My system's been running slowly and from looking at the FAQ in this section of the forum I've realised it's because my hard disk's transfer mode is set to PIO mode.
I'm running Windows XP and although I've got the primary IDE channel set to use "DMA if available" my HDD won't seem to run in this mode.
The disk in question is a Quantum Fireball Plus AS40.0 and according to my BIOS it is UDMA 5 standard. I'm running an old UDMA 4 drive as the slave device on the same channel, so I can't understand why the newer drive won't be recognised as UDMA.
I would be very grateful if anybody can help me with this issue. Thank you,
<b>08. Is it ok to have 2 IDE drives on one cable?</b>
Yes it is, but bear in mind that you are sharing the bandwidth of the cable & controller equally.
if you have two fast & modern IDE drives you may see better performance with the drives on different IDE channels. A common setup is:
Primary master: HDD #1
primary slave: optical drive
secondary master: HDD #2
secondary slave: another optical drive.
I don't know a hole h*ll of a lot about drives, but know if you have two HDD on the same cable, it will run at the slowest speed. Try the setup above.
I've got my drives set-up fine - I was just testing before.
The problem is that my UDMA/100 drive won't be recognised as UDMA/100 in Windows XP on my system. It will in aother donor system (my brother's XP set-up with similar specs, but different board).
I've got the Asus A7N266-E. It uses the nVidia nForce 420-D chipset. There are no specific IDE drivers (e.g. as the Via chipset drivers offer).
It's very wierd 'cos my old UDMA/66 drive is recognised as this standard but the newer drive is forced to use the defunct PIO mode of transfer. It's a killer, as you can probably imagine - especially on an 1800+.
48-bit LBA addressing means support for >137 GB hard disks without having to have an ATA/133 controller AND HD. I've heard the upcoming large 60GB per platter IDE HDs from WD and Seagate work at ATA/100 but with the help of this, your BIOS can recognize thie full capacity. I've also heard that you need the SP1 for WinXP to be properly setup...
I've also heard that you need the SP1 for WinXP to be properly setup...
Not in my experience. I've been running WinXP for 10 months without SP1, and it is stable. I have 18 of the pre-SP1 hotfixes applied, with the last one downloaded and installed in May. I can't think of a reason for installing SP1 at this point, because there isn't anything wrong. It's not broke, so why should I fix it?
IMHO, if you don't need the features that are supported in SP1, and already have drivers for any USB 2.0 devices, downloading SP1 is a just a waste of bandwidth. And you can get any patches for the OS you need at the <A HREF="http://v4.windowsupdate.microsoft.com/en/default.asp?co..." target="_new">Corporate Update</A> website.
Lol. what generation are we in now? Thanks for the sight, it looks very informative, plus a lot of reading. Off topic. Why do those sights have (click on) in them, then that one might have one or two more, and so on, then you have to put it all together and try to remember where you started;) Know what I mean? Thanks again, because you made me realize I should check out the video programs.
You didn't think I'd be that dumb (thinking XP needs SP1 to just work with HDs...)
Oh, no. Nothing of the sort, r2k. That would be crazy! EEK!
But you don't need the first Service Pack to use hard drives that are 137GB and larger. That's dependent on the BIOS version, chipset, and chipset drivers (which includes the IDE controller and drivers.)
Your options for using a drive that is larger than 137GB are:
1.) A BIOS, or a BIOS upgrade that allows support for 48-addressing.
2.) A controller card with an onboard BIOS that allows you to break the 137GB barrier.
3.) A new mainboard with native support for hard drives that are 137GB or larger.
Example. You purchase a 200GB Western Digital hard drive, and you are running WinXP without the service pack. You are already aware that your hardware is compliant, and you have installed the latest chipset drivers. As a result, there should be no difficulty using the space above 137GB. Both VIA and Intel have chipset drivers that support 48-bit addressing.
You can even do this with Win98SE if you use the manufacturer's disk overlay utility ... assuming your hardware supports the size of the drive with one of the parameters mentioned above.
My point, for clarification, is that SP1 really isn't needed for WinXP, period. If the OS is patched and up-to-date with the pre-SP1 hotfixes (and not even all of them ... most aren't needed) then SP1 is redundant for most installations.