Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: HDD's - the Advertized size vs the Actual size.

04 Oct 2009   #41
SquonkSC

Win7 Build 7600 x86
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by jimbo45 View Post
Actually the File system is important -- How do you know that the disk is actually less than 500 GB. Presumably you must have put some data on it or formatted it in some way. All file systems have directory overhead etc which reduce the amount of available DATA space on the disk.

Looking at the packaging of one of my older powered 500 GB USB ext drives I see that the spec refers to 500 GB Unformatted capacity and mentions that the actual amount may be less after formatting it.

The "Native" amount of the disk before you format it can probably be seen in your BIOS before the system boots into the OS.

The measurement here should refect the theoretical maximum capacity of the disk drive (it should show you details such as Sectors / heads / cylinders etc).

Cheers
jimbo

Formatted or non formatted, the capacity of the disk remains 500.000.000.000 bytes.

The fact that after formatting you can't see or use it all,
or that parts of it are occupied, does not change the physical properties of the drive.

The difference in size mentioned by manufacturers, and how it shows in windows has nothing,
I repeat nothing to do with formatting, nor filesystem, nor bios nor anything else.
Note that I am NOT talking about free space. I'm talking about capacity.

The first post of this thread shows you that the difference between advertised and reported by windows,
is because the whole industry (miss) uses 1024 for a kilobyte, and disk makers use 1000.

The calculation is watertight.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
06 Oct 2009   #42
jimbo45

Linux CENTOS 7 / various Windows OS'es and servers
 
 

Hi there.

Not wishing to flog a dead horse but if Windows reports a drive as only having yyyy bytes then thats all Windows can tell you. Windows can only report what IT sees -- and it DOESN'T see the actual maximum capacity of the drive.

Say the file system was REALLY inefficient and Windows reported a 500GB drive as having 300GB. Who'se at fault here - the manufacurer or the operating system making inefficient use of the drive.

Ok the manufacturers might be using 500 GB as 500GB rather than the normally accepted computer term of 1KB = 1024MB but if it says on the package 500GB UNFORMATTED capacity then in my book you've got 500GB.

How you USE it (or how the OS uses it) is another matter.

If you format the same drive with ext3 on a Linux system and display the amount of space you'll get a different free space indicator than if you format the same device on Windows. Windows will also give you DIFFERENT amounts for the same device depending on the formatting options you chose.

I'm with the manufacturers on this one -- they publish the spec of their drive - they don't know what file system you are going to use on it and in some cases the manual actually says 500GB = 500GB (but of course we all read the manuals every time don't we ).

Cheers
jimbo
My System SpecsSystem Spec
06 Oct 2009   #43
SquonkSC

Win7 Build 7600 x86
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by jimbo45 View Post
Hi there.

Not wishing to flog a dead horse but if Windows reports a drive as only having yyyy bytes then thats all Windows can tell you. Windows can only report what IT sees -- and it DOESN'T see the actual maximum capacity of the drive.

Say the file system was REALLY inefficient and Windows reported a 500GB drive as having 300GB. Who'se at fault here - the manufacurer or the operating system making inefficient use of the drive.

Ok the manufacturers might be using 500 GB as 500GB rather than the normally accepted computer term of 1KB = 1024MB but if it says on the package 500GB UNFORMATTED capacity then in my book you've got 500GB.

How you USE it (or how the OS uses it) is another matter.

If you format the same drive with ext3 on a Linux system and display the amount of space you'll get a different free space indicator than if you format the same device on Windows. Windows will also give you DIFFERENT amounts for the same device depending on the formatting options you chose.

I'm with the manufacturers on this one -- they publish the spec of their drive - they don't know what file system you are going to use on it and in some cases the manual actually says 500GB = 500GB (but of course we all read the manuals every time don't we ).

Cheers
jimbo
You simply don't get it, or don't want to get it.

Either way, I am done explaining.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

06 Oct 2009   #44
H2SO4

Win7x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by SquonkSC View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by jimbo45 View Post
Hi there.

Not wishing to flog a dead horse but if Windows reports a drive as only having yyyy bytes then thats all Windows can tell you. Windows can only report what IT sees -- and it DOESN'T see the actual maximum capacity of the drive.

Say the file system was REALLY inefficient and Windows reported a 500GB drive as having 300GB. Who'se at fault here - the manufacurer or the operating system making inefficient use of the drive.

Ok the manufacturers might be using 500 GB as 500GB rather than the normally accepted computer term of 1KB = 1024MB but if it says on the package 500GB UNFORMATTED capacity then in my book you've got 500GB.

How you USE it (or how the OS uses it) is another matter.

If you format the same drive with ext3 on a Linux system and display the amount of space you'll get a different free space indicator than if you format the same device on Windows. Windows will also give you DIFFERENT amounts for the same device depending on the formatting options you chose.

I'm with the manufacturers on this one -- they publish the spec of their drive - they don't know what file system you are going to use on it and in some cases the manual actually says 500GB = 500GB (but of course we all read the manuals every time don't we ).

Cheers
jimbo
You simply don't get it, or don't want to get it.

Either way, I am done explaining.
Oooohh, my turn then

Jimbo, mate, me old mucker, let's conduct a thought experiment. Say there's this drive and it just came from the factory, as yet completely undefiled by software. Like, there's nothing on there at all. No OS, no recovery partitions, no vestigal deleted stuff... nada.

Is it meaningful to talk about that drive's capacity yet? Does it have a "size" we could measure in terms of a certain number of bytes?

Most people would agree that the drive is indeed endowed with a certain size even at that point, long before file systems become a concern. That is the quantity whose dimensions are being discussed in this thread, not the formatted capacity or any other FS-specific value.



(Otherwise, if you've discovered a way to prove that the drive's capacity while it's brand spanking new is a probability cloud, we can publish the idea as the "New HDD Capacity Uncertainty Principle" - you can either gauge the drive's position or its size, but not both at the same time.)
My System SpecsSystem Spec
24 Oct 2009   #45
Zinic

Windows 7 64bit
 
 

I wondered why and now I know. Thanks.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
29 Oct 2009   #46
mpcrsc562

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

excellent post!

there was a lawsuit levied against seagate a few years ago because of this very thing. i guess now it really is not much of a matter with the price of hdd so low now. you can buy a 1tb drive on newegg for $80!
My System SpecsSystem Spec
30 Oct 2009   #47
jimbo45

Linux CENTOS 7 / various Windows OS'es and servers
 
 

Hi there
in the case of SSD's the argument is clear -- Here's the statement from the Horses Mouth (OCZ).


*Consumers may see a discrepancy between reported capacity and actual capacity; the storage industry standard is to display capacity in decimal. However, the operating system usually calculates capacity in binary format, causing traditional HDD and SSD to show a lower capacity in Windows. In the case of SSDs, some of the capacity is reserved for formatting and redundancy for wear leveling. These reserved areas on an SSD may occupy up to 5% of the drive’s storage capacity. On the Vertex Series the naming convention reflects this and the 30 is equivalent to 32GB, the 60 is equivalent to the 64GB and so on.



For more info

http://www.ocztechnology.com/products/solid_state_drives/ocz_vertex_turbo_series_sata_ii_2_5-ssd

Think this at least for SSD's should wrap this up.

Cheers
jimbo
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Nov 2009   #48
pallesenw

Windows
 
 

I am sorry to say it, jimbo45, but that doesnt make your argument clear. It is still a matter of how you interpret the number "500 GB". The harddrive manufacturer interpret it one way and Windows another.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Nov 2009   #49
fseal

Windows 7 x64 Ultimate
 
 

The situation with SSDs is completely different from the situation with rotating platters.

With SSDs the drives are based on a device (the memory chips) that are already in measured in GibiBytes (GiB) and so the "32 gig" is in fact accurate (minus the additional 5% as outlined above).

In the case of SSDs the manufactureres are reporting proper sizes. That is NOT so for rotating drives and never has been all the way back to the first 10 meg drives sold to the PC world.

The manufacturer gets X bytes out of a platter based on how they can pack it on and in order to make the drives sound larger than they are it was a no-brainer to simply report the size in GB which is larger than the size in GiB and it remains that way today.

SSD == Accurate and clear reporting of unformatted drive size.

Rotating Drive == Misleading use of Gigibyte vs Gibibyte, always has been.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
14 Dec 2009   #50
Parker

Windows 7 x64 Ultimate
 
 

Would 1.5TB be 1395GB if I'm correct? I'm setting up a partition so I can format it and trying to as close to capacity as possible.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 HDD's - the Advertized size vs the Actual size.




Thread Tools




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
"Windows Backup size" not reflecting actual backup file size
I'm having a problem with a system image (C: drive and System Reserved drive, that I made with a scheduled Windows Backup) and its size. I have a D: drive where I store it. First of all, I noticed this in D: drive properties: http://i.imgur.com/1ZAmdW2.jpg http://i.imgur.com/P73edVm.jpg ...
Backup and Restore
Actual print size when printing picures
Hi, I work quite a bit with photos and images. Since Windows 7 there no longer seems to be any way of printing pictures in their actual size and their actual resolution. There's just this wizard that assumes you want to print a standard photo size. The problem is that some of the images I work...
Music, Pictures & Video
change taskbar icon size to specific size other than small or large?
Hi to all. Can we change taskbar icons' size to a specific size other than two default windows defined sizes? Tnx.
Customization
150% size zoom in makes Chrome and Adobe Reader overblown size
150% size zoom in corrupts Chrome and Adobe Reader - Windows Forum - Computer Support Forums I have my Windows set to 150% zoom (otherwise it becomes hard to aim at the little buttons in order to click them) It's really nice to have the buttons really big in the list of options that come up...
General Discussion
How Do I Make 1024x768 the Actual Display Size?
Running W7, 64. Have a wide-screen LCD monitor, and I want 1024x768, period. That will chop some screen area off each side, fine. But even with the 1024x768 setting, the display is stretched horizontally and shrunken vertically, so photos look awful. How to fix?
Graphic Cards
Resizing Gadgets using the Larger Size/Smaller Size Button
I'm wanting to resize my gadget I developed with the Larger Size/Smaller button. Currently, I have two separate main gadget html files. The only difference between them is the background image, size, and the orientation of the icons. I noticed other built-in gadgets like Weather and CPU meter...
Customization


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:04.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App