Capacity of Caviar 33200?

[TW]

Hi All,

I've got an old HDD Western Digital Caviar 33200.
The label on the drive says that the capacity of the
disk is 32493 MB (6296 cyl. 16 heads 63 spt.)
However information in the Internet says that it is
3.2 GB, ~6296 Cylinders, ~16 heads, ~63 spt
During a try of Windows XP installation it shows
3099 MB but the disk can be corrupted.

So what is the capacity of the Caviar 33200?

Regards
TW

 

[Rod Speed]

I've got an old HDD Western Digital Caviar 33200.
The label on the drive says that the capacity of the
disk is 32493 MB (6296 cyl. 16 heads 63 spt.)

3249.3MB actually.

However information in the Internet says that it is
3.2 GB, ~6296 Cylinders, ~16 heads, ~63 spt

That is correct.

During a try of Windows XP installation it shows 3099 MB but the disk can be
corrupted.

That is using binary MBs. A binary MB has 1024*1024 bytes.

So what is the capacity of the Caviar 33200?

3,249,340,416 bytes

http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc...nBfc2VhcmNoX3RleHQ9MzMyMDA*&p_li=&p_topview=1

 

[TW]

Thank you very much.

http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc...nBfc2VhcmNoX3RleHQ9MzMyMDA*&p_li=&p_topview=1

The jumper settings are also different here than thouse on the label.

Regards
TW

 

[Rod Speed]

Thank you very much.

The jumper settings are also different here than thouse on the label.

Yeah, the stupid WD jumper settings are too complicated for labels.

 

[paulmd]

Hi All,

I've got an old HDD Western Digital Caviar 33200.
The label on the drive says that the capacity of the
disk is 32493 MB (6296 cyl. 16 heads 63 spt.)

3249.3MB, It's NOT a 30GB drive. Pesky decimal points. The label may
be worn on that old drive.

However information in the Internet says that it is
3.2 GB, ~6296 Cylinders, ~16 heads, ~63 spt
During a try of Windows XP installation it shows
3099 MB but the disk can be corrupted.

What you're probably getting is an "unformatted or corrupted" note on
XP installation. It's almost certianly just unformatted. Not to worry
overmuch.

Not a big enough difference to suspect corruption. The formatting eats
up some space.

The disk is a tad too small for XP. It MAY install. But there's not
much room for much else. Certianly no updates or service packs.

So what is the capacity of the Caviar 33200?

About 3.2GB.

 

[paulmd]

Thank you very much.

The jumper settings are also different here than thouse on the label.

Did you get it with the jumper turned sideways (shorting pins 4 and 6)?
That's OK, it's a place holder for the jumper, should you need to
actually set it. The default is Single. You can remove the jumper for
the same effect. There's a zillion other positions. But the main ones
are on the label, and/or the silk screen on the controller card. CS
stands for Cable Select, which you should ignore for that drive)

 

[Rod Speed]

3249.3MB, It's NOT a 30GB drive. Pesky decimal points. The label may
be worn on that old drive.




What you're probably getting is an "unformatted or corrupted"
note on XP installation. It's almost certianly just unformatted.

Its just the binary/decimal MBs.

Not to worry overmuch.

Not to worry at all.

Not a big enough difference to suspect corruption.
The formatting eats up some space.

Nothing to do with formatting.

The disk is a tad too small for XP.

Nope, I've installed it on a lot less than that, with Office Pro as well.

It MAY install. But there's not much room for much else.

Wrong. Plenty of room for Office.

Certianly no updates or service packs.

Wrong again.

 

[paulmd]

Its just the binary/decimal MBs.

Not to worry at all.


Nothing to do with formatting.

Quite a lot to do with formatting. For instance, the 3.5" floppy disk
that we all refer to as 1.44MB, actually will hold up to 2mb of data,
and there are utilities that will allow you do do this (you really
shouldn't, but you can). The same media, formatted with DMF, holds
1.68MB data. The same principle applies to harddrives. Formatting
matters.

http://www.pcmech.com/show/harddrive/67/

The 3099MB is the max (yes, the difference in this case is binary vs
decimal), If you were to format it fat32, you will wind up wasting lot
of space to the format, and to "slack". NTFS is a little more efficient
in both areas. The full picture is more complex, of course.

See this table, your drive is reporting correctly.

http://www.wdc.com/en/library/eide/79-880097.pdf#search="Decimal Megabytes WD"

Nope, I've installed it on a lot less than that, with Office Pro as well.

This is an example, of you CAN, but you shouldn't. If you're stuck with
limitations like this, you should use an older OS. 3GB is more
comfortable on Win2k, and plenty of room for win98. If this drive came
with your computer, you're almost certialy better off with an older OS,
considering the computers at this time were all running win98, and had
much slower processors and less RAM.

Wrong. Plenty of room for Office.

I didn't say NO room, I said Not Much room. Add in an HP all in 1
printer, that's, -I kid you not-, an extra 50mb-200MB or more. I've
even seen these bloated things offer a 1GB "full" version. Add in an
antivirus program, a firewall, and some other basic applications and
you're in a world of hurt. It adds up real fast.

Wrong again.

Archiving sp2 eats up several hundred MB (Actual size depends on
system), There are about 70MB in updates (again, depending on system,
and whether you want to do "optionals" like Media player 10), that are
also archived so they can be uninstalled. It adds up real fast. And
having a small drive forces you to do things like remove the hidden
archives, which most people don't even know about. Slipstreaming helps,
but, again, it's one of those things that only the geekier set bother
with.

Overall, it's a higher maintence deal.

 

[Rod Speed]

(e-mail address removed) wrote

Rod Speed wrote

Quite a lot to do with formatting.

Nope, the difference in the numbers that the OP
posted are JUST due to the drive manufacturer
using decimal MBs and XP using binary MBs.

For instance, the 3.5" floppy disk that we all refer to as 1.44MB,
actually will hold up to 2mb of data, and there are utilities that will
allow you do do this (you really shouldn't, but you can). The same
media, formatted with DMF, holds 1.68MB data. The same
principle applies to harddrives. Formatting matters.

Not to the two numbers the OP posted above. That
is JUST due to the use of decimal MBs by the hard
drive manufacturer and binary MBs by XP.

http://www.pcmech.com/show/harddrive/67/

Completely irrelevant to the two numbers the OP posted
above. That is JUST due to the use of decimal MBs by
the hard drive manufacturer and binary MBs by XP.

The 3099MB is the max (yes, the difference
in this case is binary vs decimal),

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

If you were to format it fat32, you will wind up wasting lot of
space to the format, and to "slack". NTFS is a little more efficient
in both areas. The full picture is more complex, of course.

Completely irrelevant to the two numbers the OP posted
above. That is JUST due to the use of decimal MBs by
the hard drive manufacturer and binary MBs by XP.

See this table, your drive is reporting correctly.

http://www.wdc.com/en/library/eide/79-880097.pdf#search="Decimal Megabytes WD"

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

This is an example, of you CAN, but you shouldn't.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Its fine.

If you're stuck with limitations like this, you should use an older OS.

Wrong, as always, its plenty big enough for XP as long
as you dont get too carried away with apps and data.

3GB is more comfortable on Win2k, and plenty of room for win98.

Pity about your stupid pig ignorant claim below.

If this drive came with your computer, you're almost certialy better
off with an older OS, considering the computers at this time were
all running win98, and had much slower processors and less RAM.

Pity about your stupid pig ignorant claim below.

I didn't say NO room, I said Not Much room.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Add in an HP all in 1 printer, that's, -I kid
you not-, an extra 50mb-200MB or more.

Still plenty of room for that too.

I've even seen these bloated things offer a 1GB "full" version.
Add in an antivirus program, a firewall, and some other basic
applications and you're in a world of hurt.

Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant drug crazed fantasyland.

It adds up real fast.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Archiving sp2 eats up several hundred MB

Plenty of room for that even with Office installed too.

(Actual size depends on system), There are about 70MB in updates
(again, depending on system, and whether you want to do "optionals"
like Media player 10), that are also archived so they can be uninstalled.

Plenty of room for that even with Office installed too.

It adds up real fast.

Cant even manage even the most basic arithmetic.

And having a small drive forces you to do things like remove
the hidden archives, which most people don't even know about.

Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant drug crazed fantasyland.

Slipstreaming helps, but, again, it's one of those
things that only the geekier set bother with.

Taint even necessary, even with Office installed.

Overall, it's a higher maintence deal.

Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant drug crazed fantasyland.