Advice on Slave/Master Settings

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Building a new PC with son.

Installed components last night and have a question about the
slave/master settings on the hard drive and the CD/DVD drive. There
is no floppy at the present.

I have the HD set to master and the CD/DVD set to slave, but the
illustration that came with the CD drive indicates that I should set
that to master.

Any thoughts?

TIA,

Douglas

 

[Dee]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Douglas Fifield wrote:
> Building a new PC with son.
>
> Installed components last night and have a question about the
> slave/master settings on the hard drive and the CD/DVD drive. There
> is no floppy at the present.
>
> I have the HD set to master and the CD/DVD set to slave, but the
> illustration that came with the CD drive indicates that I should set
> that to master.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> TIA,
>
> Douglas

Generally it is recommended to install the CD/DVD drive as Master on the
secondary IDE channel. The hard drive, of course, will be the Master on
the Primary IDE channel. The rationale for this is that IDE cannot read
and write at the same time on the same channel. So, theoretically, if
you're burning a CD, it will write faster if it's on the secondary
channel vs the primary channel. Since I have never really given it much
thought, I have no idea if this is actually true in the real world. I
do have my system with the DVD burner on the secondary Master.

 

[James]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:20:29 -0500, Dee <dee@home.net> wrote:


>Generally it is recommended to install the CD/DVD drive as Master on the
>secondary IDE channel. The hard drive, of course, will be the Master on
>the Primary IDE channel. The rationale for this is that IDE cannot read
>and write at the same time on the same channel. So, theoretically, if
>you're burning a CD, it will write faster if it's on the secondary
>channel vs the primary channel. Since I have never really given it much
>thought, I have no idea if this is actually true in the real world. I
>do have my system with the DVD burner on the secondary Master.

Now how would you setup two hard drives one dvd buner and one cd
burner?

Thanks for your help.

 

[Dee]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

James wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 09:20:29 -0500, Dee <dee@home.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Generally it is recommended to install the CD/DVD drive as Master on the
>>secondary IDE channel. The hard drive, of course, will be the Master on
>>the Primary IDE channel. The rationale for this is that IDE cannot read
>>and write at the same time on the same channel. So, theoretically, if
>>you're burning a CD, it will write faster if it's on the secondary
>>channel vs the primary channel. Since I have never really given it much
>>thought, I have no idea if this is actually true in the real world. I
>>do have my system with the DVD burner on the secondary Master.
>
>
> Now how would you setup two hard drives one dvd buner and one cd
> burner?
>
> Thanks for your help.
>

That depends on your needs and what you expect out of the components.

Personally, I wouldn't use both a CD and a DVD burner. To me it's
somewhat redundant and a waste of money. The DVD burner suffices for
both types of discs.

With only one burner, I would put both hard drives on the primary
channel and the burner on the secondary.

But, this is my situation and I cannot say that this is a proper
solution for anyone else!

If you have special needs/requirements, then find a Systems Engineer to
evaluate your requirements and recommend the appropriate solution(s).

 

[James]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 07:44:17 -0500, Dee <dee@home.net> wrote:

>That depends on your needs and what you expect out of the components.
>
>Personally, I wouldn't use both a CD and a DVD burner. To me it's
>somewhat redundant and a waste of money. The DVD burner suffices for
>both types of discs.
>
>With only one burner, I would put both hard drives on the primary
>channel and the burner on the secondary.
>
>But, this is my situation and I cannot say that this is a proper
>solution for anyone else!
>
>If you have special needs/requirements, then find a Systems Engineer to
>evaluate your requirements and recommend the appropriate solution(s).

That is quite true about having both. But considering that I do
hundreds of copies a year I thought it would be a little quicker.
Especially since I already have them both.

Actually I forgot to mention in the original question that the problem
is the second HD is in a removable drawer. So it is not always
present.

Thanks dee.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:00:42 -0500, James wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 07:44:17 -0500, Dee <dee@home.net> wrote:
>
>>That depends on your needs and what you expect out of the components.
>>
>>Personally, I wouldn't use both a CD and a DVD burner. To me it's
>>somewhat redundant and a waste of money. The DVD burner suffices for
>>both types of discs.
>>
>>With only one burner, I would put both hard drives on the primary
>>channel and the burner on the secondary.
>>
>>But, this is my situation and I cannot say that this is a proper
>>solution for anyone else!
>>
>>If you have special needs/requirements, then find a Systems Engineer to
>>evaluate your requirements and recommend the appropriate solution(s).
>
>That is quite true about having both. But considering that I do
>hundreds of copies a year I thought it would be a little quicker.
>Especially since I already have them both.
>
>Actually I forgot to mention in the original question that the problem
>is the second HD is in a removable drawer. So it is not always
>present.
>
>Thanks dee.

There are many reasons why a 2nd drive is handy or useful,
also including reduction of wear on the most expensive
drive, having one drive that's not spinning slow/quiet for
audio CDs, copying, leaving game/other CDs in the drive when
the app requires them in for use... among others.

Since the second HDD is not always installed, you might make
it the slave on secondary channel, or primary. Main-OS HDD
may not "need" to be, but might as well be HDD0, as master
on channel 1 (assuming parallel ATA). So you have two
opticals left. Put the one used primarily for backup from
HDD0, on the opposite channel as master. Put the other
optical on the other channel as slave.

Or, just do whaever makes easiest cable routing then change
it IF that config leads to problems.

 

[James]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 20:34:38 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:

>There are many reasons why a 2nd drive is handy or useful,
>also including reduction of wear on the most expensive
>drive, having one drive that's not spinning slow/quiet for
>audio CDs, copying, leaving game/other CDs in the drive when
>the app requires them in for use... among others.
>
>Since the second HDD is not always installed, you might make
>it the slave on secondary channel, or primary. Main-OS HDD
>may not "need" to be, but might as well be HDD0, as master
>on channel 1 (assuming parallel ATA). So you have two
>opticals left. Put the one used primarily for backup from
>HDD0, on the opposite channel as master. Put the other
>optical on the other channel as slave.
>
>Or, just do whaever makes easiest cable routing then change
>it IF that config leads to problems.

I must have been out to lunch when I was thinking.

I have a Gigabyte 7DXR mobo which has to built in RAID controllers.
Simply put the internal HD on IDE 1 as the master. The second HD was
put on IDE 3 also as a master. Works perfectly. )

Thanks for helping making the though process a little clearer.