| Revision as of 07:03, 6 August 2008 editThunderbird2 (talk | contribs)6,831 edits 1 GB = 1,000,194,048 B? | Revision as of 17:02, 6 August 2008 edit undoTom94022 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,113 edits How I calcuate the IDEMA GBNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Tom, I read that idema standard, which was new to me. I can't see how it follows from it that 1 GB = 1,000,194,048 B. Can you explain that please? ] (]) 07:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC) | Tom, I read that idema standard, which was new to me. I can't see how it follows from it that 1 GB = 1,000,194,048 B. Can you explain that please? ] (]) 07:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :It is one interpretation of the formula at the bottom of the article: | |||
| ::LBA count = '''97696368''' + ('''1953504''' * (Desired Capacity in Gbytes – 50.0)) | |||
| :::In the case of HDDs logical blocks (LBAs) are 512 bytes so the marginal value of a Gbyte is | |||
| ::::'''1,953,504''' logical blocks x 512 bytes/logical block = 1,000,194,048 bytes | |||
| ::the other constant, '''9,7696,368''' is 50,020,540,416 bytes which does not divide into a whole number for Gbyte. | |||
| :I suppose it is more accurate to say that IDEMA has a "variable" definition of Gbyte for ATA HDDs starting with 1,011,032,064 bytes for a 1 GB HDD and 1,000,194,048 bytes per GByte there after. I am going to change the footnote to use the terms logical blocks but I think it would be TMI to go to this detail (I can be convinced otherwise :-) ). | |||
| :FWIW, I checked several ATA and SATA drive specifications by different manufacturers and found them compliant to this spec. I haven't checked the SCSI side for this issue, but I bet they comply. The reason it is important, of course, is this is how the drive responds to the systems when queried about its capacity, a hexidecimal string listing the number of 512 byte logical blocks (SCSI does support other block sizes and SATA will). How the OS presents that is the source of confusion. There are no prefixes at this level! It always has seemed sloppy, inconsistent and strange to me that the OSs change the hex string into into decimal number with binary prefixes - decimal numbers with decimal prefixes or hex numbers with hex prefixes make a lot more sense. ] (]) 17:02, 6 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:02, 6 August 2008
Tom, I read that idema standard, which was new to me. I can't see how it follows from it that 1 GB = 1,000,194,048 B. Can you explain that please? Thunderbird2 (talk) 07:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
- It is one interpretation of the formula at the bottom of the article:
- LBA count = 97696368 + (1953504 * (Desired Capacity in Gbytes – 50.0))
- In the case of HDDs logical blocks (LBAs) are 512 bytes so the marginal value of a Gbyte is
- 1,953,504 logical blocks x 512 bytes/logical block = 1,000,194,048 bytes
- In the case of HDDs logical blocks (LBAs) are 512 bytes so the marginal value of a Gbyte is
- the other constant, 9,7696,368 is 50,020,540,416 bytes which does not divide into a whole number for Gbyte.
- LBA count = 97696368 + (1953504 * (Desired Capacity in Gbytes – 50.0))
- I suppose it is more accurate to say that IDEMA has a "variable" definition of Gbyte for ATA HDDs starting with 1,011,032,064 bytes for a 1 GB HDD and 1,000,194,048 bytes per GByte there after. I am going to change the footnote to use the terms logical blocks but I think it would be TMI to go to this detail (I can be convinced otherwise :-) ).
- FWIW, I checked several ATA and SATA drive specifications by different manufacturers and found them compliant to this spec. I haven't checked the SCSI side for this issue, but I bet they comply. The reason it is important, of course, is this is how the drive responds to the systems when queried about its capacity, a hexidecimal string listing the number of 512 byte logical blocks (SCSI does support other block sizes and SATA will). How the OS presents that is the source of confusion. There are no prefixes at this level! It always has seemed sloppy, inconsistent and strange to me that the OSs change the hex string into into decimal number with binary prefixes - decimal numbers with decimal prefixes or hex numbers with hex prefixes make a lot more sense. Tom94022 (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2008 (UTC)