| Zettabits per second (Zbit/s) | Kibioctets per second (Kio/s) |
|---|---|
| 1 Zettabit per second | 1.220703125 × 1017 Kio/s |
| 2 Zettabits per second | 2.44140625 × 1017 Kio/s |
| 3 Zettabits per second | 3.662109375 × 1017 Kio/s |
| 4 Zettabits per second | 4.8828125 × 1017 Kio/s |
| 5 Zettabits per second | 6.103515625 × 1017 Kio/s |
| 10 Zettabits per second | 1.220703125 × 1018 Kio/s |
| 20 Zettabits per second | 2.44140625 × 1018 Kio/s |
| 25 Zettabits per second | 3.0517578125 × 1018 Kio/s |
| 50 Zettabits per second | 6.103515625 × 1018 Kio/s |
| 100 Zettabits per second | 1.220703125 × 1019 Kio/s |
| Reference | Zettabits per second (Zbit/s) | Kibioctets per second (Kio/s) |
|---|---|---|
| A dial-up modem | 5.6 × 10-17 Zbit/s | 6.83594 Kio/s |
| Typical home broadband | 1 × 10-13 Zbit/s | 12207 Kio/s |
| Gigabit Ethernet | 1 × 10-12 Zbit/s | 122070 Kio/s |
| Streaming a 4K film | 2.5 × 10-14 Zbit/s | 3051.76 Kio/s |
The zettabit per second is a unit of data transfer rate equal to a thousand exabits per second. Its symbol is Zbit/s. No system on Earth moves data at this rate, and none is planned; the unit exists because the metric system defines every prefix for every unit, whether or not the combination has yet been needed.
To see how far off it is, take the whole internet. Global traffic at present runs at roughly one exabit per second on average, so the entire planet's communications would have to grow a thousandfold to reach one zettabit per second. At the growth rates of the last two decades that would take somewhere between twenty and thirty years, which is precisely the sort of extrapolation that has been wrong in both directions before.
A zettabit per second is 125 exaoctets per second. Since global data storage manufacturing runs at a few hundred exaoctets a year, a link at this rate would transfer the world's entire annual production of new storage capacity in a couple of seconds. Nothing could be stored at the far end; the data would have to be processed and discarded as it arrived.
That last point is not as fanciful as it sounds. Several existing systems already discard almost everything they receive: particle detectors, radio telescope arrays and network monitoring systems all process far more than they keep, because keeping it is impossible and unnecessary. A zettabit-per-second link would be an extreme case of an architecture that already exists.
The physical obstacles are less absolute than they might appear. The theoretical capacity of a single optical fibre is far above what is used today, and the practical limits come from amplifier noise, non-linear effects and the electronics at each end rather than from the glass itself. Aggregating enough fibres would reach a zettabit per second; the difficulty is that nobody has a reason to.
For a converter, the unit matters because forecasts and capacity models are written in whatever unit keeps the numbers legible. A projection that reaches into the 2050s may reasonably state totals in zettabits per second, and a reader needs to be able to convert that into something familiar.
One zettabit per second equals 1,000 exabits per second, 125 exaoctets per second, or about 0.8470 zebibits per second.
The kibioctet per second is a unit of data transfer rate equal to 1,024 octets per second, and therefore to 8,192 bits per second. Its symbol is Kio/s. Unlike most of the binary rate units it is genuinely common, because the command-line tools that copy, download and synchronise files have reported in it for decades.
The reason is straightforward. Those tools count what they have moved in blocks, and blocks are powers of two. A program that reads in four-kibioctet pieces and divides the total by elapsed time produces a rate in kibioctets per second, and reporting it in decimal kilooctets would require an extra multiplication for no benefit. The unit is what the arithmetic naturally produces.
Anyone who has watched a file copy on a Unix-like system has seen the figure. Download utilities, archive tools, disc-writing commands and network file transfer programs all report progress in kibioctets or mebioctets per second, and most of them label it correctly with the lowercase i. It is one of the few places where the IEC prefixes are used consistently in everyday software.
For scale, a kibioctet per second moves about a thousand characters of text each second: a short letter in a second, a novel in about ten minutes. It is a rate at which a modern web page will not load in any reasonable time, so seeing it in a progress display usually means something has gone wrong with the connection rather than that the transfer is nearly finished.
The difference from a kilooctet per second is 2.4 per cent, which nobody notices. The value of using the binary unit here is not accuracy but honesty: the number came from a binary computation, and writing it with a binary prefix says so. A reader who wants the decimal figure can convert; a reader given a decimal label for a binary number cannot recover anything.
Comparing the reading with an advertised connection speed requires two steps: multiply by eight to get bits, and adjust by 2.4 per cent for the base. In practice the second step is beneath the noise of any real measurement, and the first is the one that matters.
One kibioctet per second equals 1,024 octets per second, 8,192 bits per second, or 1.024 kilooctets per second.