Intel D865PERL install problems with Win2K pro and Win XP ..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

For the life of me, and for the last 3 weeks, I've tried everything I
can think of to install either win200pro or winXP pro on my new Intel
D865PERLL motherboard. I've upgraded the BIOS to the latest version.
And I'm trying to use the RAID driver (since I have 2 identical
Western Digitial 120Gb SATA harddrives).
I haven't had any luck installing with or without RAID turned on. At
this point I'd accept just getting windows installed and then using
the Application accellerator to do the rest of the work.
What happens is I'm able to see both drives, or one RAID volume if I
set it up that way. Either OS will sometimes create an NTFS partition,
other times it says the disk doesn't contain a compatible partition,
even after I delete it and then create one.
I 've run western digital diagnostics on both drives and they checkout
ok.
I have even tried going backwards in the BIOS revisions, but still no
joy.
I'm open to any and all suggestions and ideas, just don't be upset if
I tell you I've tried that already.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

First off,before xp starts no drivers are used on the computer,so until
you enter desktop,thier are no drivers running.I'm not totally use to RAID,
but RAID runs on 3 drives not 2,and to install those with xp you still need
to boot to xp cd,then press F6 to install/configure them in xp,from thier,
keep on and install xp at the info screen.The 865 Perll is the same as 865
GEBVL except it has the ICH5R chip set,forget RAID for now,take a hd set as
master on the IDE connection,boot to xp cd,install xp.Application Accelerator
has no business really at all till xp is installed,it runs the same as version
2.3 except for RAID.By the way,booting to xp cd,recovery,also gets you
DiskPart which can format youre RAID drives,try:http://www.microsoft.com/
technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/proddocs/diskpart.asp

"Marv" wrote:

> For the life of me, and for the last 3 weeks, I've tried everything I
> can think of to install either win200pro or winXP pro on my new Intel
> D865PERLL motherboard. I've upgraded the BIOS to the latest version.
> And I'm trying to use the RAID driver (since I have 2 identical
> Western Digitial 120Gb SATA harddrives).
> I haven't had any luck installing with or without RAID turned on. At
> this point I'd accept just getting windows installed and then using
> the Application accellerator to do the rest of the work.
> What happens is I'm able to see both drives, or one RAID volume if I
> set it up that way. Either OS will sometimes create an NTFS partition,
> other times it says the disk doesn't contain a compatible partition,
> even after I delete it and then create one.
> I 've run western digital diagnostics on both drives and they checkout
> ok.
> I have even tried going backwards in the BIOS revisions, but still no
> joy.
> I'm open to any and all suggestions and ideas, just don't be upset if
> I tell you I've tried that already.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

3 drives can be used as RAID type 0 or 5

2 drives are used, usually, for RAID 1 (also known as Mirrroring).

"Andrew E" <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote in message
news:0CDDA4D7-1F07-4DD8-ACD2-E0DE56E2717B@microsoft.com...
> First off,before xp starts no drivers are used on the computer,so until
> you enter desktop,thier are no drivers running.I'm not totally use to
RAID,
> but RAID runs on 3 drives not 2,and to install those with xp you still
need
> to boot to xp cd,then press F6 to install/configure them in xp,from
thier,
> keep on and install xp at the info screen.The 865 Perll is the same as
865
> GEBVL except it has the ICH5R chip set,forget RAID for now,take a hd set
as
> master on the IDE connection,boot to xp cd,install xp.Application
Accelerator
> has no business really at all till xp is installed,it runs the same as
version
> 2.3 except for RAID.By the way,booting to xp cd,recovery,also gets you
> DiskPart which can format youre RAID drives,try:http://www.microsoft.com/
> technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/proddocs/diskpart.asp
>
> "Marv" wrote:
>
> > For the life of me, and for the last 3 weeks, I've tried everything I
> > can think of to install either win200pro or winXP pro on my new Intel
> > D865PERLL motherboard. I've upgraded the BIOS to the latest version.
> > And I'm trying to use the RAID driver (since I have 2 identical
> > Western Digitial 120Gb SATA harddrives).
> > I haven't had any luck installing with or without RAID turned on. At
> > this point I'd accept just getting windows installed and then using
> > the Application accellerator to do the rest of the work.
> > What happens is I'm able to see both drives, or one RAID volume if I
> > set it up that way. Either OS will sometimes create an NTFS partition,
> > other times it says the disk doesn't contain a compatible partition,
> > even after I delete it and then create one.
> > I 've run western digital diagnostics on both drives and they checkout
> > ok.
> > I have even tried going backwards in the BIOS revisions, but still no
> > joy.
> > I'm open to any and all suggestions and ideas, just don't be upset if
> > I tell you I've tried that already.
> >

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Andrew,
Thanks for the reply, but:
I already have upgraded the BIOS to the lastest revision and
downloaded the latest F6install drivers from the Intel website. I
tried them and I'm still not able to load XPpro or win2kpro. The
F6install drivers are I believe, only necessary if you're attempting
to do a clean install onto a RAID volume. The RAID volume is created
via the RAID option ROM that boots after the normal BIOS ROM boot.
I've hit F6 when prompted and even hit it before prompting(in the
event some other drive was clobbering the RAID one) still no luck.
I understand from reading a truckload of intel documentation that the
application accelerator, when installed after a successfull windows
install, will allow you to manage your RAID configurations from within
windows. So assuming that's true and RAID 0 is really where I want to
go, I'm willing to wait to get RAID going. For now I'd settle for a
simple install onto one of the SATA drives. So I've turned off RAID in
the BIOS (after first using the RAID ROM to set the drives to
"Non-RAID mode" and tried to install windows, still no luck, I've
tried it both with and without using the F6install drivers, since I'm
not sure if windows supports the ICH5R chipset in "native" mode
(without RAID enabled). Still no luck.
The sytems is setup with IDE set to enhanced in the BIOS (so I get the
use of the 6 possible channels (2-SATA and 4-EIDE) There is a 120Gb
WD harddrive on each SATA port, and a Plextor CD-R/RW drive on the
secondary EIDE port. (I've tried the plextor on both the primary and
secondary EIDE ports) my thinking for leaving it on the secondary is
that there should be no confusion as to the desire to boot from the
Primary "port/channel", be it EIDE or SATA-0. The BIOS will recognize
whatever I connect to it, however I connect the hardware up, so it's
(BIOS) identifying everything properly.
From what I've read, it seems like windows doesn't recognize the ICH5R
harddisk controller properly or sometimes not at all. It recognizes
it to say that I have drives connected and asks me if I want it format
them, then when it finishes formatting them, it says there's no
recognizable formatted partition? how can that be.. or if it gets past
there, then it says there's and OS load failure when windows tries to
re-boot to finish the install.
Anyway,
I will take a look at the URL you suggested and see if there's
anything in there of use. Oh well, thanks for trying.
M

"Andrew E" <eckrichco@msn.com> wrote in message news:<0CDDA4D7-1F07-4DD8-ACD2-E0DE56E2717B@microsoft.com>...
> First off,before xp starts no drivers are used on the computer,so until
> you enter desktop,thier are no drivers running.I'm not totally use to RAID,
> but RAID runs on 3 drives not 2,and to install those with xp you still need
> to boot to xp cd,then press F6 to install/configure them in xp,from thier,
> keep on and install xp at the info screen.The 865 Perll is the same as 865
> GEBVL except it has the ICH5R chip set,forget RAID for now,take a hd set as
> master on the IDE connection,boot to xp cd,install xp.Application Accelerator
> has no business really at all till xp is installed,it runs the same as version
> 2.3 except for RAID.By the way,booting to xp cd,recovery,also gets you
> DiskPart which can format youre RAID drives,try:http://www.microsoft.com/
> technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/proddocs/diskpart.asp

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Yves,
I believe you'r mistaken:
You can run RAID 0, 1, or 0+1 with two harddrives. Of course with
RAID 0 (stripping) you don't get mirroring/backup or your data since
1/2 or it resides on each drive.
With RAID 1 (mirroring) you do get the backup but no performance
increase.
With RAID 0+1 you get both, but your useable drive size (when 2
harddisks are used) is cut in half.
M

"Yves Leclerc" <yvesleclercNOSPAM@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<el3X50$VEHA.3524@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>...
> 3 drives can be used as RAID type 0 or 5
>
> 2 drives are used, usually, for RAID 1 (also known as Mirrroring).
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Here's an update.
I was able to get thru the win2kpro install program up thru the point
where it copies files to the harddrive. at the end of the file copy
windows reports, "Setup cannot set the required Windows 2000
configuration information. This indicates an internal setup error.
Contact your system administrator."
I hope someone can explain this to me.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Marv wrote:
> Yves,
> I believe you'r mistaken:
> You can run RAID 0, 1, or 0+1 with two harddrives. Of course with
> RAID 0 (stripping) you don't get mirroring/backup or your data since
> 1/2 or it resides on each drive.
> With RAID 1 (mirroring) you do get the backup but no performance
> increase.
> With RAID 0+1 you get both, but your useable drive size (when 2
> harddisks are used) is cut in half.
> M
>
> "Yves Leclerc" <yvesleclercNOSPAM@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<el3X50$VEHA.3524@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>...
>
>>3 drives can be used as RAID type 0 or 5
>>
>>2 drives are used, usually, for RAID 1 (also known as Mirrroring).
>>

Two HDs can be used to create a RAID0 set, or a RAID1 set. To create
a useful RAID0+1 set (or a useful RAID1+0) set, requires a minimum of
4 HDs: e.g., create a RAID1 set named R-A from HD-0 and HD-1, then
create another RAID1 set named R-B from HD-2 and HD-3, then create
a RAID0 set from R-A and R-B.

While it is theoretically possible to create RAIDsets based on logical
disks (partitions) instead of physical disks, they are not practical:
there is no protection against component failure, there is lower performance,
and there is less storage space. {Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, ...}
--
Cheers, Bob

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

I HAD A SIMILAR PROBLEM AND FOUND OUT IT WAS INCOMPATIBLE RAM
"Marv" <marvs@att.net> wrote in message
news:ca7c162b.0406201756.381644b5@posting.google.com...
> For the life of me, and for the last 3 weeks, I've tried everything I
> can think of to install either win200pro or winXP pro on my new Intel
> D865PERLL motherboard. I've upgraded the BIOS to the latest version.
> And I'm trying to use the RAID driver (since I have 2 identical
> Western Digitial 120Gb SATA harddrives).
> I haven't had any luck installing with or without RAID turned on. At
> this point I'd accept just getting windows installed and then using
> the Application accellerator to do the rest of the work.
> What happens is I'm able to see both drives, or one RAID volume if I
> set it up that way. Either OS will sometimes create an NTFS partition,
> other times it says the disk doesn't contain a compatible partition,
> even after I delete it and then create one.
> I 've run western digital diagnostics on both drives and they checkout
> ok.
> I have even tried going backwards in the BIOS revisions, but still no
> joy.
> I'm open to any and all suggestions and ideas, just don't be upset if
> I tell you I've tried that already.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

WOW!! you're kidding?
Well that's hard to believe since I had this same system working with
one SATA drive. But now that you mention it. I had the DDR RAM
installed wrong and was not using it in DDR mode at that time. I'll
try putting it back the way it was and see if that makes any
difference.
At this point in time I'm willing to try anything.
I'll also have to double-check the intel site, but I'm using Kingston
DDR RAM which I believe is on their approved RAM list.
Thanks for the suggestion

"Outpost11" <turnoutthelight@porchlight.ca> wrote in message news:<AhLCc.1704$0A.32130@localhost>...
> I HAD A SIMILAR PROBLEM AND FOUND OUT IT WAS INCOMPATIBLE RAM
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Well,
Turns out it's not RAM.. The kingston DDR ram that I am using is on
intels approved RAM lsita, and every RAM test I throw at it passes.

> "Outpost11" <turnoutthelight@porchlight.ca> wrote in message news:<AhLCc.1704$0A.32130@localhost>...
> > I HAD A SIMILAR PROBLEM AND FOUND OUT IT WAS INCOMPATIBLE RAM
> >