Iv lost 17GB!!!!!!!!!

ben1977 · 7 Jun 2014 at 18:04

just installed an Intel 335 series 240GB ssd.

Also i reformatted my older 120 and re installed windows 7 on this drive.

So the problem is.... windows can see its a 240 drive but only gives me 223 GB to play with.

can someone explain what i have done wrong and help me sort this mess out?

KIA · 7 Jun 2014 at 18:14

You're mistaken. The 120 is actually 128, 119GB after being formatted. The Intel 240GB is 223GB after being formatted.

Proof: http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/storage/30751-crucial-128gb-m4-ssd-review/ & http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1399/pg2/intel-520-series-240gb-ssd-review-the-ssd.html

Explanation: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/245851-32-hard-disk-label-actual-capacity-difference-excessive

ben1977 · 7 Jun 2014 at 18:35

Well thats a bit of a let down.............

Klo · 7 Jun 2014 at 22:32

ben1977 said:
Well thats a bit of a let down.............

I think it's happened that way for ages, my 500gb HDD only registers as 465gb in Windows.

CaNsA · 8 Jun 2014 at 04:00

Klo said:
I think it's happened that way since the dawn of time

EFA.

jh30uk · 8 Jun 2014 at 04:49

1000 vs 1024.

Its fine.

UTmaniac · 8 Jun 2014 at 05:55

Sounds fine, my ~7 year old WD3200AAKs register as 298GB after formatting.

bledd · 8 Jun 2014 at 10:18

jh30uk said:
1000 vs 1024.

Its fine.

This.

It's not 'lost', or due to formatting. It was never there..

http://www.andrewwhyman.com/blog/ra...-differences-are-and-why-it-causes-confusion/

queamin · 8 Jun 2014 at 11:30

jh30uk said:
1000 vs 1024.

Its fine.

I always hated this, I feel it is a con.

jh30uk · 8 Jun 2014 at 16:20

http://apcmag.com/seagate_settles_class_action_cash_back_over_misleading_hard_drive_capacities.htm

nutcase · 8 Jun 2014 at 16:56

Depressing isn't it - my Server has 6x 3TB drives in RAID 10 - so in theory 9TB capacity but it's actually 8.18 so about 820GB "missing"!

abbotsmike · 8 Jun 2014 at 17:27

I find bigger issues to keep me awake at night! The formatted vs advertised capacity has always been a bit different.

jh30uk · 8 Jun 2014 at 18:10

^^ Like loosing your hair or teeth?

RedvGreen · 8 Jun 2014 at 19:14

It serves the storage drive manufacturers well as people like the OP may buy that advertised size only to find out later (if at all) that it is in fact lower than stated.

A little shakeup of labelling on an international level will result in the correct numbers being shown, however 1TB or 931GB ... one rolls off the tongue, whilst the other... no so much.

Dicehunter · 8 Jun 2014 at 21:04

They should make SSD's and HDD's the actual size they state, When I buy a 240GB SSD I want a 240GB SSD not 220GB, Same goes for HDD's.

It's a legal con that needs to be fixed.

Rroff · 8 Jun 2014 at 21:09

Indeed its long since time it was sorted really.

Sasahara · 8 Jun 2014 at 21:45

Most Humans use the base ten numeral system. As such HDDs are sold using this system. It's you PC that's using the binary system when it changes the units to GB.

If you look at the bytes figure you are getting more or less the number you are paying for in the base ten numeral system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibibyte

You see the binary name (the one your PC shows) are using different names.

So your 240 gigabyte drive is a 223 gibibyte drive.

abbotsmike · 8 Jun 2014 at 21:49

jh30uk said:
^^ Like loosing your hair or teeth?

Not that old. Things like whether it's going to rain the next day are more likely to concern me than missing a few gig in a hard drive.

jh30uk · 8 Jun 2014 at 21:53

Nothing to do with age, those 2 things are common for peeps to dream about and you wake up and think its real for a few secs.

Surveyor · 9 Jun 2014 at 01:40

Dicehunter said:
They should make SSD's and HDD's the actual size they state, When I buy a 240GB SSD I want a 240GB SSD not 220GB, Same goes for HDD's.

It's a legal con that needs to be fixed.

They are the size they state.

When you buy a 240GB SSD you get a 240GB SSD.

Windows measures in GiB.

240GB = 223.51GiB.