|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] Is my 'bandwidth' math right?
|
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 07:24:36PM -0500, Jeff McAdams wrote:
> No, hard drives are frequently quoted in powers of 10...but that's hard
> drive vendors being dumb.
I'm sure they'd tell you that they're selling more hard drives.
> Networks are basically *never* quoted in powers of 10. So Marc was
> correct in the 1024 * 1024.
I'm sorry, but that's just not the case. When network devices say
"billion", they are not referring to 2^30, they are referring to 10^9.
Please refer here for more information:
http://www.ethermanage.com/ethernet/10quickref/ch1qr_2.html#HEADING1
> > A T1 is 1.54Mbit per second, over 150% faster than his current connection
> > (assuming he's got a symmetric connection).
>
> > 1.54Mbit/s => 192.5Kbytes/sec.
>
> At the risk of being pedantic...
>
> Its 1.544Mbit/s, but only 1.536Mbit/s is useable...the other 8kbit/s is
> used by the framing on the circuit. That's not so much to make a really
> noticeable difference, though.
...which is still 150+% of the friend's current bandwidth. By the way, if
you round 1.536 up, you get 1.54.
> > Lots of people think that networking and disk are measured along powers
> > of 2 units, like RAM. I used to think that myself, but its not true. Check
> > the real number of bytes on your hard disk for some confirmation.
>
> Yeah, hard drive vendors are dumb...but networks still use powers of
> 2...basically universally.
Apparently, you are one of the people I was referring to.
--
Toby DiPasquale
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|