Why do we have these conversations every time a Grixx deal is posted :smile:

Yes, they are genuine 128GB. Yes they are very reliable and have a decent reputation. :smiley:

The USB 3.0 version (£21.99) are very fast but as this is USB 2.0 so you'll be hampered by that.

Nonsense again, GB vs GiB, nothing to do with formatting. Formatting itself takes up a miniscule amount.

Its not fake. Bought 2 of the 128MB Grixx from 7dayshop months ago and they are fine. As someone has already said, 7DayShop is a well known company not some dodgy ebay seller. Stop scare mongering.

a bargain for the capacity, but i wouldnt touch it with a barge pole as id question its speed and reliability

​no storage device provides full access out of the box, they always have room reserved that the user can't touch.

Why do we have these conversations every time a Grixx deal is posted :smile:

Yes, they are genuine 128GB. Yes they are very reliable and have a decent reputation. :smiley:

The USB 3.0 version (£21.99) are very fast but as this is USB 2.0 so you'll be hampered by that.

One of the reviews says he had 117GB of usable space so still not bad for the money

Been posted at this price...

Have one for recordings on my sat box as its only usb 2 anyhow so speed is not an issue. Great price.

I know you never get the full 128gb it's like an iPhone says 16gb but only get 14gb or something like that

I'm saying I've brought cheap usb what turned out to be fake just seem like this could be one

It's from 7 dayshop, not ebay or Amazon trader.

Its not fake. Bought 2 of the 128MB Grixx from 7dayshop months ago and they are fine. As someone has already said, 7DayShop is a well known company not some dodgy ebay seller. Stop scare mongering.

Duplicate post
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/grixx-usb-2-0-flash-drive-128gb-16-99-delivered-7dayshop-2295870

You always get about 97% of the advertised space of ANY (I hope there isn't any strange situations where this is not true) drive which is for the reason Sin_of_nature gave. I bought one of the WD Red 6TB HDD drives advertised over the weekend. When I check it I expect it will only show as 5.8TB which is quite a difference when you consider that 'missing' space amount to 180GB which was incidentally the size of my first HDD about 10 years ago.

Re Fakes: - I promise 7dayshop and GRIXX are fine! I'd never buy from eBay again. I had a 1GB card from eBay which worked fine, so it was 1GB (this was 2005), but died one day, so I called San Disc to report it and they asked me to quote the serial number printed on the back of the card - wasn't one. Best steer clear of the whole sorry market place for fake goods. With Amazon you have protection, but I'd only buy something fully supplied and sold by Amazon. 7dayshop and mymemory are also fine.

Had the USB 3.0, 128GB Grixx for over a year and it's great, no problems at all! Recommended!

I bought the exact same version at this price a couple of weeks ago from the same seller. It is really 128gb and speed is decent better than a lot of other USB 2.0 devices

Nonsense, it's down to different reporting of sizes. Most devices are sold using the GB standard, though Windows for instance uses the GiB standard, hence the discrepancy.

Gibi vs Giga is th reason for some of the difference.

Nonsense again, GB vs GiB, nothing to do with formatting. Formatting itself takes up a miniscule amount.

Formatting takes up a miniscule amount of space, saying the difference is because of the MFT is nonsense.

On my 256GB boot SSD, which appears as 238GiB in windows, my MFT (index) is 350MB. Info provided by NTFSInfo

What the hell is "full access"? And what does NAND wear leveling have to do with fake USB pendrives (which this most certainly isn't)?

That's a cluster of words which make no sense.

The 'overhead' for formatting is miniscule, as BlackAle said. "Quite a chuck" is wrong.

Your comment about NTFS / FAT32 is also wildly off the mark. The actual formatting process takes up almost no space. You're talking about the overhead once the file system is in use....which is again, off the mark: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/314875


The net result is usually no space difference in the "overhead" when comparing the two file systems. It might go either way when there are exceptions.....but seriously, why are you worrying about this on a 128GB drive? We didn't worry about this on 1.44MB floppys.....

Bigger than my laptop!

Yep, my bad. He is correct (as are you). I knew about GB vs GiB but I thought formatting took up more space than it does. I've removed the comment to stop confusion. Learn something new every day :smiley:

My first 1gb cost me £16.99! Now for 128gb it's amazing

Please all shut up about formatting and stuff :smiley: it makes you sound like nerds / dweebs. (Delete as appropriate)

:laughing:

You sound like my wife. Never get it right with her either :smile:

Interestingly Apple gave up a few years ago and started using Giga instead of Gibi, so now a 256 gigabyte SSD reports as 256 gigabytes on Mac OS, instead of 238 gibibytes like on windows and generally linux.

​Nerd alert....

You'll never get the full capacity of any drive as operating systems measure 1KB as 1000 bytes, when it's actually 1024 bytes. If you multiply this on a grand scale then the physical size of the drive is always under reported as every KB is losing 24bytes.

You've got that backwards, some OS's use the GiB standard, i.e base 2, 1024. HD manufacturers use the GB standard, i.e base 10, 1000. You don't lose anything really, you still get to use the full capacity.

​Isn't the max speed of USB 2.0 around 50mb/s? Barring the expensive SanDisk extremes, I'm yet to see many usb drives actually max out usb 2.0. Its just that the manufacturers put slower nand in usb 2 drives.

I would never buy a large USB 2 stick because it won't max out USB 2 speeds (typically around 30 Mbytes/sec) and would therefore take an age to fill (or just read/write multi-GB files in general). Even if all your devices are USB 2, it's still a false economy - spend the extra for the USB 3 version: time (spent waiting) is money! If you eventually come into this decade and get a USB 3 device, you'll be kicking yourself about the lack of speed of this stick.

Do devices still recognise these? I don't mean PC but things like in car USB, TVs etc. I know some have a cap and some may not recognise exFAT or NTSC.

Not in practice it's not. You can easily saturate a USB2 link with a modern pendrive and have been able to for a while. You really need a USB3 drive for drives this large.

See my posts in these threads:
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/kingston-data-traveler-100-g3-usb-3-0-flash-drive-32gb-7-19-delivered-7dayshop-2262608
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/sandisk-cruzer-glide-128gb-usb-flash-drive-22-99-argos-2272727

USB2 protocol speed is one of the biggest misquoted things I see on HUKD. Realistically, the highest transfer rate you'll see on USB2 is 35 MB/s, assuming everything is perfect (see the links in the other threads for the reasons why). It's mathematically not possible to go much over this due to overheads, bus limitations and being half duplex.

anyone know if this would work as external storage for the Xbox one? sitting on 91% at the minute and with all these new game coming out this would be ideal!

There was a reason I didn't post this version - it's USB2.0 and much slower than the 128GB 3.0 version (http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/128gb-usb-3-0-grix-usb-stick-21-84-21-40-with-quidco-7dayshop-2310788)

I'd always spend the few quid extra for 3.0.

The discrepancy with (usb/sd/hdd) storage is that marketers consider 1000kb to be a megabyte (i.e. mega = 1000x) in reality it takes 1024kb to make a megabyte so thus once your format a drive there's always slightly less than what's advertised (in the case of iphones etc there's also system OS & software taking up space)

No they don't, it's nothing to do with marketing and them 'considering' the value to be different.

A megabyte is decimal (1000^2)
A mebibyte is binary (1024^2)

A megabyte doesn't and won't ever "takes 1024kb to make a megabyte", because that's not what a megabyte is - you're talking about a mebibyte. Mega is a multiplier of 1000000 (106) in the International System of Units (SI) [See Wikipedia]. This is not negotiable.

Storage has always been measured in base 10, because that's what it is at an engineering level.


Formatting has nothing to do with this space difference. We've just been through this in this very thread. The overhead and lost space for the formatting aspect is tiny.

It's amazing how cheap it is compared to SSD. If you just need storage it's cheaper to buy a USB stick or, even better, a HDD. Not much point in buying a SDD over 128GB

Anyway, enough about this nonsense over GiB and Gb.... can anyone who has this particular drive comment on its actual write speed please? I know there is a USB 3.0 option, but as long as this is around 15-20MB/sec ill be happy.

It's 126.68gb capacity. I bought one last week.

The reason for what most people think as "lost capacity" is that manufacturers quote capacity on the basis that 1MB = 1000KB whereas computers use the base 2 system, ie 1MB = 1024KB.

If you click on a drives properties in Windows it will tell you both. A 128GB stick will normally show a capacity of 128,000,000,000 bytes and ~119.2GB.

In this case you are not really "losing" capacity relative to another product since every manufacturer does the same.

However, even accounting for this, some USB sticks actually do give you less than the advertised capacity.

Here's an example, the drive on the left is 32GB and has a genuine 32,000,000,000 bytes whereas the drive on the right is 64GB but has significantly less than 64,000,000,000 bytes. So the drive on the right is a legit example of a missing capacity. It's actually missing about 1.3GB