How to clone a SATA hard disk?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Hi,

I am using a WD80GB SATA HDD on an AMD64 3000+ system running WinXP
Pro on an MSI K8T Neo-FIS2R motherboard, with 512MB of DDR400 RAM. The
HDD is connected to a SATA connector belonging to the VIA chipset, and
not to the additional Promise SATA/RAID chipset that is also available
on the MB.

I wish to make a backup copy of the HDD onto a second SATA HDD and am
wondering how to go about doing it.

When using IDE HDDs, I would use Norton Ghost 2001, connect the
primary HDD to IDE1 and the new HDD to IDE2, boot up with a Floppy
diskette in MS-DOS 6.22 or bare boot Win98, and then run the Ghost
program from the floppy drive. I can use this method to make backup
copies of my hard drives (for archive purposes, in case the original
HDD crashes) or to upgrade to a larger capacity hard drive. It has
worked very well so far with IDE drives.

With SATA drives, a bare boot with a Win98 diskette will not enable
the system to detect and see the SATA HDD, so I do not know how to
clone a SATA HDD.

Is there anyway to clone a SATA HDD, similar to the way I can clone an
IDE HDD?

Thanks for any advice that you can offer!

C.L.
17 answers Last reply
More about clone sata hard disk
  1. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    > With SATA drives, a bare boot with a Win98 diskette will not enable
    > the system to detect and see the SATA HDD, so I do not know how to
    > clone a SATA HDD.

    Why not? This should work even with plain DOS.

    JMS
  2. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    owwtemdczruw@spammotel.com (Jens) wrote in message news:<2b21bea9.0405052301.22ffa870@posting.google.com>...
    > > With SATA drives, a bare boot with a Win98 diskette will not enable
    > > the system to detect and see the SATA HDD, so I do not know how to
    > > clone a SATA HDD.
    >
    > Why not? This should work even with plain DOS.
    >
    > JMS

    Oh yes, I forgot to mention. My SATA 80GB HDD is partitioned into 2
    logical drives. C: Drive is 60GB in size and is in NTFS format, and
    contains all the operating system files. D: Drive is 20GB in size and
    is in FAT32 format and I use it only for data storage. Don't ask me
    why; the computer shop people just configured the HDD this way :-)

    When I did a bare boot with MS-DOS 6.22, I could not see the HDD at
    all.
    When I did a bare boot with Win98, I could see the FAT32 drive which
    is now reported as being the C: Drive, but not the NTFS drive at all.

    I have visit the Symantec website and read the article pointed out by
    an earlier poster. Does it mean that in order to support SATA drives,
    Ghost must be the latest updated version of version 2003, only
    available from download from the Symantec website?

    I do not have a spare SATA HDD at home to experiment with. I am not
    keen to spend the money to buy a new SATA HDD if my Ghost 2001 will
    not be able to clone my existing SATA HDD onto the new one.

    Thanks for shedding a bit of light on this matter.
  3. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "C.L. Wong" <bampfylde1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:b08c8b2c.0405060618.5d29e8d1@posting.google.com...
    >
    > Oh yes, I forgot to mention. My SATA 80GB HDD is partitioned into 2
    > logical drives. C: Drive is 60GB in size and is in NTFS format, and
    > contains all the operating system files. D: Drive is 20GB in size and
    > is in FAT32 format and I use it only for data storage. Don't ask me
    > why; the computer shop people just configured the HDD this way :-)
    >
    > When I did a bare boot with MS-DOS 6.22, I could not see the HDD at
    > all.
    > When I did a bare boot with Win98, I could see the FAT32 drive which
    > is now reported as being the C: Drive, but not the NTFS drive at all.
    >
    Are you using "fdisk /status" to check for drives? You will not get drive
    letters on new drives.

    > I have visit the Symantec website and read the article pointed out by
    > an earlier poster. Does it mean that in order to support SATA drives,
    > Ghost must be the latest updated version of version 2003, only
    > available from download from the Symantec website?
    >
    If fdisk sees both drives, simply use the documented -fni workaround.

    > I do not have a spare SATA HDD at home to experiment with. I am not
    > keen to spend the money to buy a new SATA HDD if my Ghost 2001 will
    > not be able to clone my existing SATA HDD onto the new one.
    >
  4. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    In article <b08c8b2c.0405060618.5d29e8d1@posting.google.com>,
    C.L. Wong <bampfylde1@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >owwtemdczruw@spammotel.com (Jens) wrote in message news:<2b21bea9.0405052301.22ffa870@posting.google.com>...
    >> > With SATA drives, a bare boot with a Win98 diskette will not enable
    >> > the system to detect and see the SATA HDD, so I do not know how to
    >> > clone a SATA HDD.
    >>
    >> Why not? This should work even with plain DOS.
    >>
    >> JMS
    >
    >Oh yes, I forgot to mention. My SATA 80GB HDD is partitioned into 2
    >logical drives. C: Drive is 60GB in size and is in NTFS format, and
    >contains all the operating system files. D: Drive is 20GB in size and
    >is in FAT32 format and I use it only for data storage. Don't ask me
    >why; the computer shop people just configured the HDD this way :-)
    >
    >When I did a bare boot with MS-DOS 6.22, I could not see the HDD at
    >all.
    >When I did a bare boot with Win98, I could see the FAT32 drive which
    >is now reported as being the C: Drive, but not the NTFS drive at all.
    >
    >I have visit the Symantec website and read the article pointed out by
    >an earlier poster. Does it mean that in order to support SATA drives,
    >Ghost must be the latest updated version of version 2003, only
    >available from download from the Symantec website?
    >
    >I do not have a spare SATA HDD at home to experiment with. I am not
    >keen to spend the money to buy a new SATA HDD if my Ghost 2001 will
    >not be able to clone my existing SATA HDD onto the new one.
    >
    >Thanks for shedding a bit of light on this matter.


    FWIW; Acronis Trueimage 7 will boot from the CDROM that's burned as
    part of the installation process and see my 160GBB SATA disk. I can
    make an image of a NTFS SATA disk and then restore the image to a new
    disk. I've done it.

    TI is built on Linux.

    I backup and restore over 100BM ethernet.


    --
    Al Dykes
    -----------
    adykes at p a n i x . c o m
  5. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    This may depend on the BIOS mode of your SATA drive. If it is set in
    BIOS to compatibility mode, DOS will see the drive and can
    access/backup the drive sectors. If the drive is in enhanced mode (for
    WinXP), DOS may not see it.

    But for backup purposes you may switch it to compatible mode in the
    BIOS.
    In compatible mode, you may only have 4 drives.

    Jens Martin Schlatter
  6. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    I would connect BOTH sATA disks to the Promise chipset, boot,
    select Raid 1 (Security), select Create and Duplicate, select
    your original disk as the Source, select Yes to start.

    All done in BIOS. No OS. :)

    When done, you can either un-do the connections, and go back to
    the way you were, or leave it all set up, and have the second
    disk be maintained as a constant mirror copy of the original.

    "C.L. Wong" wrote:
    >
    > I am using a WD80GB SATA HDD on an AMD64 3000+ system running WinXP
    > Pro on an MSI K8T Neo-FIS2R motherboard, with 512MB of DDR400 RAM. The
    > HDD is connected to a SATA connector belonging to the VIA chipset, and
    > not to the additional Promise SATA/RAID chipset that is also available
    > on the MB.
    >
    > I wish to make a backup copy of the HDD onto a second SATA HDD and am
    > wondering how to go about doing it.
    >
  7. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Check your bios settings, the boards I have used have all had 2 different
    modes for SATA, I believe they are "enhanced" and "legacy" or maybe "native"
    and "legacy" depending on what board it is. Ghost 2003 works well with them
    only if I set the SATA controller to "legacy". No problems after that. I
    just switch back to "enhanced" before booting back to windows. I have used
    giant 250gb drives like this with no problems. Strangely, Ghost works fine
    when I have 2 drives setup as a RAID 0 array even though that is just about
    as enhanced as a guy can get (ha ha, remembering the "male enhancement" ads
    right now).

    --Dan

    "C.L. Wong" <bampfylde1@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:b08c8b2c.0405051620.18fbf200@posting.google.com...
    > Is there anyway to clone a SATA HDD, similar to the way I can clone an
    > IDE HDD?
    >
    > Thanks for any advice that you can offer!
    >
    > C.L.
  8. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "Mr. Grinch" wrote:
    > "Timothy Daniels" wrote:
    > > C'mon. In this day of malign URLs and hostile websites, you're
    > > asking a stranger to connect to a URL he can't read? TinyURL.com
    > > has outlived its usefulness. It's time to go back to long URLs that,
    > > at least, can be read.
    >
    > I don't see anyone holding a gun to his head forcing him to click on it.
    >
    > I did say it was on Symantec's site. He can find it himself if he wants
    > with a search for SATA under the GHOST KB.


    I'm not saying you had any mean intent - or might have had -
    Mr. G. I'm just saying that more readers would be likely to use the
    link that you provided if it weren't put through the forwarding step at
    TinyURL.com. I, for one, am quite willing to do a cut 'n past on a
    URL, and a long URL would also be less work for you, or any other
    poster, to do. IOW, in this day of bad guys on the Internet,
    TinyURL.com has outlived its value as a convenience. There is also
    the question of value in archiving. What happens if TinyURL.com
    goes belly up? Then all the tiny URLs archived at Google become
    worthless.

    *TimDaniels*
  9. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "Jens" <owwtemdczruw@spammotel.com> wrote in message news:2b21bea9.0405061251.6bc0ae86@posting.google.com
    > This may depend on the BIOS mode of your SATA drive. If it is set in
    > BIOS to compatibility mode, DOS will see the drive and can
    > access/backup the drive sectors.

    > If the drive is in enhanced mode (for WinXP), DOS may not see it.

    Any idea why that is?

    >
    > But for backup purposes you may switch it to compatible mode in the BIOS.

    > In compatible mode, you may only have 4 drives.

    Again, any idea why?

    >
    > Jens Martin Schlatter
  10. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Walt <NoSpamForWalt@Early.com> wrote in message news:<409A8CE8.5F28AC56@Early.com>...
    > I would connect BOTH sATA disks to the Promise chipset, boot,
    > select Raid 1 (Security), select Create and Duplicate, select
    > your original disk as the Source, select Yes to start.
    >
    > All done in BIOS. No OS. :)
    >
    > When done, you can either un-do the connections, and go back to
    > the way you were, or leave it all set up, and have the second
    > disk be maintained as a constant mirror copy of the original.
    >

    Walt, many thanks for the tip! It seems so simple and straightforward,
    yet I never thought of it. I have never played around with RAID
    before, so I never realized that this would be such an easy way to
    clone a SATA HDD using a RAID 1 array.

    My MSI K8T Neo FIS2R M/B's onboard VIA chipset supports SATA and RAID
    0, RAID 1. The additonal Promise chipset supports SATA, RAID 0, RAID1
    and RAID 0+1.

    I went out and bought an identical 80GB SATA HDD, hooked it up to the
    VIA connector (the first HDD was already on that chipset connector)
    and created a RAID 1 array. It was all done in about 40 minutes, and
    then the RAID 1 array worked well on rebooting. I disconnected the
    original HDD and ran the computer with the new mirrored SATA HDD, and
    it worked perfectly. I even took it off the VIA SATA connector and
    tried connecting it to the Promise SATA connector, and it worked
    perfectly too! So now I have removed and stored the new cloned HDD as
    a backup, in case the original HDD crashed or the OS gets corrupted.

    As you rightly said, all done in BIOS and no OS involved!

    I suppose the only downside to this method is that you cannot transfer
    the HDD contents to a larger capacity HDD, since in a RAID array, the
    smallest size HDD governs the size of the image on all the hard
    drives.

    C.L.
  11. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    owwtemdczruw@spammotel.com (Jens) wrote in message news:<2b21bea9.0405061251.6bc0ae86@posting.google.com>...
    > This may depend on the BIOS mode of your SATA drive. If it is set in
    > BIOS to compatibility mode, DOS will see the drive and can
    > access/backup the drive sectors. If the drive is in enhanced mode (for
    > WinXP), DOS may not see it.
    >
    > But for backup purposes you may switch it to compatible mode in the
    > BIOS.
    > In compatible mode, you may only have 4 drives.
    >
    > Jens Martin Schlatter

    My motherboard BIOS does not seem to have the option to choose the
    SATA drive as Enhanced mode or Compatibility mode.

    Anyway, I managed to create a clone of my original 80GB SATA HDD onto
    another 80GB SATA HDD by using the RAID controller and setting up a
    RAID 1 array, as I described in another post below. This is for backup
    purposes. Of course this method will probably not work if I wanted to
    upgrade to a higher capacity HDD. May have to try Acronis True Image 7
    in that case :-)
  12. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@graffiti.net> wrote in message news:<c7djga01q07@enews1.newsguy.com>...

    > >
    > Are you using "fdisk /status" to check for drives? You will not get drive
    > letters on new drives.
    >

    Yesterday, I just booted up with a bare Win98 diskette and only used
    the DIR command to look for drives. I could only locate the FAT32
    drive and not the NTFS drive, which is probably not surprising, since
    Win98 cannot read NTFS drives. Today, I booted up again with a Win98
    bare boot diskette and ran Fdisk and Fdisk /status. I can see the
    FAT32 drive. Fdisk can also see the presence of the NTFS drive, but it
    cannot read the name of this drive volume.

    > > I have visit the Symantec website and read the article pointed out by
    > > an earlier poster. Does it mean that in order to support SATA drives,
    > > Ghost must be the latest updated version of version 2003, only
    > > available from download from the Symantec website?
    > >
    > If fdisk sees both drives, simply use the documented -fni workaround.
    >

    I have not tried this with Ghost 2001.

    Today, I managed to clone my SATA HDD onto a new SATA HDD of the same
    capacity by creating a RAID 1 array and then removing the new HDD for
    storing as a backup. This method is described in a post below, and
    worked very well, but I think it cannot be used for upgrading to a
    larger capacity HDD.
  13. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "C.L. Wong" wrote:
    > I suppose the only downside to this method is that you cannot transfer
    > the HDD contents to a larger capacity HDD, since in a RAID array, the
    > smallest size HDD governs the size of the image on all the hard
    > drives.


    Try connecting the 2nd HD as a secondary HD and use Disk Manager
    on the primary HD to create another partition on the secondary HD that
    is as large or larger than the primary HD and set the new partition to "active".
    Then hook them both up in a RAID 1 configuration and try to do the
    Duplicate procedure. It *might* use the 2nd partion on the 2nd HD.
    Let us know the results.

    To set a partition as "active":
    rt-click MyComputer, click Manage/Disk Management
    rt-click the new partition, click Mark Partition as Active

    *TimDaniels*
  14. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "Timothy Daniels" <TDaniels@NoSpamDot.com> wrote in
    news:SLydnUE5Ka0WfQfd4p2dnA@comcast.com:

    > "Mr. Grinch" wrote:
    >> "Timothy Daniels" wrote:
    >> > C'mon. In this day of malign URLs and hostile websites, you're
    >> > asking a stranger to connect to a URL he can't read? TinyURL.com
    >> > has outlived its usefulness. It's time to go back to long URLs that,
    >> > at least, can be read.
    >>
    >> I don't see anyone holding a gun to his head forcing him to click on it.
    >>
    >> I did say it was on Symantec's site. He can find it himself if he wants
    >> with a search for SATA under the GHOST KB.
    >
    >
    > I'm not saying you had any mean intent - or might have had -
    > Mr. G. I'm just saying that more readers would be likely to use the
    > link that you provided if it weren't put through the forwarding step at
    > TinyURL.com. I, for one, am quite willing to do a cut 'n past on a
    > URL, and a long URL would also be less work for you, or any other
    > poster, to do. IOW, in this day of bad guys on the Internet,
    > TinyURL.com has outlived its value as a convenience. There is also
    > the question of value in archiving. What happens if TinyURL.com
    > goes belly up? Then all the tiny URLs archived at Google become
    > worthless.

    FWIW, I agree with your assessment of the drawbacks of TinyURL. I read about
    20 different discussion groups and 6 online forums, and I'm just as likely to
    get complaints about using long URLS as using TinyURL. I can't win either
    way. I also run a pop-up blocker, antivirus, and windows update. I archive
    interesting articles but I also save all URLs in IE Favourites, organized
    into folders, and back those up every day. If an article is particularly
    important to me, I go into the Xnews archived articles list and edit it (to
    add the URL or extra info) and save it again. When I'm searching through
    deja, lots of links may show up as TinyURL in articles, but even the full
    link are often broken too. Broken links will continue to exist with or
    without TinyURL to help them break.

    I suppose I should always put both links for the sake of being complete, so
    that an archived article has a better chance of being useful. But I have to
    be honest and admit that I don't get to worried about making others feel safe
    on the web.

    Thank you for the explanation, it's appreciated.
  15. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    bampfylde1@yahoo.com (C.L. Wong) wrote in
    news:b08c8b2c.0405070022.2415205f@posting.google.com:

    > My MSI K8T Neo FIS2R M/B's onboard VIA chipset supports SATA and RAID
    > 0, RAID 1. The additonal Promise chipset supports SATA, RAID 0, RAID1
    > and RAID 0+1.
    >
    > I went out and bought an identical 80GB SATA HDD, hooked it up to the
    > VIA connector (the first HDD was already on that chipset connector)
    > and created a RAID 1 array. It was all done in about 40 minutes, and
    > then the RAID 1 array worked well on rebooting. I disconnected the

    You used the Promise RAID to clone the drive? 40 minutes for 80GB sounds
    pretty good.
  16. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "Mr. Grinch" <grinch@hatespam.yucky> wrote in message news:<Xns94E29551D8B70grinchhatespamyucksh@24.71.223.159>...
    >
    > You used the Promise RAID to clone the drive? 40 minutes for 80GB sounds
    > pretty good.

    No, I used the onboard RAID supported by the VIA VT8237 southbridge
    for the cloning. It supports RAID 0 and RAID 1, and seems to be fairly
    easy to use. I did not try to clone using the Promise RAID.

    Although it was a 80GB HDD, it was not full. There are about 43GB of
    data in it, but even then, 40 minutes was quite fast. It was certainly
    faster than using Ghost 2001 to clone similar-sized IDE drives.
  17. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "Timothy Daniels" <TDaniels@NoSpamDot.com> wrote in message news:<wYidnSfEWZ2wLAbdRVn-sA@comcast.com>...
    > "C.L. Wong" wrote:
    > > I suppose the only downside to this method is that you cannot transfer
    > > the HDD contents to a larger capacity HDD, since in a RAID array, the
    > > smallest size HDD governs the size of the image on all the hard
    > > drives.
    >
    >
    > Try connecting the 2nd HD as a secondary HD and use Disk Manager
    > on the primary HD to create another partition on the secondary HD that
    > is as large or larger than the primary HD and set the new partition to "active".
    > Then hook them both up in a RAID 1 configuration and try to do the
    > Duplicate procedure. It *might* use the 2nd partion on the 2nd HD.
    > Let us know the results.
    >
    > To set a partition as "active":
    > rt-click MyComputer, click Manage/Disk Management
    > rt-click the new partition, click Mark Partition as Active
    >
    > *TimDaniels*

    Thanks for the tip, but I have already bought an identical 80GB SATA
    HDD yesterday and managed to clone it using RAID 1 on the VIA VT8237
    Southbridge SATA RAID connection. I don't have any immediate plans to
    buy a larger SATA HDD, so I won't be able to try out the above
    scenario.
Ask a new question

Read More

SATA Hard Drives Storage