I have an old PII 400 with an SE400BX mobo. 3 hard drives, all SCSI.
I need to add a drive. SCSI is too expensive, not to mention, not sure how easy it would be to rejigger the cable to handle a 4th drive. So, I need to add an ATA 100 drive.
1. Anyone recall the BIOS restrictions on drive capacity imposed by the SE440BX?
2. If I buy a 40GB or an 80GB drive, will I be able to ise at least the first 32GB?
3. Do the capacity restrictions apply to individual partititions, or the drive as a whole?
4. Currently, I have a CD-RW on one of the IDE connectors (I guess the master), and a ZIP on the other. What would be the best config: ATA drive on master, with CD-RW and ZIP on slave?
5. Yes, I know the ATA 100 would only run as ATA 33, but I have no available slots for an ATA controller.
6. Any recommendations for drive bay coolers? -- http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.
What version of Windows is running on the old beast? The version has a lot to do with partition sizes.
The SE440-BX2 is right on the cusp of BIOS changes to handle larger IDE hard drives.
Preferably, put an IDE drive alone on the primary IDE channel. By the way, the IDE drive will become the boot drive. The SE440-BX2 BIOS is not smart enough to boot from a SCSI when an IDE is present.
A 4th SCSI drive is no big deal. The last drive on the cable gets SCSI bus termination. The other drives do not... Ben Myers
On Sun, 20 May 2007 08:17:01 -0400, "Howard Kaikow" <kai...@standards.com> wrote:
>I have an old PII 400 with an SE400BX mobo. >3 hard drives, all SCSI.
>I need to add a drive. SCSI is too expensive, not to mention, not sure how >easy it would be to rejigger the cable to handle a 4th drive. >So, I need to add an ATA 100 drive.
>1. Anyone recall the BIOS restrictions on drive capacity imposed by the >SE440BX?
>2. If I buy a 40GB or an 80GB drive, will I be able to ise at least the >first 32GB?
>3. Do the capacity restrictions apply to individual partititions, or the >drive as a whole?
>4. Currently, I have a CD-RW on one of the IDE connectors (I guess the >master), and a ZIP on the other. >What would be the best config: ATA drive on master, with CD-RW and ZIP on >slave?
>5. Yes, I know the ATA 100 would only run as ATA 33, but I have no available >slots for an ATA controller.
> What version of Windows is running on the old beast? The version has a lot to > do with partition sizes.
Windows 2000.
> The SE440-BX2 is right on the cusp of BIOS changes to handle larger IDE hard > drives.
I asked about the SE440BX, not the BX 2.
> Preferably, put an IDE drive alone on the primary IDE channel. By the way, the > IDE drive will become the boot drive. The SE440-BX2 BIOS is not smart enough > to boot from a SCSI when an IDE is present.
I thought that the BIOS had a menu to determine the order in which the drives are used for booting. If booting from the IDE, than ALL drive letters will change. There are OS on C and three other partitions.
> A 4th SCSI drive is no big deal. The last drive on the cable gets SCSI bus > termination. The other drives do not...
There are two issues with adding a 4th SCSI drive.
1. Not sure that the cabling can be arranged accommodate the drive. I've got go inside, pull the tape drive, to see whether this is feasible.
On Mon, 21 May 2007 16:01:50 -0400, "Howard Kaikow" <kai...@standards.com> wrote:
>"Ben Myers" <ben_myers_spam_me_...@charter.net> wrote in message >news:lr8253h5mddn4qodav9rn86731ihlnmult@4ax.com... >> What version of Windows is running on the old beast? The version has a >lot to >> do with partition sizes.
>Windows 2000.
Windows 2000 will not handle the megapartitons supported by XP. I suspect that 132GB is the limit. You might be able to confirm that somehow with some research on your own. I have a 44GB SCSI drive with a single partition running perfectly on a Windows 2000 system here.
>> The SE440-BX2 is right on the cusp of BIOS changes to handle larger IDE >hard >> drives.
>I asked about the SE440BX, not the BX 2.
And the SE440BX might well be just before the cusp. I am uncertain if it supports a drive larger than 32GB, one of the several fabled BIOS limits programmed by short-sighted BIOS programmers.
>> Preferably, put an IDE drive alone on the primary IDE channel. By the >way, the >> IDE drive will become the boot drive. The SE440-BX2 BIOS is not smart >enough >> to boot from a SCSI when an IDE is present.
>I thought that the BIOS had a menu to determine the order in which the >drives are used for booting.
Well, no. It does not. Which is exactly why I stated what I did. The SE440-BX BIOS is not smart enough to boot from a SCSI when an IDE is present either. The SE440-BX BIOS does not have a menu to determine the order in which the drives are used for booting, taking SCSI drives into account. In general, only motherboards with on-board SCSI are capable of doing so. Intel boards generally do not behave this way. You can check this yourself by examinig the BIOS setup options for the board.
>If booting from the IDE, than ALL drive letters will change. There are OS on >C and three other partitions.
I do not know how to solve that problem. But you are right. It is a problem.
>> A 4th SCSI drive is no big deal. The last drive on the cable gets SCSI >bus >> termination. The other drives do not...
>There are two issues with adding a 4th SCSI drive.
>1. Not sure that the cabling can be arranged accommodate the drive. I've got >go inside, pull the tape drive, >to see whether this is feasible.
>2. Cost.
So you stated the first time. But you are going to pay one way or another. Either you get another SCSI drive or replace one of the ones you already have with a larger drive or you get a SCSI cable with more connectors or you spend a lot of time reloading Win 2000 on an IDE drive then rejiggering all your programs and data. You pays your money and you makes your choice... Ben
> Windows 2000 will not handle the megapartitons supported by XP. I suspect that > 132GB is the limit. You might be able to confirm that somehow with some > research on your own. I have a 44GB SCSI drive with a single partition running > perfectly on a Windows 2000 system here.
AFAIK, the mobo BIOS limit does not affect SCSI, that is handled by te SCSI card.
> Well, no. It does not. Which is exactly why I stated what I did. The > SE440-BX BIOS is not smart enough to boot from a SCSI when an IDE is present > either. The SE440-BX BIOS does not have a menu to determine the order in which > the drives are used for booting, taking SCSI drives into account. In general, > only motherboards with on-board SCSI are capable of doing so. Intel boards > generally do not behave this way. You can check this yourself by examinig the > BIOS setup options for the board.
The SE440BX does have a "Hard Drive Submenu" that "Specifies the boot sequence for the hard drives attached to the computer".
You're ahead of the game. Let me know if you are short on internal SCSI cable connections, SCSI terminators and the like. We've got'em here, both narrow and wide... Ben
On Fri, 25 May 2007 11:42:45 -0400, "Howard Kaikow" <kai...@standards.com> wrote:
> You're ahead of the game. Let me know if you are short on internal SCSI cable > connections, SCSI terminators and the like. We've got'em here, both narrow and > wide... Ben
|
