Hardware Is it normal for the 128 evo+ to be 138 gb?

[Mikemk]

I just realized. Flash memory has over-provisioning. Typically 7%, which would be a total of 136.96. If the card for some reason is using its full capacity instead of over-provisioning (very unlikely), that's bad.

 

[fatsquirrel]

False. I own many Samsung cards and they work fine.

If you are satisfied with trash be my guest.

It's a fake card. It has nothing to do with Samsung.

Probably works better than the official product

In all seriousness, dont buy samshit. Buy either a Toshiba or Sandisk

 

[migles]

Yes, this is normal. Ubuntu displays the SI sizes, and Windows displays the real sizes. Normally, Ubuntu will show it being what it's actually advertised as, but in the rare case the manufacturer doesn't cheat you, it'll show over.

(1024*1024*1024*128) / (1024*1000*1000) ~= 134.

this^
linux\ubunto calculates in and displays MB as Megabytes.. and if you notice it sometimes shows values in MiB (mebibyte) or MB (megabyte)
while shitty windows calls MB to mebibyte

more info about here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte
you can use the bottom template to navigate between different measures

Anyway. it sjhould display it as 128 not 138.... test the card anyway to make sure...

 

[gnmmarechal]

Yes, this is normal. Ubuntu displays the SI sizes, and Windows displays the real sizes. Normally, Ubuntu will show it being what it's actually advertised as, but in the rare case the manufacturer doesn't cheat you, it'll show over.

(1024*1024*1024*128) / (1024*1000*1000) ~= 134.

What? Actually, Windows doesn't display the "real capacity". Windows generally calls GiB GB, which is frankly, well, stupid. GiB is base 2, GB is base 10. SI units ARE the standard units.

Samsung would call 1GB to a Samsung card with 10^9 bytes.

If anyway, Ubuntu is using proper units (Ubuntu calls GiB GiB and GB GB).

128GiB = 137.4GB ...

Windows is dumb.

 

[Mikemk]

Ubuntu last time I used it used the middle "standard" (for lack of a better word). 1024 bytes in a kilobyte since drives store in multiples of 512, and 1000 thereafter.

 

[Onepunchbruh]

Lucky!

 

[NebulaPiplup]

The size is never the one they say it is
For example,my 8GB SD card has 7,27GB instead

 

[Amapola62]

Yeah...I have 62Gb in my 64GB...and 14 in my 16Gb card...I think we always lose 2GB...or something....

 

[Tomy Sakazaki]

@jimmyleen I'd recommend that you test the card anyway (even if it takes hours to do, let the application do it's thing while you sleep), just to be sure that it's not fake. This in case that you didn't finish the previous test attempt.

@NebulaPiplup @Amapola62 What OP actually found strange is that Ubuntu was showing a "larger than real capacity", but in the end, the "problem" is that Ubuntu uses a size calculation different from other OSes.

 

[sarkwalvein]

But the "real" capacity is 128 Gigabytes. That is 128,000,000,000 bytes.
Giga is defined by standards as left shifting 9 decimal digits.
The poor man 70s computer friendly version of left shifting 30 binary digits is the incorrect, imprecise, non standard, only there because of bad legacy, calculation of the value.

 

[tbb043]

this^
linux\ubunto calculates in and displays MB as Megabytes.. and if you notice it sometimes shows values in MiB (mebibyte) or MB (megabyte)
while shitty windows calls MB to mebibyte

more info about here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte
you can use the bottom template to navigate between different measures

Anyway. it sjhould display it as 128 not 138.... test the card anyway to make sure...

What? Actually, Windows doesn't display the "real capacity". Windows generally calls GiB GB, which is frankly, well, stupid. GiB is base 2, GB is base 10. SI units ARE the standard units.

Samsung would call 1GB to a Samsung card with 10^9 bytes.

If anyway, Ubuntu is using proper units (Ubuntu calls GiB GiB and GB GB).

128GiB = 137.4GB ...

Windows is dumb.

MIB and GIB is revisionist history nonsense. Windows is using the terms MB and GB (and KB, etc) as they were defined from the dawn of computing, before sneaky, unscrupulous hard drive manufacturers started using GB as 1,000,000,000 bytes because it artificially inflated the size they could list the drive on the packaging to fool consumers.

 

[The Real Jdbye]

If you are satisfied with trash be my guest.

Probably works better than the official product

In all seriousness, dont buy samshit. Buy either a Toshiba or Sandisk

I'm not sure why you hate on Samsung so much, but their SSDs are proven to be among the best on the market, which says a lot about the quality of their flash memory, and their SD cards have about the same price and performance as SanDisk. I've had no problems with my Samsung Evo card yet.

 

[Veho]

Windows is dumb.

The poor man 70s computer friendly version of left shifting 30 binary digits is the incorrect, imprecise, non standard, only there because of bad legacy, calculation of the value.

Having units tied to 1024 (or some other power of 2) makes way more sense when describing size in a binary system and a binary address space than some decimal, power of ten version. Forcing a decimal notation on an inherently binary value is silly, and the only reason hard drive manufacturers are so vehemently in favor of it is because it makes their disk look larger than it really is. Which is understandable; everyone wants to make their disk look bigger But it's horribly impractical, non-intuitive and just plain silly to use it with binary storage.

 

[sweis12]

Windows and linux will display different sizes. This happened with mine too. Your card is fine.

 

[gnmmarechal]

MIB and GIB is revisionist history nonsense. Windows is using the terms MB and GB (and KB, etc) as they were defined from the dawn of computing, before sneaky, unscrupulous hard drive manufacturers started using GB as 1,000,000,000 bytes because it artificially inflated the size they could list the drive on the packaging to fool consumers.

Ridiculous. A standard's a standard. If a KB was initially 1024B, it was wrong right from the start, MiB and GiB make much more sense. Differentiate it from base 10... the moment the byte was defined, kilobyte was automatically defined as 10^3 bytes. That's just how it works. If anything, those who said 1 K = 1024 are the ones wrong. And why is MiB or KiB nonsense? It makes much more sense, considering it actually is aimed at base 2.

To correct a mistake (calling K --> 2^10 , when it is 10^3) is not "revisionist history nonsense".