440 chipset and hard drive limitation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mark M
  • Start date Start date
'wrote in' what?
I don't think that is true unless you call embedded code in chips
"software".
Click to expand...

There is no embedded code in ATA (host)controllers.
And it is probably the opposite for that sentence to make sense.
Folkie, please take this the right way ... I have no problem if you
wish to beat your old drum and shout out about what you (rather
incorrectly) think is the poor way I approach these things.
Maybe I am insanely stupid and inept. But maybe not.

Whatever I am, I do the best I can. And your repeated inaccurate
observations on my approach will not somehow magically persuade me
otherwise.

Perhaps I should make it my quest to offer endless pedantry in
comments to your postings? Heh!
Click to expand...

Hey, if that keeps you off the street ....
The risk is that you prove yourself to be "insanely stupid and inept".
That is a good guess if you misinterpreted what I wrote. I wrote that
I got this info from Gigabyte Tech Support and I mean from Taiwan.
So?

Even if you missed that you could have seen the web page I referred
to and noticed that the Gigabyte company was of the opinion that
version F2 of the BIOS ugrade overcame the 75 GB limit.
So?


I don't know how I can make this any clearer.
Click to expand...

Clear enough for me. Doesn't change a word of what I said.
Just pushing a few chips around in a predetermined rectangle
in a CAD program to make the design look different from
someone elses and then ordering some sweatshop to make it and
plonk a BIOS on it directly from AWARD with their name
in it, doesn't make them more than just a marketing operation.
 
Folkert Rienstra said:
Clear enough for me. Doesn't change a word of what I said.
Just pushing a few chips around in a predetermined rectangle
in a CAD program to make the design look different from
someone elses and then ordering some sweatshop to make it and
plonk a BIOS on it directly from AWARD with their name
in it, doesn't make them more than just a marketing operation.
Click to expand...


So can you explain why Gigabyte are saying there in a 75 GB limit
on this board which their BIOS upgrade overcomes?
 
Mark M said:
So can you explain why Gigabyte are saying there in a 75 GB limit
on this board which their BIOS upgrade overcomes?
Click to expand...

Because some clown sent them the revised bios saying that it
resolved the 75GB limitation (or something similar obscure).
 
Folkert Rienstra said:
Because some clown sent them the revised bios saying that it
resolved the 75GB limitation (or something similar obscure).
Click to expand...


Well Folkert you wont believe this but the last email I got from
Gigabyte tech support said this:

<QUOTE>
I am correct i have one of these boards myself.

Question :
I think you are wrong when you say "im afraid the 440 chipset only
allows up to 75GB".
<UNQUOTE>

Maybe this belief pervades the whole of the Gigabyte organization?
Maybe, just maybe, they are correct.

But I am left wondering what the hell they are talking about and
why they say there is a 75 GB limit. Any ideas what they could be
referring to (bearng in mind that a BIOS flash is said to fix it)?

Surely it could not be that they are unable to write "137 GB" or
"128 GB" and instead they wrote 75 GB by mistake?
 
But I am left wondering what the hell they are talking about and
why they say there is a 75 GB limit. Any ideas what they could be
referring to (bearng in mind that a BIOS flash is said to fix it)?

Surely it could not be that they are unable to write "137 GB" or
"128 GB" and instead they wrote 75 GB by mistake?
Click to expand...

I've been following this thread and I don't know what's going on at
Gigabyte but either a) they really screwed up when they wrote the bios or
b) the tech response you received is wrong.

I've got a Tyan Tiger 100 S1832DL motherboard, thats a 440BX Dual. It has
the ATA drive size limit you would expect at 128 / 137 GB, depending on
your method of measuring HD size. It does NOT have a limit at 75GB. I've
verified this by installing 160GB drives on the board controller and
comming up against the 128 / 137 limit.

From the Maxtor site:
http://tinyurl.com/3395l

So I don't know about any BX boards with a 75GB limit, but I can say for
certain my BX board doesn't.
 
Mark M said:
Well Folkert you wont believe this but the last email I got from
Gigabyte tech support said this:

<QUOTE>
I am correct i have one of these boards myself.
Click to expand...

Aha, so Gigabyte tech support is a one person operation.
And now that person is covering for himself.
Question :
I think you are wrong when you say "im afraid the 440 chipset only
allows up to 75GB".
<UNQUOTE>

Maybe this belief pervades the whole of the Gigabyte organization?
Maybe, just maybe, they are correct.
Click to expand...

We already established that they weren't. It's not the chipset.
But I am left wondering what the hell they are talking about and
why they say there is a 75 GB limit. Any ideas what they could be
referring to (bearing in mind that a BIOS flash is said to fix it)?
Click to expand...

Read my response to Roger.
 
-- snip --

Folkert Rienstra said:
We already established that they weren't. It's not the
chipset.


Read my response to Roger.
Click to expand...

I must confess I don't really understand the details of what you
have written to him. To take a guess maybe "P-CHS" means "physical
CHS" and you are referring to an emulation of the physcial CHS.

Anyway, it seems it may lie deep in the BIOS so I will just accept
that the BIOS flash fixes it. I can't try the BIOS flash for a
while so I will have to wait to see if it really does do the trick.
 
Mark M said:
-- snip --



I must confess I don't really understand the details of what you
have written to him. To take a guess maybe "P-CHS" means "physical
CHS" and you are referring to an emulation of the physcial CHS.
Click to expand...

L-CHS is the CHS as used by the software interface (int13 etc.)
P-CHS is a translated CHS as used by the harddrive interface.

For some odd reason software makers and hardware makers went a dif-
ferent route expanding the old 20-bit (528MB) CHS (1024 16 63) to 24-
bit (8GB) CHS. L-CHS expanded the Heads register with 4 bits (1024 256
63) and P-CHS expanded the Cylinder register with 6 bits (65536 16 63).
Although 2 bits more P-CHS is still limited to C*H*S= 8GB.
 
Folkert Rienstra said:
Aha, so Gigabyte tech support is a one person operation.
And now that person is covering for himself.


We already established that they weren't. It's not the chipset.


Read my response to Roger.
Click to expand...
Both Folkert, and I think that this problem, is probably down to a numeric
'translation' limit inside the BIOS. There is definately no 'chipset' limit
at this point (given that a BIOS change fixes it, and thousands of other
boards with the same chipset do not have a problem). Basically, there are a
number of different 'values' used inside the IDE code. There are the
'numbers' used to refer to cylinders, heads etc., that are translated inside
the drive to the 'real' geometry of the drive, and are also translated from
'LBA' values inside the BIOS. Now (for instance, not a real example...),
suppose you elected to take the values at one point in the BIOS, and do the
arithmetic using BCD, and use a register at some point in the maths, that
limited the maximum value in the 'maths' to 99999999. Since you are dealing
with 'sector counts', this would give a drive size 'limit' of 50GB. This
would be entirely a 'BIOS' problem (trying to blame it on the chipset, would
just be down to wanting to find somebody else to blame for the programmers
error). 75G, is a very 'odd' number in these terms, since generally all the
arithmetic is binary (with some silly 'oddities' in the actual numbers
allowed, which are the result of 'history' in the interface, and the upgrade
methods chosen at times). It sounds as though perhaps one part of the
conversion code, is thorougly 'screwed'...

Best Wishes
 
Folkert Rienstra said:
L-CHS is the CHS as used by the software interface (int13 etc.)
P-CHS is a translated CHS as used by the harddrive interface.

For some odd reason software makers and hardware makers went a dif-
ferent route expanding the old 20-bit (528MB) CHS (1024 16 63) to 24-
bit (8GB) CHS. L-CHS expanded the *Heads* register with 4 bits (1024 256
63) and P-CHS expanded the *Cylinder* register with 6 bits (65536 16 63).
Although 2 bits more P-CHS is still limited to C*H*S= 8GB.
Click to expand...

Btw: doing what trick?
You "have not come across a 75 GB limit" so what do you think you'll notice?
 
Folkert Rienstra said:
Btw: doing what trick?
You "have not come across a 75 GB limit" so what do you think
you'll notice?
Click to expand...



I hope that flashing this mobo's BIOS will allow it to see the
space about 75 GB on the drive.

After I flashed it I still can't see all of a 160 GB drive.

Maybe it has a 128/137 GB limit now.
 
Mark M said:
I hope that flashing this mobo's BIOS will allow it to see the
space about 75 GB on the drive.

After I flashed it I still can't see all of a 160 GB drive.

Maybe it has a 128/137 GB limit now.
Click to expand...

You have an ancient mainboard. Why do you expect more than 135GB?

Maybe you should follow all the other threads about LBA-48 and BIOS support.
 
Eric Gisin said:
You have an ancient mainboard. Why do you expect more than
135GB?

Maybe you should follow all the other threads about LBA-48 and
BIOS support.
Click to expand...


You are right. The mobo is far too old. I think it may destined
for the trash sometime soon.

Although it has no cash value, I had originally wanted to use the
mobo in a machine to get on the net when my main machine was down.
 
Back
Top