The number is far too large to have an SI name. Some people have put forward suggestions for new prefixes, but they wouldn't help you understand the number. Ed

The number is far too large to have an SI name. Some people have put forward suggestions for new prefixes, but they wouldn't help you understand the number. Edit: I suppose you could say 1 exayottayottabit, or 100 pebiyobiyobibytes, per cc. And yes, this relies on using qubits for storage, in greater densities than is achievable.