Transferring data from old to new hdd.

jpeyper · **Joined:** 22 Aug 07, 2:59 pm **Posts:** 770

SLi | TriMe : : . wrote:

its because of the HDD cache and partition of the drive that makes it smaller.

its like when you buy a 80Gb HDD after you do a NTFS partition it shows 76.4Gb (i think) and then well you Divide 80Gb by 1000Gb and you times that by the amount lost (3.6Gb)

i believe its more to do with a HDD manufacturer uses 1000mb = 1gb, while windows employs the 1024 mb = 1gb strategy. could be wrong though.

ur_noobie · **Posted:** 8 Nov 09, 7:05 am

jpeyper wrote:

i believe its more to do with a HDD manufacturer uses 1000mb = 1gb, while windows employs the 1024 mb = 1gb strategy. could be wrong though.

no your right, i learned that at school and uni

SLi | TriMe : : . wrote:

80Gb HDD

to be really annoying

80Gb = 10GB
b = bits, B = bytes (its weird)

Pigfat · **Joined:** 14 May 08, 12:27 pm **Posts:** 2564

So everything (programs, websites) calculate it as 1024mb = 1gb, except HDDs?

lepstar · **Posted:** 8 Nov 09, 9:15 am

Pigfat wrote:

So everything (programs, websites) calculate it as 1024mb = 1gb, except HDDs?

the question you asked is not quite what i think your asking.
1024mb IS 1gb (its a set finite quantity)

what hdd manufacturer's, some isp's, the kid round the corner etc calls 1gb can be whatever the hell they want it to be......the most common case is 1000mb is 1gb

SLi | TriMe : : . · **Posted:** 8 Nov 09, 1:12 pm

Yeah you guys got the answer written better than i did.

and its actually 1024Gib not 1024Gb

If you say you have 1Tb its 1Tb

If you say you have 1,024Tb its actually 1,024Tib

I have actually forgotten the real meaning behind it as its been ages since i last read about this.

I found this on wiki somewhere and will look for it after if i can

UPDATE: Found it >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tebibyte

l337h1um · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 9:19 am

Wait.

Before you install Windows on the 250GB, how old is it?

The 1TB drive might be faster. I'd look up the specs for both and install on the faster one.

SLi | TriMe : : . · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 9:39 am

Bit slow bud.

I would say its probably.

7200rpm 16Mb Cache...

as my 512Gibs are...

l337h1um · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 9:49 am

SLi | TriMe : : . wrote:

Bit slow bud.

He hadn't posted back that he'd done it yet so I thought I might get in before he did.

SLi | TriMe : : . wrote:

7200rpm 16Mb Cache...

I meant random seek and read/write times, and sustained transfer rates. Pretty much all desktop drives are 7200rpm.

l337h1um · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 9:51 am

delete...

SLi | TriMe : : . · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 11:28 am

My WD 1Tb Drives aren't 7200... nor are they 16Mg Cache

l337h1um · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 11:54 am

That's why I said "pretty much"... because there are some that aren't.

tryonthis · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 1:34 pm

l337h1um wrote:

Wait.

Before you install Windows on the 250GB, how old is it?

The 1TB drive might be faster. I'd look up the specs for both and install on the faster one.

Okay, so I edited my post, and I decided to take the 2 HDD's out.

The 1TB HDD is a Seagate Barracude 7200.12
The old 250Gb HDD is a Hitachi HDT725025VLA380, which was manufactured in August 2006.

tryonthis · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 2:07 pm

Just found some details on the Hitachi HDD:
http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/support/T7k500/T7k500.htm

Quote:

HDT725025VLA380 250Gb 7200RPM Serial-ATA

Seagate 1TB HDD:
http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?v ... ee0a0aRCRD

I really don't know the difference between the two.
Some opinions/recommendations would be greatly appreciated

l337h1um · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 3:26 pm

Hitachi has only provided random read seek, and it's the same as the Seagate.

So I wouldn't worry about it.

tryonthis · **Posted:** 9 Nov 09, 3:29 pm

Sweet. ta!

Transferring data from old to new hdd.

Who is online