Question about drive capacity

[Buckwheat]

I hope this isn't too stupid. I just installed Vista on a new Seagate 320G
HD. I have an identical drive that is being used for backup and additional
storage. When I go into Disk Management, Vista says the boot drive is 20G
smaller than the data drive. Each drive is just one big partition. Any idea
where the 20G went?

 

[Byron Hinson]

System restore files etc possibly?

 

[Buckwheat]

No offense, but I'm looking for an answer, not speculation.

 

[Byron Hinson]

Well without seeing the drives, the setup, what's on them etc its pretty
hard for anyone to know 100%

 

[Richard G. Harper]

Is this one of those "The drive says 340 gigabytes on the package but
installed it only says ..." questions?

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] (e-mail address removed)
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

 

[Pumpkin]

Is this one of those "The drive says 340 gigabytes on the package but
installed it only says ..." questions?

my new one is supposed to be 320 GB and it shows up at 290 or so, is this
sort of thing common??

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] (e-mail address removed)
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

No offense, but I'm looking for an answer, not speculation.

 

[Ron Sommer]

A binary gigabyte is 2 to the 30th power, 1,073,741,824 bytes.

Manufactures use a decimal gigabyte, 1,000,000,000 bytes or 109 bytes.

So the size reported by the computer is 7% less than the manufacture's size.
--
Ronald Sommer

:
: : > Is this one of those "The drive says 340 gigabytes on the package but
: > installed it only says ..." questions?
:
: my new one is supposed to be 320 GB and it shows up at 290 or so, is this
: sort of thing common??
:
:
: >
: > --
: > Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] (e-mail address removed)
: > * NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
: > * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
: > * The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
: > * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
: >
: >
: > : >> No offense, but I'm looking for an answer, not speculation.
: >>
: >>
: >>
: >> : >>> System restore files etc possibly?
: >>>
: >>> --
: >>> Byron Hinson
: >>> ActiveWin Windows Site: http://www.activewin.com
: >>> Photos: http://www.byronhinson.com
: >>>
: >>>
: >>> : >>>>I hope this isn't too stupid. I just installed Vista on a new Seagate
: >>>>320G HD. I have an identical drive that is being used for backup and
: >>>>additional storage. When I go into Disk Management, Vista says the
boot
: >>>>drive is 20G smaller than the data drive. Each drive is just one big
: >>>>partition. Any idea where the 20G went?
: >>>
: >>
: >
: >
:

 

[Richard G. Harper]

Yes, it is. Drive manufacturers overstate the capacity of the drive by
rounding to 1,000s instead of using the accepted 1,024 values that are used
by Windows and folks who are precise.

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] (e-mail address removed)
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

Is this one of those "The drive says 340 gigabytes on the package but
installed it only says ..." questions?

my new one is supposed to be 320 GB and it shows up at 290 or so, is this
sort of thing common??

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] (e-mail address removed)
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

No offense, but I'm looking for an answer, not speculation.



System restore files etc possibly?

--
Byron Hinson
ActiveWin Windows Site: http://www.activewin.com
Photos: http://www.byronhinson.com


I hope this isn't too stupid. I just installed Vista on a new Seagate
320G HD. I have an identical drive that is being used for backup and
additional storage. When I go into Disk Management, Vista says the boot
drive is 20G smaller than the data drive. Each drive is just one big
partition. Any idea where the 20G went?

 

[Guest]

Nope, that's not it. Let me try one more time for clarification. I have two
320G Identical Seagate drives installed. C: contains the operating system, D:
is just an NTFS formatted drive. Vista says the capacity of C: is 280G. It
says the capacity of D: is 300G. Now I understand that because of the way
capacity is calculated, that the drives will be less than the manufactures
specifications. However, they should still be the same. I'm trying to
determine why they are different. My BIOS sees identical drives. The Seagate
tools sees identical drives and capacity, but Vista does not.

I used Diskpart.exe to examine the dives, and they don't appear to have any
additional volumes or partitions. So... Why the 20G difference?

Is this one of those "The drive says 340 gigabytes on the package but
installed it only says ..." questions?

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] (e-mail address removed)
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

No offense, but I'm looking for an answer, not speculation.

 

[andy]

What do you see using the list disk command?

DISKPART> list disk

Disk ### Status Size Free Dyn Gpt
-------- ---------- ------- ------- --- ---
Disk 0 Online 373 GB 0 B
Disk 1 Online 233 GB 0 B
Disk 2 Online 373 GB 0 B

Nope, that's not it. Let me try one more time for clarification. I have two
320G Identical Seagate drives installed. C: contains the operating system, D:
is just an NTFS formatted drive. Vista says the capacity of C: is 280G. It
says the capacity of D: is 300G. Now I understand that because of the way
capacity is calculated, that the drives will be less than the manufactures
specifications. However, they should still be the same. I'm trying to
determine why they are different. My BIOS sees identical drives. The Seagate
tools sees identical drives and capacity, but Vista does not.

I used Diskpart.exe to examine the dives, and they don't appear to have any
additional volumes or partitions. So... Why the 20G difference?

Is this one of those "The drive says 340 gigabytes on the package but
installed it only says ..." questions?

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] (e-mail address removed)
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm

No offense, but I'm looking for an answer, not speculation.



System restore files etc possibly?

--
Byron Hinson
ActiveWin Windows Site: http://www.activewin.com
Photos: http://www.byronhinson.com


I hope this isn't too stupid. I just installed Vista on a new Seagate
320G HD. I have an identical drive that is being used for backup and
additional storage. When I go into Disk Management, Vista says the boot
drive is 20G smaller than the data drive. Each drive is just one big
partition. Any idea where the 20G went?

 

[Buckwheat]

This is what I see...


Microsoft DiskPart version 6.0.6000
Copyright (C) 1999-2007 Microsoft Corporation.
On computer: xxx

DISKPART> list disk

Disk ### Status Size Free Dyn Gpt
-------- ---------- ------- ------- --- ---
Disk 0 Online 279 GB 1145 KB
Disk 1 Online 298 GB 1337 KB
Disk 2 No Media 0 B 0 B
Disk 3 No Media 0 B 0 B
Disk 4 No Media 0 B 0 B
Disk 5 No Media 0 B 0 B
Disk 6 No Media 0 B 0 B

What do you see using the list disk command?

DISKPART> list disk

Disk ### Status Size Free Dyn Gpt
-------- ---------- ------- ------- --- ---
Disk 0 Online 373 GB 0 B
Disk 1 Online 233 GB 0 B
Disk 2 Online 373 GB 0 B

Nope, that's not it. Let me try one more time for clarification. I have
two
320G Identical Seagate drives installed. C: contains the operating system,
D:
is just an NTFS formatted drive. Vista says the capacity of C: is 280G. It
says the capacity of D: is 300G. Now I understand that because of the way
capacity is calculated, that the drives will be less than the manufactures
specifications. However, they should still be the same. I'm trying to
determine why they are different. My BIOS sees identical drives. The
Seagate
tools sees identical drives and capacity, but Vista does not.

I used Diskpart.exe to examine the dives, and they don't appear to have
any
additional volumes or partitions. So... Why the 20G difference?

Is this one of those "The drive says 340 gigabytes on the package but
installed it only says ..." questions?

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] (e-mail address removed)
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


No offense, but I'm looking for an answer, not speculation.



System restore files etc possibly?

--
Byron Hinson
ActiveWin Windows Site: http://www.activewin.com
Photos: http://www.byronhinson.com


I hope this isn't too stupid. I just installed Vista on a new
Seagate
320G HD. I have an identical drive that is being used for backup and
additional storage. When I go into Disk Management, Vista says the
boot
drive is 20G smaller than the data drive. Each drive is just one big
partition. Any idea where the 20G went?

 

[Adam Albright]

This is what I see...


Microsoft DiskPart version 6.0.6000
Copyright (C) 1999-2007 Microsoft Corporation.
On computer: xxx

DISKPART> list disk

Disk ### Status Size Free Dyn Gpt
-------- ---------- ------- ------- --- ---
Disk 0 Online 279 GB 1145 KB
Disk 1 Online 298 GB 1337 KB
Disk 2 No Media 0 B 0 B
Disk 3 No Media 0 B 0 B
Disk 4 No Media 0 B 0 B
Disk 5 No Media 0 B 0 B
Disk 6 No Media 0 B 0 B

If you have two identical drives the most logical assumption is the
one with the least space either isn't formatted to its full capacity,
there is some unallocated space Windows isn't seeing or something
along those lines. Do the same sizes show if your right click on the
drives in Windows Explorer? Right click, pick properties, then right
under the pie chart see what Windows says is the capacity.

For example my Seagate drive sold as a 750 GB drive is seen as a 698
GB drive which Windows reports as 750,153,728,000 bytes.

I've seen it where a huge difference in actual verses reported drive
size can happen if there are file system errors like cross linked
files. Right click on the drive that shows the least space, then
tools, check now with auto fix file system errors. Windows may say the
drive is in use and schedule the operation the next time you boot. If
so, the screen before entering the normal Windows screen will show a
pale blue screen (not the dark blue BSOD screen) and show the 3 steps
it will do automatically to check your NTFS file system for that
drive. It can take a several minutes to complete, longer if your drive
is very large. Watch at the very end it will show a summary of what if
anything was corrupted, damaged or just plain goofed up, then it will
just continue with booting, if it repaired the problem. Even if there
isn't any reported problem at least you know there isn't any.

If something very seriously wrong is found, don't panic. There is a
automated process that Windows did in XP and probably still does on a
NTFS volume in Vista where lots of stuff again goes flying by
(thousands of lines) if you select show details option displayed on
another pale blue screen. If this happens, (probably won't) just sit
back and watch as Windows fixes itself or at least tries to. I've had
this happen a few times over the years and its quite a show to watch
Windows do its thing. All your files, one by one if Windows thinks
have wrong information in its file system get displayed and hopefully
corrected.

 

[Buckwheat]

Chkdsk reported the same discrepancy as diskpart. No errors, just a 20G
difference. Unless someone has any other ideas, I might simply try a
reinstall and see if I get different results.