Show us your SSD performance

[ignatzatsonic]

You got close. Shift the comma one position to the right since you started with 10 billion and not 100 billion.

I started with 10 million.

Not 10 billion.

My calculator accepts a maximum of 8 digits: 10000000

 

[whs]

That works out to be 320GB of NAND for a drive whose rated capacity is 300GB. In Windows you'll see ~279GB of free space, which leaves 12.8% of the total NAND capacity as spare area

Here is another one who was asleep in school when they discussed binary versus decimal.

 

[ignatzatsonic]

Intel sent a 300GB version of the 320 for us to take a look at. Internally the drive has 20 physical NAND devices. Each NAND device is 16GB in size and features two 64Gbit 25nm 2-bit MLC NAND die. That works out to be 320GB of NAND for a drive whose rated capacity is 300GB. In Windows you'll see ~279GB of free space, which leaves 12.8% of the total NAND capacity as spare area

Anandtech quote for 300GB. > AnandTech - The Intel SSD 320 Review: 25nm G3 is Finally Here

The I-29F16 is 16GB. New numbering system.
The I-29F64 is 8GB. Old number system exact same chip as X-25.

So one 16GB + 8x8GB = 80GB storage.
1 8GB is used with the controller as explained in my above post.

I had to figure it out from scratch since I couldn't find my list.

The difference is over provisioning. This isn't an HDD.
Read the anandtech page I posted above explaining the OP.

An Intel 120 GB SSD actually has 128 GB of NAND (per your earlier post above)

But an Intel 80 GB SSD has only 80 GB of NAND?

 

[whs]

You got close. Shift the comma one position to the right since you started with 10 billion and not 100 billion.

I started with 10 million.

Not 10 billion.

My calculator accepts a maximum of 8 digits: 10000000

Try the calculator in All Programs > Accessories. Then we compare results.

 

[Hopalong X]

80GB has 88GB of NAND but 80GB for storage. 74.5GB usable after the 5.5GB reserve.


The 120GB is 128GB of NAND and 120 storage. 111GB usable. This is approx. I don't have the exact figures on which NAND chips are in the 120.
I don't remember the exact combiation of 8GB and 16GB NAND off hand.

Each 80 and 120 has a 8GB NAND chip used with the controller not for storage.

That is my story and what I got today and remember.
I'm sticking to it until someone points me in the right direction if I'm wrong.
The End!

I'm ready for my nap!!!

I posted the pic of the 80GB with nine 8GB and one 16GB. Eight of the 8GB are storage + one 16GB= 80GB.

 

[ignatzatsonic]

Try the calculator in All Programs > Accessories. Then we compare results.

I get 93.13225746154785

aka about 6.868 percent loss due to the binary/decimal thing.

 

[whs]

Try the calculator in All Programs > Accessories. Then we compare results.

I get 93.13225746154785

aka about 6.868 percent loss due to the binary/decimal thing.

Hurrah, you got it. But it is not a "loss", it is just another unit to show 100Billion bytes. Like Celsius and Fahrenheit. 32 degrees F is 0 degrees C - but you have not lost 32 degrees, it is just another way of measuring.

You may now add the Speedy Gonzales button to your Avatar.

 

[Hopalong X]

I still don't know what you fellows are talking about.

Unless your refering to the difference between GB and GiB.

Intel measures theirs in GB all the other brands I beleive are in GiB though they are marked in GB. xtremeforums running the endurance app figured them out.
Windows Disk Management is GB.

Otherwise I have not a clue to your numbers.

 

[whs]

I still don't know what you fellows are talking about.

Unless your refering to the difference between GB and GiB.

Intel measures theirs in GB all the other brands I beleive are in GiB though they are marked in GB. xtremeforums running the endurance app figured them out.
Windows Disk Management is GB.

Otherwise I have not a clue to your numbers.

Let me try to explain it:

1KB in decimal is 1000 bytes
1KB in binary is 1024 bytes

If you wanted 1GB in decimal, you would do 1000x1000x1000
if you wanted 1GB in binary, you would do 1024x1024x1024 - and that would be appr. 7% more (do the math)

So a 100GB drive in decimal (and that is the num that would be on the box) will show as appr. 93GBs (binary equivalent) when you see the capacity on the screen - because the system shows that number in binary.

I remember one Canadian lady that wanted to sue the disk company because she thought that she got mislead by the ad. We had a hard time stopping her.

 

[Hopalong X]

That is the difference between Gib and GB. Add the little "i" and it stands for the bianary.

KiB or a kB. 8 decimal or 10 decimal.

Chart in upper right corner.
Terabyte - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Intel sizes in GB NOT GiB.

 

[ignatzatsonic]

The Anandtech article Hoppy linked:

AnandTech - The Intel SSD 320 Review: 25nm G3 is Finally Here

states, in reference to a 320 GB Intel SSD:

"That works out to be 320GB of NAND for a drive whose rated capacity is 300GB. In Windows you'll see ~279GB of free space, which leaves 12.8% of the total NAND capacity as spare area.'


Well, 279 is about 87.2% of 320, so they were obviously using 320 as a starting point, not the rated capacity of 300.

However---279 is also about 93% of 300--very close to the 93.13225746154785 percent differential to be expected between binary and decimal.

Hmmm.........

I don't see anything explicit at the Anandtech link clarifying this.

 

[Hopalong X]

I found what I could for everyone.

I did the best I can and hope you can fill in my blanks or have corrected my errors.
I'm doing the best I can to help all of you with info.

No argument wanted.

Ignatz if your right your right. I'm sure you are.

This is just discussion for me to learn more also.

Thanks.
Mike

ignat

Your original question you can OP more if you want. Leave it unallocated as we found out yesterday from snakeye.

It isn't necessary though on the Intel's with Toolbox. Can't hurt either.

 

[ignatzatsonic]

Intel sizes in GB NOT GiB.

If that's true, then the question is answered. The 5.5 GB is not due to binary versus decimal.

I guess Intel is the only outfit not using binary?

No argument at all Hoppy---I am just confused due to the fact that 7% might be attributed to anything--binary/decimal or something else.

Maybe it is pure coincidence.

I have no idea, but if Intel uses decimal not binary, that would mean you are correct.

 

[Hopalong X]

Intel sizes in GB NOT GiB.

If that's true, then the question is answered. The 5.5 GB is not due to binary versus decimal.

I guess Intel is the only outfit not using binary?

No argument at all Hoppy---I am just confused due to the fact that 7% might be attributed to anything--binary/decimal or something else.

Maybe it is pure coincidence.

I have no idea, but if Intel uses decimal not binary, that would mean you are correct.

This is as far as I know from my reading. No specific paper or link to prove it.

Essenbe posted the Intel pdf specs link for the 320 earlier.
Maybe you can get more info from it also.
Mike

Everything at Intel is posted in decimal numbers I have found not binary. kB, MB, GB not KiB, Mib or Tib.

 

[whs]

OK, Understand. Never saw the GiB notion before.

 

[Hopalong X]

Here you go. Straight from Intel.> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state-drives/ssd-320-specification.html
Check the "Note".

1GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes

So it is sized in decimal 10 not binary.
I knew it was somewhere. I just had to find it.

 

[ignatzatsonic]

Here you go. Straight from Intel.> Intel® Solid-State Drive 320 Series Product Specification
Check the "Note".

1GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes

So it is sized in decimal 10 not binary.

Good job, Hoppy---I'd rep you, but it's disallowed until I spread more around.

 

[Hopalong X]

I'll be fine after my nap. Where's my blankie?

 

[Snakeyeskm]

WOW ! Hopalong I am putting you in for sainthood.

 

[whs]

Here you go. Straight from Intel.> Intel® Solid-State Drive 320 Series Product Specification
Check the "Note".

1GB = 1,000,000,000 bytes

So it is sized in decimal 10 not binary.
I knew it was somewhere. I just had to find it.

All disks are sized in decimal. But if you stick it into your PC, it will show the size in binary which is a number 7% smaller. But the capacity is the same. It is just another unit.

Am I fighting the wrong war here.