New Harddrive

[krome]

I just bought me a new harddrive yesterday 80GB Maxtor, I Installed it, then partision it for a whole use of the drive C: only... I USED FDISK to do this as my Primary HD

But when i installed my OS in my new HD and check the Space Available it Says

Capacity 68.9 what the hell happen to 80GB.? I understand the installing the OS takes a GB away but what happen to the rest???


OS: Windows98
HD: one, 80GB

[Livy]

maybe fdisk didnt do it properly. but i would expect 80 gigs outtta it anyway, maybe juts under, but no less than 75gigs.
are you happy to use partition magic?
i would recomend splittin your drive into 2. maybe bout 10 gigs at most as your system drive for installed progs and windows. and the rest for all you downloads, then if windows buggers buggers up, you wont lose any your stuff.

[krome]

Originally posted by Livy@2 June 2003 - 11:35
maybe fdisk didnt do it properly. but i would expect 80 gigs outtta it anyway, maybe juts under, but no less than 75gigs.
are you happy to use partition magic?
i would recomend splittin your drive into 2. maybe bout 10 gigs at most as your system drive for installed progs and windows. and the rest for all you downloads, then if windows buggers buggers up, you wont lose any your stuff.

i knew i should of used PMagic, i just decided to use FDISK instead now like what happen

[ilw]

Some is probably virtual ram and other system stuff. It might be that they labelled it 80 gigabytes meaning 80 billion bytes as opposed to 80 * 1024 * 1024 which is 80 gigs in binary notation. But its still well short cos 80 billion bytes is still 76 gigs. These are just guesses by the way!

[3RA1N1AC]

uh... try reformatting and installing Windows again. if it still claims to be on 69gb, i would think you received a defective hard drive and it should be replaced by the store.

[Livy]

Originally posted by ian_l_williams@2 June 2003 - 20:38
Some is probably virtual ram and other system stuff. It might be that they labelled it 80 gigabytes meaning 80 billion bytes as opposed to 80 * 1024 * 1024 which is 80 gigs in binary notation. But its still well short cos 80 billion bytes is still 76 gigs. These are just guesses by the way!

but it would still show up in the size of the drive?

if you know how to use partition magic. try that, you can split it into 2 as i said, or it will give u the option to make the current partition to max size, fdisk is pretty crappy, irs done that to me too.

[Somebody1234]

When you format an 80GB harddrive you will end up with a partition of about 74.5GB without anyting installed on it yet. Once you install Windows the OS will take up some more and maybe you have some temporary installation files left on the drive from the installation. Maybe you installed some other small programs or drivers? Did you surf the web? That leaves temporary internet files, virtual memory etc.

So... It doesn't sound too far away from what it should be.

[ooo]

dunt wry bout it, it happens

my 80gb western digital is now 69 gbs too

[balamm]

Is your Bios able to recognize an 80gig drive? What does it show in the Bios config for cylinders/heads/sectors ?

Some tables that demonstrate how much space is wasted in certain file systems>>

FAT16

File Allocation Table (commonly known as FAT or FAT16) is supported by Windows XP Professional, all Windows operating systems, and DOS, as well as a host of other non-Microsoft OSes.

FAT is allocated in clusters, the size of which are determined by the size of the partition. The larger the partition, the larger the cluster size. The larger the cluster size, the more space "required" when using it to store data.

FAT file system cluster sizes

Partition Size    Cluster Size    FAT Type
0M to less than 16MB 4,096 bytes 12-bit
16M through 128MB 2,048 bytes 16-bit
128 through 256MB 4,096 bytes 16-bit
256 through 512MB 8,192 bytes 16-bit
512 through 1,024MB 16,384 bytes 16-bit
1,024 through 2,048MB 32,768 bytes 16-bit

As you can see, with a 2GB partition size, (the maximum allowed under FAT16 in most cases) if you were to save 50 different files, all 1024 bytes (1KB) in actual size (or to have 50 fractions of larger files "fall over" to the next cluster by that same amount), the amount of hard drive space used up would be 1,638,400 bytes (a little over 1 MB), for 51,200 bytes of actual data.

You can obviously see that this is a serious problem when there are thousands of small *.DLLs and other types of small files.

Also, with the advent of super-inexpensive hard drives that are 80GB in size, you can see where using FAT would be an issue as well.

In summary, there are "advantages" for using the FAT file system on a Windows XP Professional installation:



MS-DOS, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows NT, Windows 2000, and some UNIX operating systems can use FAT16. If there is some reason to dual boot the system, FAT16 allows you the greatest number of options.


There are many software tools that can address problems and recover data on FAT16 volumes.


If you have a startup failure, you can start the computer by using a bootable floppy disk to troubleshoot the problem.


FAT16 is efficient, in speed and storage, on volumes smaller than 256 MB. 

(Those 50 files I mentioned above, all 1024 bytes (1KB) in actual size, would use up "only" 409,600 bytes on a 400MB partition formatted with FAT16 and "only" 204,800 bytes on a 250MB partition.)

There are also some FAT16 disadvantages as well:

The root folder (usually the C:\ drive) has a limit of 512 entries. The use of long file names can significantly reduce the number of available entries.



FAT16 is limited to 65,536 clusters, but because certain clusters are reserved, it has a practical limit of 65,524. The largest FAT16 volume on Windows 2000 and Windows XP Professional is limited to 4 GB and uses a cluster size of 64 KB. To maintain compatibility with MS-DOS, Windows 95, and Windows 98, a volume cannot be larger than 2 GB. (Those 50 files I mentioned above, all 1024 bytes (1KB) in actual size, would use up 3,276,200 bytes of hard drive space to store 51,200 bytes of actual data on a 4 GB FAT16 partition used in this scenario.)


FAT16 is inefficient on larger volume sizes, as the size of the cluster increases. We have seen this in the examples above.


The boot sector is not backed up on FAT16 partitions. Because FAT16 does not include a backup copy of critical data structures, they are susceptible to single point of failure issues, more so than other file systems.

There is no native file level security, compression or encryption available in the FAT16 file system.

Below is a table of Microsoft Operating systems and which file systems they can natively access.



Operating System  Supports NTFS  Supports FAT32  Supports FAT  Max Partition
         
Windows XP Professional Yes  Yes  Yes  4GB
Windows XP Home Yes  Yes  Yes  4GB
Windows 2000 Professional Yes  Yes  Yes  4GB
Windows Millennium Edition No Yes  Yes  2GB
Windows 98 and Second Edition No Yes  Yes  2GB
Windows 95 OSR2 and OSR2.5 No Yes  Yes  2GB
Windows NT4  Workstation Yes  No Yes  4GB
Windows 95 Gold (Original Release) No No Yes  2GB
Windows NT3.5x  Workstation Yes  No Yes  4GB
MS-DOS (versions 3.3 and higher) No No Yes  * see below

[krome]

nevermind, guess thanks for your help, i fixed the problem, i used partitionmagic and corrected it....