Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (
More info?)
Rob Stow <rob.stow@sasktel.net> wrote in message news:<1085t6kg4dpi86b@corp.supernews.com>...
> Arhi wrote:
> > "S.Heenan" <sheenan@wahs.ac> wrote in message news:<zhlgc.163563$oR5.344@pd7tw3no>...
> >
> >>Arhi wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hi,
> >>>
> >>>Has anybody managed to enable 48 bit LBA support on a K7M? I just got
> >>>a 200Gb WD2000JB hard drive and my Windows XP SP1 only recognizes it
> >>>as 128Gb without the 48 bit LBA support. I couldn't find any info on
> >>>BIOS upgrades for K7M that would add 48 LBA support. Is none
> >>>available? Is there then no way to use a hard drive larger than 128Gb
> >>>with K7M?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Reg48bitLBA for Windows XP SP1 and Windows 2000 SP3
> >>From here:
> >>http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/utils.html
> >>
> >>This makes the necessary registry changes. Have your hard drive connected to
> >>the HighPoint controller at this time. After, check for the correct version
> >>of atapi.sys
> >>http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013
> >
> >
> > I have run the Reg48bitLBA utility. The EnableBigLba registry key is
> > now set to 1. I have also upgraded Atapi.sys to version 5.1.2600.1135
> > as per the MS KB article. My problem remains -- Windows XP SP1
> > recognizes the drive as 128Gb only even if it's connected by means of
> > a Highpoint Rocket 133 PCI IDE controller.
> >
>
> I have used that card with 200 and 250 GB drives with W2K SP4,
> but unfortunately not with XP.
>
> > I guess I am still looking for an authoritative answer to the question
> > as to whether a system whose BIOS doesn't support 48 bit LBA can
> > support drives > 137Gb when a controller that supports > 137Gb drives
> > is used?
>
> Yes those controllers can. They have their own BIOS on them
> for their own ports. In otherwords, the limitations of the
> motherboard's BIOS only affects the ports on the motherboard.
>
> > From my personal experience, the answer seems to be No. This
> > would make sense since it is the system routines in the BIOS that have
> > to be aware of 48 bit addressing.
>
> No. Again, the limitations of the motherboard's BIOS only
> affects the ports on the motherboard. It is the BIOS
> on the card that determines what drives that card supports.
>
> If you used a card that supported 48 bit LBA but could not
> see, for example, all of a 250 GB drive that was attached
> to that card, then that indicates a configuration error on
> your part. You might not have successfully enabled 48 bit LBA
> support in Windows, for example.
>
> You mention updating Atapi.sys, but you don't say whether
> the HighPoint driver was installed.
>
>
> > However, there seems to be
> > conflicting information out there. For example, this article on
> > Western Digital's site:
> >
http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=533&p_created=1031763968
> > states that using a 48 bit addressing aware add-on IDE controller
> > should be sufficient and they recommend Promise controllers:
> > "Another possibility is the use of an add-on EIDE controller that
> > supports 48-bit addressing. "
> > However, another WD article:
> > http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc.cfg/php/enduser/popup_adp.php?p_faqid=928&&p_sid=UI5Hjc9h&p_lva=533&p_li=
> > says:
> > "The system must have a 48-bit LBA-compatible Basic Input/Output
> > System (BIOS) installed. This includes EIDE controller card BIOSs."
> >
> > So, which is true?
>
> Both. It all makes sense once you recognize that the ports on
> those PCI-IDE cards are controlled by a BIOS on that card and
> not by the BIOS on the motherboard.
>
> >
> > Somebody please shed some light on this.
> >
>
> At my age, the only thing I shed is hair.
Rob,
Thank you for shedding more than hair
I _did_ install the XP drivers from the floppy disk that came with the
card. The only thing I can think of at this point is to try to upgrade
the driver and the card BIOS.
-a