Right IDE connection ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Agentur Showtime
  • Start date Start date
A

Agentur Showtime

Hello Group,

I have a ASUS A7V266-EX Motherboard. On the first
IDE Controller I have a Seagate ST 380021A (80GByte, Ultra-ATA/100 Master)
and
a Samsung SP161 4N (160GByte, Ultra-ATA/133,Slave) running.

On the Second my Pionier CD/DVD Drive and an NEC DVD Burner.

In the Bios I only can use PIO Mode 5 for the Harddisks. If i use PIO 6 the
system
fails to find the Harddisk. Does the Seagte Drive slows my Samsung Drive
down ?

I use the latest BIOS 1015 Beta 1 for the Board. Is this right or is a over
way around
to connect the drives to the BOARD ?

The CABLES are able to run in ATA 133 mode.

Thanks for your help.

Michael


\!/
@^@
------------------oOO-(_)-OOo-----------------------------------------------
 
Hello Group,

I have a ASUS A7V266-EX Motherboard. On the first
IDE Controller I have a Seagate ST 380021A (80GByte, Ultra-ATA/100 Master)
and
a Samsung SP161 4N (160GByte, Ultra-ATA/133,Slave) running.

On the Second my Pionier CD/DVD Drive and an NEC DVD Burner.

In the Bios I only can use PIO Mode 5 for the Harddisks. If i use PIO 6 the
system
fails to find the Harddisk. Does the Seagte Drive slows my Samsung Drive
down ?

I use the latest BIOS 1015 Beta 1 for the Board. Is this right or is a over
way around
to connect the drives to the BOARD ?

The CABLES are able to run in ATA 133 mode.

Thanks for your help.

Michael
Click to expand...

If this is WinXP you need SP1 installed to get UDMA 133 support.
Also it's best to split your Cdrom drives onto separate IDE ports if
you do a lot of,"On-the-fly" Cdrom disk to Cdrom disk copying.

HTH :)




--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
email shepATpartyheld.de
Free songs download,
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm
 
DaveW said:
Two IDE devices on the same cable both run at the speed of the slowest
device.
Click to expand...
This has not been true for at least five years.
Very early IDE implementations behaved this way, but modern chipsets
implement seperate speeds for the devices on the cable.
There is still a potential 'downside', since the way the IDE driver is
written, is basically 'single threaded', and if a process is talking to one
drive on the cable, and waiting for a data response, another device will
have to wait for the first transaction to complete. Some drivers will take
advantage of the ability of latter drives (IBM especially), to implement
disconnect/reconnect (the Promise cards/drivers do this), but few
motherboards yet do.
Unfortunately, there could be a number of answers to this. Some drives do
have 'oddities', that lead to this type of behaviour. Historically, Seagate
have often been reluctant to 'play ball' mixed on cables with some other
makes of drive. It'd be worth trying with the drives reversed on the cable
(so the Samsung becomes the master), and seeing if this has an effect. It is
also worth saying, that this behaviour has very little effect on speed,
since this is an 'interface' speed, not the actual speed of the drive. Even
the fastest drives in existence, on their very fastest tracks, do not exceed
the performance of an ATA100 interface.

Best Wishes
 
Shep© said:
If this is WinXP you need SP1 installed to get UDMA 133 support.
Also it's best to split your Cdrom drives onto separate IDE ports if
you do a lot of,"On-the-fly" Cdrom disk to Cdrom disk copying.

HTH :)
Click to expand...

But is it ok to slave the CD-Roms to the hard drives on two separate IDE
ports? ie... Master hard drive, Slave CD-Rom on IDE1 and Master hard drive
and Slave CD-RW on IDE2. I always heard that could "possibly" slow down the
hard drives.

Patty
 
But is it ok to slave the CD-Roms to the hard drives on two separate IDE
ports? ie... Master hard drive, Slave CD-Rom on IDE1 and Master hard drive
and Slave CD-RW on IDE2. I always heard that could "possibly" slow down the
hard drives.

Patty
Click to expand...

It's only System builders convention over the years that they place
CDRom drives on the same IDE port in most cases as this is the easiest
physical connection when setting up however for most people it's not
the,"Optimal" setting.
See the reply by the other guy as well.Very early systems did
have a limitation but this was lost years ago even on my old P133 with
Win95A.



If there is only 1 device on the chain then that device can read and
write at the same time and therefore it's performance is optimal for
that device.

If there are two devices on the same IDE port then each one can only
read or write at the same time.This is what causes the,"Wait States"
and data slow down.However.If only one of these two devices is
actually being accessed then as far as,"That" device is concerned the
other one does not exist and is ignored.

Having two devices of differing speeds on the same IDE chain
does,"NOT" slow the faster drive down to the slower speed
unless,"Both" drives are being accessed at the same time.
This is how all IDE ports have worked for years and for all intents
purposes is the standard.

So to conclude:
If you want to burn from a CD disk to a CD disk e.g,"On-the-Fly" it's
best to have the two Cdrom drives on separate IDE chains e.g as slaves
to a hard drive if you only have two IDE ports on the mother board.

With this setup you will get the full speed burn.If you are
making,"Compilation" CDR/W image then make sure the image is on the
drive the CDR/W disk is,"Not" and that way you will also get a full
speed burn.
I have my Standard Cdrom drive as a slave to my main system drive and
my CDR/W drive as a slave to my 2nd hard drive.I never do images or
have my burners image cache on the same drive I'm going to burn from.
I have tested all hardware configurations and if it's done wrong my
24X will be less than 12X in reality.

HTH :)




--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
email shepATpartyheld.de
Free songs download,
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm
 
Back
Top