Main > Main Forum
WEIRDEST computer problem ever...WTF???
railz:
Just a FYI for anyone who has problems with a WD drive in the future - put it on cable select (no jumper on some models) and it will work fine.
Some of the drives are a little quirky about this. I got this tip from WD support.
Tiger-Heli:
--- Quote from: Vol on August 10, 2003, 10:35:06 am ---You also have to consider how you will be moving files and accessing files.
Essentially you do not want to put the two most accessed drives on the same IDE channel as only one will be able to read or write at a time. To further illustrate: if you copy a file from primary IDE master to primary IDE slave data is read from the master into system memory, then data is written to the slave from system memory. However, if you were to copy from a drive on the primary IDE channel to a drive on the secondary IDE channel, the source drive can read at the same time the destination drive is writing. Theoretically cutting the copy process time in half (in reality its about 3/4 or so but still faster).
--- End quote ---
This is true for moving data if you only have the two HD's, but . . . I think all CD-Drives are ATA-33, so the HD on the same channel as the CD-Burner now operates at ATA-33, not -66 or -100 or -133. Might still be faster than sharing with the other HD, but maybe not?
Dunno!
Spaced Invader:
--- Quote from: Tiger-Heli on August 11, 2003, 08:21:27 am ---
--- Quote from: Vol on August 10, 2003, 10:35:06 am ---You also have to consider how you will be moving files and accessing files.
Essentially you do not want to put the two most accessed drives on the same IDE channel as only one will be able to read or write at a time. To further illustrate: if you copy a file from primary IDE master to primary IDE slave data is read from the master into system memory, then data is written to the slave from system memory. However, if you were to copy from a drive on the primary IDE channel to a drive on the secondary IDE channel, the source drive can read at the same time the destination drive is writing. Theoretically cutting the copy process time in half (in reality its about 3/4 or so but still faster).
--- End quote ---
This is true for moving data if you only have the two HD's, but . . . I think all CD-Drives are ATA-33, so the HD on the same channel as the CD-Burner now operates at ATA-33, not -66 or -100 or -133. Might still be faster than sharing with the other HD, but maybe not?
Dunno!
--- End quote ---
Not!
HD's should be on the same IDE channel provided they both operate at the same high bus speed (66/100/133). You are quite correct in pointing out that placing a drive on the same channel as the CD device will force the HD to operate at the much slower bus speed of the CD (33). This does not equal a faster system.
History:
In the days before UDMA drives it was popular to place hard drives on seperate channels on a windows system. This was done to improve system performance. Windows was placed on the first channel and the systems virtual memory cache on the second. This allowed for simultaneous access and faster speeds.
However, this gain does not outweigh the speed lost to a slower bus. In addition, with the large amounts of memory in most modern systems and Windows improved memory cache handling (post 95) it's really a non-issue anyway. In short...HD's on 1st channel and CD's on the 2nd channel.
Of course, opinions vary! ;D
Lilwolf:
Common problem.
IDE drives are really MFM drives (any oldschoolers here) that have the controller on the harddrive itself. The ide controller on your motherboard is basically a passthrough to it. Thats how they got around all the wierd drive parameters (remeber back when you had a list of ,like 40 drive heads/cylindars combos to pick out).
Anyway...
When you slave one drive... You disable the controller from it's board... And it uses the controller from the other drive. So any problems between brands... and they wont work.
The best part is that My two maxtors didn't work together for a LONG time. I had to have them on seperate cables and my cd roms as slaves... Where it would have been better to keep them on one (for me anyway).
I'm not saying I know a solution... but its a common problem. Best to just play around with them until they are all there.... You might find that just swapping them around will do.
RacerX:
--- Quote from: zowiebowie on August 10, 2003, 06:47:01 am ---Surely that's not the weirdest computer problem ever though? :P
--- End quote ---
That's just Snaaake. Whatever is going on now is always the ____est ever. But that's why we love him. ;)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version