Asus K7M 48 bit LBA support for >128Gb HDDs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Arhi
  • Start date Start date
A

Arhi

Hi,

Has anybody managed to enable 48 bit LBA support on a K7M? I just got
a 200Gb WD2000JB hard drive and my Windows XP SP1 only recognizes it
as 128Gb without the 48 bit LBA support. I couldn't find any info on
BIOS upgrades for K7M that would add 48 LBA support. Is none
available? Is there then no way to use a hard drive larger than 128Gb
with K7M?

Please share if you had a similar experience.

Thank you,
-a
 
Hi,

Has anybody managed to enable 48 bit LBA support on a K7M? I just got
a 200Gb WD2000JB hard drive and my Windows XP SP1 only recognizes it
as 128Gb without the 48 bit LBA support. I couldn't find any info on
BIOS upgrades for K7M that would add 48 LBA support. Is none
available? Is there then no way to use a hard drive larger than 128Gb
with K7M?

Please share if you had a similar experience.

Thank you,
-a
Click to expand...

http://www.asuscom.de/support/FAQ/faq076_32gb_ide_hdd.htm

"P3B-1394/P2..-/ME..-/K7..-/P5..- Serien Aktuelle Beta
bis einschl. 128 GB"

so 128GB is the limit. If it said "Uber", it would be a different
story. Perhaps a PCI ATA133 disk controller board, used to
control the disk drives, instead of the Southbridge, would
remedy this problem.

HTH,
Paul
 
Paul said:
Perhaps a PCI ATA133 disk controller board, used to
control the disk drives, instead of the Southbridge, would
remedy this problem.
Click to expand...

Not only perhaps, but quite certainly. It needn't be ATA133 BTW, a
Promise Ultra100 TX2 should also do, provided one is using a recent BIOS
(like 2.20 build 15) and current drivers (like 2.00 build 42). We're
using exactly that combo with a Samsung SP1604N on an MSI K7 Master
here, works just fine.

Stephan
 
Same problem with my p4p800dlx, it didn't recognise my new 160 gig.
The drive was set up as a slave so when XP was up and running I used
Partition Magic 8 to partition the new drive. I now have the full
capacity divided in 3 partitions.

Locust
 
end said:
Same problem with my p4p800dlx, it didn't recognise my new 160 gig.
Click to expand...

This was certainly *not* the same problem, since a P4P800, as opposed to
the old K7M, should support 48 bit LBA and thus recognize the full
capacity of a 160 gig drive just fine. (And even if it didn't, the drive
would still be visible, only with just 128 GiB accessible.)

Stephan
 
Are you saying that as long as I use a program like Partition Magic to
slice the hard drive into partitions that are smaller than 128Gb, it
will work fine? I don't mind doing that.

Thank you.

-a
 
The interesting thing is that I am actually using the hard drive with
a Highpoint Rocket 133 PCI IDE controller. The datasheet for the
controller claims support for capacities exceeding 137Gb.
http://www.highpoint-tech.com/datasheets/R133_R133s_R133SB.pdf
However, as I mentioned before, the 200Gb drive is recognized as
128Gb.

What is not clear to me is whether it is a requirement that the
motherboard BIOS support 48 bit LBA or you can make it work with a
proper PCI IDE controller?

Thank you,
-a
 
Arhi said:
Hi,

Has anybody managed to enable 48 bit LBA support on a K7M? I just got
a 200Gb WD2000JB hard drive and my Windows XP SP1 only recognizes it
as 128Gb without the 48 bit LBA support. I couldn't find any info on
BIOS upgrades for K7M that would add 48 LBA support. Is none
available? Is there then no way to use a hard drive larger than 128Gb
with K7M?
Click to expand...



Reg48bitLBA for Windows XP SP1 and Windows 2000 SP3
From here:
http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/utils.html

This makes the necessary registry changes. Have your hard drive connected to
the HighPoint controller at this time. After, check for the correct version
of atapi.sys
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013
 
S.Heenan said:
Reg48bitLBA for Windows XP SP1 and Windows 2000 SP3
From here:
http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/utils.html

This makes the necessary registry changes. Have your hard drive connected to
the HighPoint controller at this time. After, check for the correct version
of atapi.sys
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;303013
Click to expand...

I have run the Reg48bitLBA utility. The EnableBigLba registry key is
now set to 1. I have also upgraded Atapi.sys to version 5.1.2600.1135
as per the MS KB article. My problem remains -- Windows XP SP1
recognizes the drive as 128Gb only even if it's connected by means of
a Highpoint Rocket 133 PCI IDE controller.

I guess I am still looking for an authoritative answer to the question
as to whether a system whose BIOS doesn't support 48 bit LBA can
support drives > 137Gb when a controller that supports > 137Gb drives
is used? From my personal experience, the answer seems to be No. This
would make sense since it is the system routines in the BIOS that have
to be aware of 48 bit addressing. However, there seems to be
conflicting information out there. For example, this article on
Western Digital's site:
http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=533&p_created=1031763968
states that using a 48 bit addressing aware add-on IDE controller
should be sufficient and they recommend Promise controllers:
"Another possibility is the use of an add-on EIDE controller that
supports 48-bit addressing. "
However, another WD article:
http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc...p?p_faqid=928&&p_sid=UI5Hjc9h&p_lva=533&p_li=
says:
"The system must have a 48-bit LBA-compatible Basic Input/Output
System (BIOS) installed. This includes EIDE controller card BIOSs."

So, which is true?

Somebody please shed some light on this.

-a
 
Arhi said:
I have run the Reg48bitLBA utility. The EnableBigLba registry key is
now set to 1. I have also upgraded Atapi.sys to version 5.1.2600.1135
as per the MS KB article. My problem remains -- Windows XP SP1
recognizes the drive as 128Gb only even if it's connected by means of
a Highpoint Rocket 133 PCI IDE controller.

I guess I am still looking for an authoritative answer to the question
as to whether a system whose BIOS doesn't support 48 bit LBA can
support drives > 137Gb when a controller that supports > 137Gb drives
is used? From my personal experience, the answer seems to be No. This
would make sense since it is the system routines in the BIOS that have
to be aware of 48 bit addressing. However, there seems to be
conflicting information out there. For example, this article on
Western Digital's site:
http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=533&p_created=1031763968
states that using a 48 bit addressing aware add-on IDE controller
should be sufficient and they recommend Promise controllers:
"Another possibility is the use of an add-on EIDE controller that
supports 48-bit addressing. "
However, another WD article:
http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc...p?p_faqid=928&&p_sid=UI5Hjc9h&p_lva=533&p_li=
says:
"The system must have a 48-bit LBA-compatible Basic Input/Output
System (BIOS) installed. This includes EIDE controller card BIOSs."

So, which is true?

Somebody please shed some light on this.
Click to expand...


Odd. Download and install the newest BIOS for the Rocket133 and the Load
Utility from here:
http://www.highpoint-tech.com/USA/bios.htm

Windows XP drivers are also included in the v1.22 package.

Part of the reason ATA-100 controllers exist is to allow the use of larger
drives on older motherboards. The limitation of the motherboard BIOS is
negated.
 
Arhi said:
I have run the Reg48bitLBA utility. The EnableBigLba registry key is
now set to 1. I have also upgraded Atapi.sys to version 5.1.2600.1135
as per the MS KB article. My problem remains -- Windows XP SP1
recognizes the drive as 128Gb only even if it's connected by means of
a Highpoint Rocket 133 PCI IDE controller.
Click to expand...

I have used that card with 200 and 250 GB drives with W2K SP4,
but unfortunately not with XP.
I guess I am still looking for an authoritative answer to the question
as to whether a system whose BIOS doesn't support 48 bit LBA can
support drives > 137Gb when a controller that supports > 137Gb drives
is used?
Click to expand...

Yes those controllers can. They have their own BIOS on them
for their own ports. In otherwords, the limitations of the
motherboard's BIOS only affects the ports on the motherboard.
From my personal experience, the answer seems to be No. This
would make sense since it is the system routines in the BIOS that have
to be aware of 48 bit addressing.
Click to expand...

No. Again, the limitations of the motherboard's BIOS only
affects the ports on the motherboard. It is the BIOS
on the card that determines what drives that card supports.

If you used a card that supported 48 bit LBA but could not
see, for example, all of a 250 GB drive that was attached
to that card, then that indicates a configuration error on
your part. You might not have successfully enabled 48 bit LBA
support in Windows, for example.

You mention updating Atapi.sys, but you don't say whether
the HighPoint driver was installed.

However, there seems to be
conflicting information out there. For example, this article on
Western Digital's site:
http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=533&p_created=1031763968
states that using a 48 bit addressing aware add-on IDE controller
should be sufficient and they recommend Promise controllers:
"Another possibility is the use of an add-on EIDE controller that
supports 48-bit addressing. "
However, another WD article:
http://wdc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wdc...p?p_faqid=928&&p_sid=UI5Hjc9h&p_lva=533&p_li=
says:
"The system must have a 48-bit LBA-compatible Basic Input/Output
System (BIOS) installed. This includes EIDE controller card BIOSs."

So, which is true?
Click to expand...

Both. It all makes sense once you recognize that the ports on
those PCI-IDE cards are controlled by a BIOS on that card and
not by the BIOS on the motherboard.
Somebody please shed some light on this.
Click to expand...

At my age, the only thing I shed is hair.
 
Rob Stow said:
I have used that card with 200 and 250 GB drives with W2K SP4,
but unfortunately not with XP.


Yes those controllers can. They have their own BIOS on them
for their own ports. In otherwords, the limitations of the
motherboard's BIOS only affects the ports on the motherboard.


No. Again, the limitations of the motherboard's BIOS only
affects the ports on the motherboard. It is the BIOS
on the card that determines what drives that card supports.

If you used a card that supported 48 bit LBA but could not
see, for example, all of a 250 GB drive that was attached
to that card, then that indicates a configuration error on
your part. You might not have successfully enabled 48 bit LBA
support in Windows, for example.

You mention updating Atapi.sys, but you don't say whether
the HighPoint driver was installed.



Both. It all makes sense once you recognize that the ports on
those PCI-IDE cards are controlled by a BIOS on that card and
not by the BIOS on the motherboard.


At my age, the only thing I shed is hair.
Click to expand...

Rob,
Thank you for shedding more than hair ;)

I _did_ install the XP drivers from the floppy disk that came with the
card. The only thing I can think of at this point is to try to upgrade
the driver and the card BIOS.

-a
 
S.Heenan said:
Odd. Download and install the newest BIOS for the Rocket133 and the Load
Utility from here:
http://www.highpoint-tech.com/USA/bios.htm

Windows XP drivers are also included in the v1.22 package.

Part of the reason ATA-100 controllers exist is to allow the use of larger
drives on older motherboards. The limitation of the motherboard BIOS is
negated.
Click to expand...

Will do. Thanks for the tip. If that fails I can't think of anything
else I could do to get it all to work.

-a
 
S.Heenan said:
Odd. Download and install the newest BIOS for the Rocket133 and the Load
Utility from here:
http://www.highpoint-tech.com/USA/bios.htm

Windows XP drivers are also included in the v1.22 package.

Part of the reason ATA-100 controllers exist is to allow the use of larger
drives on older motherboards. The limitation of the motherboard BIOS is
negated.
Click to expand...

Gosh, I finally have some progress to report. Turns out it was drivers
and firmware indeed. I somehow lucked out to buy a controller card
that had 1.0 (Nov 2002) drivers included with it while the current
version is 1.22. I had to flash the card BIOS. I then had to resort to
some trickery to upgrade the driver. The problem was that even though
I obtained the new drivers, they still report their version as 1.0.0.0
-- same as the original driver. Because of that to my puzzlement XP
didn't want to upgrade the driver. After scratching my head for a
while, I solved that by removing the existing driver and installing
the new one. My system finally recognizes the 200 gig drive as such.

Overall, it's been a VERY frustrating experience with the Highpoint
Rocket 133 controller. Got old drivers with the card, upgrade was a
serious hurdle, the original driver didn't support 48 bit LBA
correctly (driver release notes mention bugs in 48 bit LBA support)
despite the claim. I hope now that I have gone though all this it will
at least work fine and not mess up my data.

Major thanks to everyone who helped me out with info here!

-a
 
Back
Top