue to converge, the boundaries between modules in terms of basic data transmission capabilities are becoming increasingly blurred. Functional differences will increasingly manifest in the depth of specialized embedded algorithms and the strength of edge computing capabilities.
