If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"kony" said in :
Ummmm, that had nothing to do with the 2nd device, the 440BX chipset only supports up to ATA33, there is no possible way for any device in any possible configuration to run any faster than ATA33 from it's onboard controller. And hard drives started at UDMA-33, huh? Forgot about the older PIO modes? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 05:39:04 -0600, "*Vanguard*"
wrote: "kony" said in : Ummmm, that had nothing to do with the 2nd device, the 440BX chipset only supports up to ATA33, there is no possible way for any device in any possible configuration to run any faster than ATA33 from it's onboard controller. And hard drives started at UDMA-33, huh? Forgot about the older PIO modes? Forget? No, I meant nothing more than I wrote... at least the way it read it me, it seemed as though you were implying that this was causing the hard drives to drop down to ATA33 mode, which was the highest mode they could support anyway. If you're claiming that PIO mode ATAPI devices will slow down the BC chipset, I won't refute that as I don't recall enough first-hand experiences trying to run PIO mode as late as the BX chipset. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks Kony, that wraps it up, its all there - a site worthy of bookmark
methinks:-) Steve "kony" wrote in message ... On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:22:23 -0000, "Steve James" wrote: OK Thanks for info, though a few different views not sure I am certain which way to go http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...onfTiming.html http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...rformance.html |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"kony" said in :
And hard drives started at UDMA-33, huh? Forgot about the older PIO modes? Forget? No, I meant nothing more than I wrote... Okay, reread your reply and you're right that UDMA-33 was the highest mode supported by Intel's 440BX chipset. I just wanted to make sure the it was understood that all modes (PIO and UDMA) might mix okay, might not, and I wasn't sure about the 440BX ... until today when I finally decided to look. I got rid of my last Intel 440BX box a little while ago. As I recall, that one was configured with the ATA devices (hard drives) on IDE0 and the ATAPI devices (CD-RW & DVD-ROM) on IDE1. Over the lifetime of this mobo, it first started out with really old drives scavanged from even older boxes and just ran DOS and then SCO and, I think, Solaris x86, so it did have some old PIO-only mode hard drives. About when Windows got put on it was when the drives were updated. In fact, because the mobo's IDE ports only supported up to UDMA-33, I put in a Promise Ultra100 to better support the UDMA-66 & -100 drives and so each had its own channel (which also meant the ATAPI devices could each be placed on their own channel on the mobo's IDE ports). I'm not sure the ATA and ATAPI devices really had to be separated on different channels for the Intel 440BX. I think that was how it was first configured because it was unknown at the start if independent timing was supported per channel; not everything was on the Internet back then for ease in lookup. I had another coworker using the box who kept claiming the ATA & ATAPI devices should be separated on different channels and since it didn't hurt I just let him have his way. Although we don't have that old 440BX box anymore, I finally decided to check on my break. Went to Intel and dug around for awhile and found for the 82371AB PCI-to-ISA chip (southbridge that provides the IDE channels), "Integrated IDE Controller: Independent timing of up to 4 drives." Aha! I was right all along. Oh well, running in the lowest-common-denominator hardware configuration didn't hurt, either. Thanks for participating. Always something to learn in the newsgroups. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"kony" said in :
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:22:23 -0000, "Steve James" wrote: OK Thanks for info, though a few different views not sure I am certain which way to go http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...onfTiming.html http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...rformance.html Thanks for the links. Ever visit www.pcguide.com who this link is referencing (in a static copy rather than a link)? After a year or more, it sure would be nice if www.pcguide.com someday fixes their search function to it works again. Having to drill around through the index takes a lot longer. I used to go there a lot to look up some info but using Google is often faster going through the matches than having to drill through pcguide.com. They/he really needs to fix his web site, or move back to a web host provider that includes Frontpage extensions. Unfortunately it doesn't look like it is being maintained to be kept up to date. Alas, twas a good reference site. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
kony wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:22:23 -0000, "Steve James" wrote: OK Thanks for info, though a few different views not sure I am certain which way to go http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...onfTiming.html http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...rformance.html Good references. However, note the "Copyright 1997-2000......" at the bottom of the page. So, what that page refers to as "Three years old" is in fact seven years old. Also, it says "Most new motherboards......." You can read that as "All new motherboards...." fairly safely. -- ~misfit~ |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 13:32:51 -0600, "*Vanguard*"
wrote: snip "Integrated IDE Controller: Independent timing of up to 4 drives." Aha! I was right all along. Oh well, running in the lowest-common-denominator hardware configuration didn't hurt, either. Prior to the 440BX, for example early socket 7, boards supported IDT (independent device timing) but what I'm less certain of is when, if ever, the controllers were able to run one device in PIO mode while the other on same channel is in DMA/UDMA mode... I was under the impression that both modes couldn't be supported simultaneously per channel, but then I've seen at least a couple of posts claiming IDT makes that possible... never bothered testing that myself since I've never had any desire to run PIO drives after there were UDMA alternatives. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:24:23 +1300, "~misfit~"
wrote: kony wrote: On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:22:23 -0000, "Steve James" wrote: OK Thanks for info, though a few different views not sure I am certain which way to go http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...onfTiming.html http://www.storagereview.com/guide20...rformance.html Good references. However, note the "Copyright 1997-2000......" at the bottom of the page. So, what that page refers to as "Three years old" is in fact seven years old. Also, it says "Most new motherboards......." You can read that as "All new motherboards...." fairly safely. Yep, it's pretty old by today's standards. Most PIO drives don't even work anymore unless they were just sitting on a shelf/unused. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
kony wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 13:32:51 -0600, "*Vanguard*" wrote: snip "Integrated IDE Controller: Independent timing of up to 4 drives." Aha! I was right all along. Oh well, running in the lowest-common-denominator hardware configuration didn't hurt, either. Prior to the 440BX, for example early socket 7, boards supported IDT (independent device timing) but what I'm less certain of is when, if ever, the controllers were able to run one device in PIO mode while the other on same channel is in DMA/UDMA mode... I was under the impression that both modes couldn't be supported simultaneously per channel, but then I've seen at least a couple of posts claiming IDT makes that possible... never bothered testing that myself since I've never had any desire to run PIO drives after there were UDMA alternatives. I've tested it, althought with my relatively new nForce2 Ultra 400 board, and having an old 120MB drive in PIO mode running alongside a modern drive running UltraDMA mode 5 on the same channel made virtually no difference to access times of the modern drive. -- ~misfit~ |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
What about sequential data transfer? ~misfit~ wrote: I've tested it, althought with my relatively new nForce2 Ultra 400 board, and having an old 120MB drive in PIO mode running alongside a modern drive running UltraDMA mode 5 on the same channel made virtually no difference to access times of the modern drive. -- ~misfit~ -- Mike Walsh West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
IDE Channel problem | Magic Blue | General | 2 | February 24th 04 08:25 PM |
Difference between Dual channel and Non-Dual channel? | Chris Stolworthy | General | 5 | January 6th 04 09:41 AM |
DDR and dual channel operation | Wolfi | General | 0 | November 16th 03 01:58 AM |
what exactily is quad pumped vs dual channel | The 700mm man | General | 0 | September 8th 03 01:25 AM |
IDE channel corrupt? | daveyboy | General | 5 | July 14th 03 05:55 PM |