4 edits
Originally posted by jimslyp69A "kilobyte" is actually 1024 bytes, but that should give you a bigger answer, not a smaller one.
I recently bought '1GB' of RAM. However it is only showing up as 916,720 KB on my system. Is there a logical explanation for this?
Wait, this looks promising:
The difference between units based on SI and binary prefixes increases exponentially — in other words, an SI kilobyte is nearly 98% as much as a kibibyte, but a megabyte is under 96% as much as a mebibyte, and a gigabyte is just over 93% as much as a gibibyte. This means that a 500 GB hard disk drive would appear as "465 GB". As storage sizes get larger and higher units are used, this difference will become more pronounced.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabyte
I suspect your listed value is a power of 2 and 1 GB is not (obviously it has a factor of 5). Let's see.
No, yours has a factor of 5 also. Hmm.
And so does 465! I'm confused.
Your listed value is not exactly 93%, but it's close.
Originally posted by jimslyp69Two explanations :
I recently bought '1GB' of RAM. However it is only showing up as 916,720 KB on my system. Is there a logical explanation for this?
Even since DOS days, a portion of your memory has been yielded to initialising system resource needs...in those days, it was the first 640k (I think...it's been a while).
In addition, Windows lies...its enumerations skills are simply shameful...ever hear the sarcastic phrase "Microsoft minutes" ?
Originally posted by ZadadkaI think you're correct about the 640K part. That's the amount that Bill Gates said was all anyone would isn't it?
Two explanations :
Even since DOS days, a portion of your memory has been yielded to initialising system resource needs...in those days, it was the first 640k (I think...it's been a while).
In addition, Windows lies...its enumerations skills are simply shameful...ever hear the sarcastic phrase "Microsoft minutes" ?
Thing is though, even at the POST, it is counted at less than a gig. I'm baffled.
Originally posted by jimslyp69while you think you're being ripped off, what internet connection speed do you think you have?
I think you're correct about the 640K part. That's the amount that Bill Gates said was all anyone would isn't it?
Thing is though, even at the POST, it is counted at less than a gig. I'm baffled.
check that online 😛
Originally posted by trevor33It's a lot better than I thought it was. 738kbps. I have signed up to three.com for one of them wireless dongle thingies.
while you think you're being ripped off, what internet connection speed do you think you have?
check that online 😛
It is fine for downloading things. Reasonable download speeds. It just tends to hang a little when trying to connect to a web page. Somw times it goes on immediately, others it just times out. All depends how busy yht mobile phone network is I guess.
Originally posted by trevor33Oh, and while we're on the subject, ISP's have small print stating that the download speed that they advertise is 'the fastest possible speed achievable and won't always be like this'. In other words, you won't achieve this speed, unless you kill everyone in your local vicinity that uses the same ISP as your good self. Also they advertise in Mbps, whereas your computer applications tend to display things in MBps. This is also misleading.
while you think you're being ripped off, what internet connection speed do you think you have?
check that online 😛