Paul said:In CPUZ, if you go to "About", there is a Register Dump. It will
dump a file "cpuz.txt". In there, you'll see something like
Dump Module #1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
00 80 08 07 0D 0A 02 40 00 04 50 60 00 82 08 00 01
10 0E 04 04 01 02 20 C0 00 00 00 00 28 28 28 28 40
20 70 70 40 40 00 00 00 00 00 37 46 30 28 50 00 00
30 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 85 ...
Well, you won't see those particular values, because that is
a dump of my 512MB DDR stick, while yours is SDRAM.
JEDEC has documents to decode those numbers. This doc is
just a guess, as being the one for SDRAM. I used an outside
search engine, rather than messing with the JEDEC search option.
Byte 5 (decimal) and Byte 31 (decimal), as seen on page 20,
define the capacity of each bank. Byte 5 should say 0x02 hex,
meaning there are two banks (double sided). Byte 31 should
read 0x20 hex, to indicate 128MB per bank, for a total of
256MB.
http://www.jedec.org/download/search/4_01_02_05R12.PDF
Have a look at the dump table, and see what your byte 5
and byte 31 show for the module. (Note - the above table
is oriented in hex form, so byte 31 decimal is the second row
right-most byte, as in byte 0x1F, and has a value of 0x40.)
The stuff above 3F, I didn't copy, because it has things like
the serial number and manufacturer ID.
kony said:Ok, then let's not spend any more time on it.
Grinder said:Ok, I officially regret my choice of title for this thread.
Nope, I couldn't do it... Sorry Kony I have to argue again!
In the computing field, a network line rated at 1 megabit refers to
1,000,000 bits. So 8 megabits = 8,000,000 bits. There are 8 bits in a byte
so 8 megabits = 1 megabyte. Therefore 1 megabyte = 8,000,000 bits or
1,000,000 bytes. This agrees with the definition of mega, which is 1
million, or 10 to the power 6. There is no scientific definition of mega
where it means 1,024,000 - this is wrong. This definition of mega is widely
used (and dare I say accepted) by some in computing. There are even websites
that state mega = 1,024,000, or 2 to the power 10,
but it is wrong. Mega is
a scientific, mathematical term meaning 10 to the power 6.-
I guess you meant 2^20 and 1,048,576
maybe in data communications, mega means 10^6.
But in some areas of computers, like i think, RAM/"main memory". It
means EXACTLY 2^20 (1048576).
This is because just as with 2 decimal numbers, one can refer to 10^2
numbers. Likewise, with 20 bits(binary digits), one can refer to 2^20
numbers , that is 1048576 numbers. Each number referring to a memory
location
Also, some oddball character "Rod Speed"
in a previous thread.
Kept calling 10^6 decimal, and 2^20 binary.
I managed to get some sense out of him, and it resolves some of the
issues that are repeated here.
thread: Actual hard drive space?
newsgroup: alt.comp.hardware
link:http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.comp.hardware/browse_frm/thread/....
Here is an extract of the discussion, where we reached some kind of
agreement.
I had argued that 2^20 is not binary. (for obvious reasons). Being
that binary is 1s and 0s..
And Kony spewed the same things about bytes being binary.. To which I
replied as you did, that that was rubbish.. That you can count
anything, bytes or fish, in any number system. Bytes - as a physical
thing(or logically presented physical thing), certainly store values
in binary, but that is another matter. Nobody got anywhere with Kony.
But I got somewhere with Rod Speed.. A horrible character..
I will quote him, since nobody should have to wade through all his
shit.
(around post 46 in that thread in google archive)
jameshanley39
Regarding the term decimal prefix and binary prefix.
I just found this article that discusses the 2^x and 10^x prefixes
Now I realise that binary prefix and decimal prefix are official
names.
Rod Speed
Yes they are, and I said that previously, tho not so explicitly.
jameshanley39http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix
It seems to me that it's not that the prefix is in binary. But it's
just officially
named "binary prefix" because the prefix is "based on" multiples of
2.
Rod Speed
Thats what saying a prefix is binary means.
jameshanley39
It talks about those that "abuse SI prefixes ..using them..in ***a
binary sense*** ".
What they have named/titled "decimal prefix" and "binary prefix",
(just) means "prefix for decimal multiples", and "prefix for binary
multiples" respectively.http://www.iec.ch/zone/si/si_bytes.htm
So, It doesn't mean it's in the binary or decimal number system.
Rod Speed
Yes, thats why I kept referring to PREFIXES.
Rod Speed said,
"
The decimal form is mostly whats used in computing, most
obviously with cpu speeds, comms speeds, etc etc etc .
....
Its only MEMORY that has an intrinsically binary organisation
where the binary form is in fact commonly used.
1024x1024=1,048,576, "giga" means 1024x1024x1024=1,073,741,824,
"tera" means 1024x1024x1024x1024=1,099,511,627,776.
I don`t plan on reading his badly presented points again, but I think
he was saying regarding hard drive capacities, that windows, by
reporting the 2^x number, reports it wrongly..
And so hard drive marketters, by using the 10^x format, are correct.
(which also gives them a higher number btw, since it is a smaller unit
than the corresponding 2^y. One reason why many consider them to be
doing so for dishonest reasons).
I'm sorry, I couldn't follow your last post - too bitsy!
In short, this argument will run and run for years and never be concluded
because certain companies and individuals refuse to use the clearly
specified industry standard terms/abbreviations correctly.
The term MB means
MegaBytes. Mega is 10^6.
Mega never means 2^20. That is Mebi.
In short, this argument will run and run for years and never be concluded
because certain companies and individuals refuse to use the clearly
specified industry standard terms/abbreviations correctly. The term MB means
MegaBytes. Mega is 10^6. Mega never means 2^20. That is Mebi.
kony said:Except in the computer industry, which already had defined
that term, probably long before you were born.
You are wrong. The computer industry didn't define Mega. The term Mega was
clearly defined to mean 10^6 before you, I and even Babbage was born, so the
computer industry didn't define it, they just misused it!
The industry defined the value of the terms megabyte, etc.
Only AFTER they had done so and used the terms as standards
for dozens of years did people like you come along and thing
the _STANDARD_ should change. That's the opposite of what a
standard is.
I agree the computer industry should not have taken the
terms mega, etc, because it is a misuse of them to have done
so in the first place- but they _did_ take these terms and
did use them to mean a specific value unto the point that it
_is_ a standard in the industry for many many years.
If you or NIST wants to intrduce a new term for a new value,
go right ahead and do so, but not trying to revalue the
existing standardized term.
No, the _STANDARD_ was defined centuries ago.
The computer industry simply
misused it for their own purposes.
The term Mega was never adopted as a
standard for 2^20. Sure, the industry used it for ages, but it has never
been the _STANDARD_ interpretation of Mega.
kony said:Nonsense, centuries ago there was not any industry using
"gigabyte". There was only ONE widespread use of the term,
in the industry that DEFINED it.
I'm talking about the SI standard prefix Giga, meaning 10^6. It was defined
a long time ago and can be used along with any unit to indicate 1,000,000
units.
Hence GigaByte is 1,000,000 bytes. When the computer industry started
to use Giga to mean something other than 1,000,000 they made a mistake. This
mistake has never been adopted as a standard. The value 1,048,576 has never
been a _standard_ meaning for Giga.
This thread should be continued down the pub over several beers...
[email protected] said:The term " Mebi ", and the rest are fairly new terms, introduced by a
standards authority, for obvious reasons. And In the hope that they
will become mainstream. ....
MebiByte is a bit of a tongue twister, like Megabyte gone wrong.
Miles Bader said:Moreover, "Mebibyte", "Kibibyte", etc, sound (and look) _incredibly
stupid_. I'm sure as hell not going to use them, for that reason alone.
And if nobody uses them, they will go away.
This is why it's a good idea for standards authorities to stick to
standardizing common practice, instead of attempting to invent their
own. When they attempt to do the latter, then more often than not
simply screw it up royally, and then we're left with the annoyance of
having to ignore a "standard".
Moreover, "Mebibyte", "Kibibyte", etc, sound (and look) _incredibly
stupid_. I'm sure as hell not going to use them, for that reason alone.
And if nobody uses them, they will go away.
This is why it's a good idea for standards authorities to stick to
standardizing common practice, instead of attempting to invent their
own. When they attempt to do the latter, then more often than not
simply screw it up royally, and then we're left with the annoyance of
having to ignore a "standard".
I agree that they sound silly, but not using a standard term because you
don't like the sound/look of them is just immature!
Unfortunately for you, there are plenty using them - Ubuntu for example.
They actually look pretty good on screen - GiB looks very 'technical'.
It is
irrelevant that the prefixes mean something else in the
decimal system because computers don't use the decimal
system, it is only converted to that for the benefit of the
users.
GT said:Standards have to be defined by controlling bodies with authority,
they don't just become standard because lots of people use them!