500GB external SATA drive only listing as 465GB during bootup

Advertised size vs what the computer sees, a quick search will find a detailed response. It is fine. 500GB = 465GB

FWIW:
300 = 279
400 = 372
500 = 465
 
Your fine, thats because the marketers use 1000mb instead of the actual 1024mb per GB
 
That's what I figured, I just found it odd that my SATA controller also reported it as 465 instead of 500.
 
The marketing department advertised the drive as 500 MB (500 x 1000).

The SATA controller is reporting it as 465 MiB (465 x 1024). The controller was built by engineers, not marketing droids.
 
Zamboni said:
The SATA controller is reporting it as 465 MiB (465 x 1024). The controller was built by engineers, not marketing droids.
Click to expand...
I suppose in fairness, the marketing droids actually have it right - using the "giga" prefix to denote 1024^3 bytes breaks the SI convention and could be considered a little sloppy, although it's now become a de facto standard.

I cant see gibibytes and mebibytes ever catching on though, so I guess we're stuck with it. :)
 
Well, I'd say that this is just a matter of interpretation. Computer guys define 1kB "one kilobyte" being 1024 Byte. That's "one" - "kilobyte", not "one kilo" - "bytes" - or: (1)(kB), not (1k)(B). The kilo in kilobyte is not the SI prefix, the whole kilobyte is a new unit. It's a little bit like 1 EA is "one each" (one piece), not one Exa-Ampere ;-)
 
hmm... that's stretching the point a little I think. If they were inventing an entirely new word for a unit of 1024 bytes, instead of playing fast and loose with the "kilo" SI prefix, they could have called it anything - maybe a "britneybyte", or a "Desmond."

As you say though, it's a matter of interpretation, and whatever's in common usage tends to win out in the end. :)
 
They have always advertised like this. It is just different from the 2gb drives to the 500mb drive.

Don't forget formatting loses some drive space as well.
 
hjreggel said:
Well, I'd say that this is just a matter of interpretation. Computer guys define 1kB "one kilobyte" being 1024 Byte. That's "one" - "kilobyte", not "one kilo" - "bytes" - or: (1)(kB), not (1k)(B). The kilo in kilobyte is not the SI prefix, the whole kilobyte is a new unit. It's a little bit like 1 EA is "one each" (one piece), not one Exa-Ampere ;-)
Click to expand...

It seems that some people have recently tried to disambiguate this situation:
Binary Prefixes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top