I need to upgrade an Abit KT7 hard disk.

  • Thread starter Thread starter mydejamail
  • Start date Start date
M

mydejamail

I need to upgrade an Abit KT7 hard disk, but I know that some of the
older motherboards have problems with large hard disks. The current
disk in it is 30G IBM hard disk, but I want to go for todays 320G.

If the BIOS isn't compatible with hard disks of this size, will Windows
XP be able to work around it?

I also wonder whether an external USB disk of that size will be alright
with Windows, so that I can still use the current one for programs and
use the external disk for data.
 
In said:
I need to upgrade an Abit KT7 hard disk, but I know that some of the
older motherboards have problems with large hard disks. The current
disk in it is 30G IBM hard disk, but I want to go for todays 320G.
Click to expand...
If the BIOS isn't compatible with hard disks of this size, will Windows
XP be able to work around it?
No.

I also wonder whether an external USB disk of that size will be alright
with Windows, so that I can still use the current one for programs and
use the external disk for data.
Click to expand...

Depends. External USB goes through the SCSI driver and will work.
External SATA depends on the SATA controller and BIOS. Should
work however.

Arno
 
I need to upgrade an Abit KT7 hard disk, but I know that some of the
older motherboards have problems with large hard disks. The current
disk in it is 30G IBM hard disk, but I want to go for todays 320G.

If the BIOS isn't compatible with hard disks of this size, will Windows
XP be able to work around it?

I also wonder whether an external USB disk of that size will be alright
with Windows, so that I can still use the current one for programs and
use the external disk for data.
Click to expand...
buy a PCI controller card like the one linked below. Standard IDE
versions are also available.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16815102102

-Dylan C
 
You can get an updated BIOS from here:

XP will be fine with new drive, though 48-bit LBA disks need to be enabled in the registry.
Click to expand...

Nope, that's 2K. XP needs SP1 or later.
 
(e-mail address removed) wrote:

| I need to upgrade an Abit KT7 hard disk, but I know that some
| of the older motherboards have problems with large hard disks.
| The current disk in it is 30G IBM hard disk, but I want to go for
| todays 320G.
|
| If the BIOS isn't compatible with hard disks of this size, will
| Windows XP be able to work around it?
|
| I also wonder whether an external USB disk of that size will be
| alright with Windows, so that I can still use the current one for
| programs and use the external disk for data.
|

There's no need for an external USB disk or an add-on PCI card.

You need two things:
.. 48-bit LBA compatible BIOS
.. 48-bit LBA compatible OS/Drivers

BIOS :
The two most recent versions of the Abit BIOS support 48-bit LBA for disks
larger than 137GB (decimal) on the IDE1/IDE2 channels.

OS/Drivers :
Windows 2000 (SP3 or later) and Windows XP (SP1 or later) provide 48-bit LBA
support. There has been recent discussion on the Abit group (cross-posted
to the Windows 98 storage group), where the KT7_A9 BIOS and most recent VIA
IDE Miniport driver was used with a large disk under Windows 98SE.

If you have the KT7-RAID or KT7A-RAID board, you'll need a modded BIOS to
support large disks on the Highpoint controller (IDE3/IDE4).

I have modified the latest versions of the KT7 BIOS' to support 48-bit LBA
on the Highpoint controller. I removed the version 1.11.0402 Highpoint BIOS
and substituted the version 2.351 Highpoint BIOS. I made no other changes.

You can pick up my modded BIOS', as well as a link to the version 2.351
Highpoint drivers, at my personal web space :
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/jefn/kt7.html

Jef
 
No.
Click to expand...

Wrong.
The bios can be disabled to let the drive pass if the bios is limited to less than 137GB.
If limited to 137GB it is not a problem for the BIOS, it will just recognize 137GB.
The problem with BIOS is limited to DOS and drive partitioning from within Windows
(INT13) of which the latter may well be circumvented by disabling the BIOS and let
the driver supply 48-bit INT13.
Depends. External USB goes through the SCSI driver and will work.
Click to expand...

So, what depends then.
External SATA depends on the SATA controller
Click to expand...
and BIOS.
Click to expand...

Wrong again. It depends on the Windows SATA driver.
Should work however.
Click to expand...

So much for that "will Windows XP be able to work around it? No." then.
 
MalcolmO said:
http://www.48bitlba.com/win2Khb.htm suggests that Rod has it right.
Click to expand...

Depends on how you read his original.
It was true for the original edition of XP so it would have been clearer
if he had said "Nope, that's 2K. XP SP1 or later doesn't need it".

If you don't want the hassle to get it working with the original edition.
SP3, according to the same site.
Click to expand...

Yes, so says Microsoft. My bad (read Q305098 too hastely) .
 
Depends on how you read his original.
Nope.

It was true for the original edition of XP
Nope.

so it would have been clearer if he had said
"Nope, that's 2K. XP SP1 or later doesn't need it".
Click to expand...

That would have been wrong. So I didnt say that.
If you don't want the hassle to get it working with the original edition.
Click to expand...

Go tell MS who knows better.
Yes, so says Microsoft. My bad (read Q305098 too hastely) .
Click to expand...

Pity it doesnt say what you claim about the original XP either.
 
Rod Speed said:
Yup.
Click to expand...
Nope.
Click to expand...

Yup, Q303013.

Just as (half) true as your "Nope, that's 2K", with there being a 'proviso'.
That would have been wrong. So I didnt say that.
Click to expand...

So was
"Nope, that's 2K" without mentioning the "proviso", which you have no problem with.
Go tell MS who knows better.
Click to expand...

No need: Q303013. Last time I looked it came from MS themselves.
Pity it doesnt say what you claim about the original XP either.
Click to expand...

Yes, isn't that odd eh, Roddles, a 2K document not detailing the
problem that it doesn't know about in XP. Long night, Roddles?
 
Folkert Rienstra said:
Nope.
Click to expand...
Yup, Q303013.
Click to expand...

Pity that clearly says

This article describes the Microsoft Windows XP Service
Pack 1 (SP1) 48-bit Logical Block Addressing (LBA) support

Try again, ****wit.

None of the rest of your desperate attempts to bullshit your
way out of your predicament worth bothering with, as always.
 
Folkert Rienstra said:
Nope.
Click to expand...
Yup, Q303013.
Click to expand...

Pity that clearly says

This article describes the Microsoft Windows XP Service
Pack 1 (SP1) 48-bit Logical Block Addressing (LBA) support

Note Windows XP does not support 48-bit LBA support unless
you are running Windows XP SP1. If you want to use 48-bit LBA
support, you must apply Windows XP SP1 or later.

Try again, ****wit.

None of the rest of your desperate attempts to bullshit your
way out of your predicament worth bothering with, as always.
 
Rod Speed said:
Pity that clearly says

This article describes the Microsoft Windows XP Service
Pack 1 (SP1) 48-bit Logical Block Addressing (LBA) support

Note Windows XP does not support 48-bit LBA support unless
you are running Windows XP SP1. If you want to use 48-bit LBA
support, you must apply Windows XP SP1 or later.
Click to expand...
Try again, ****wit.
Click to expand...

Nice posturing, Roddles.
You must be getting a bit desperate if you need two attempts to discredit me.

Unfortunately those with more than your 2 braincells can read beyond that and see
how the article goes on describing editing the registry to enable 48-bit support
even though it also says that SP1 ignores these settings. So obviously this is for
original XP. Unfortunately it seems to say that if you finally have 48-bit support
working and actually address space above 137GB it will **** up. I say "seems" as it
may well be the same problem that even some SP1 deliveries still have and is warned
for, see below.
You may actually be okay if you don't do "entering standby or hibernation or
writing a memory dump".
They just don't tell, all that they say is that "Data corruption *may* occur".

The article also speaks of checking for the correct version of ATAPI.SYS so
anyone with more than your 2 braincells can work out that that is where the
working 48-bit support is. And waddayaknow, that is available as a hotfix.
 
the article goes on describing editing the registry to enable 48-bit
support even though it also says that SP1 ignores these settings.
So obviously this is for original XP. Unfortunately it seems to say
that if you finally have 48-bit support working and actually address
space above 137GB it will **** up. I say "seems" as it may well be
the same problem that even some SP1 deliveries still have and is
warned for, see below.
Click to expand...

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
You may actually be okay if you don't do "entering
standby or hibernation or writing a memory dump".
They just don't tell, all that they say is that "Data corruption
*may* occur".
Click to expand...

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
The article also speaks of checking for the correct version
of ATAPI.SYS so anyone with more than your 2 braincells
can work out that that is where the working 48-bit support
is. And waddayaknow, that is available as a hotfix.
Click to expand...

ALL SPs include earlier hotfixes, ****wit.

Says nothing useful what so ever about your stupid pig ignorant
claim that the original XP has 48 bit LBA support JUST by enabling
it in the registry, as you originally pig ignorantly claimed.
 
Back
Top