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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Big Hard Drives on Win98
Hi I've just added a 200GB HDD to my system and have found that transferring
files across to it is very slow - taking hours instead of seconds. I have WIN98SE AMD 1Mhz CPU and 640 RAM (which hasn't caused a problem before) I have 60GB and 80 Gb HDDs already installed and have added to last 200Gb drive on the 2nd IDE channel with my DVD RW. I have tested the problem by putting the new 200 GB drive without the dvd on the same channel and used it on the primary ide channel with just one other (60GB) Hdd and the problem is the same. Running scandisk on it did show up read and write errors - repartitioning it and reformatting was a flaky process as the partitions remained unstable - the partitions on the 200GB drive weren't being recognized properly in windows. I also used partition magic to try to format it (FAT32) but it often said the drive may be damaged. I suspect after some research its may be the 137GB limit making the data unstable. So I wonder if anybody has had similar problem with these big drives and what if any was a reliable patch/fix workaround. Thanks Derek -- |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
What are the sizes of the partitions on the 200GB drive?
What are the cluster sizes used for each partition? Does your BIOS support greater than 137GB drives, or are you using a controller card that does? from http://support.octek.com.au/FAQ/faq_0113.htm : "The only current Windows operating systems that natively support the full capacity of ATA drives larger than 137GB a Windows XP Home Service Pack 1 (SP1) or higher Windows XP Professional SP1 or higher Windows 2000 Professional SP3 or higher Windows 2000 Server SP3 or higher " "If you do not have one of the operating systems listed above, we recommend that you limit the partition size to 137GB or upgrade your operating system or try one of the solutions listed" on the web page. Has it occurred to you that scandisk and PM may actually be telling you the truth....that the drive may be damaged? -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "Derek" wrote in message ... Hi I've just added a 200GB HDD to my system and have found that transferring files across to it is very slow - taking hours instead of seconds. I have WIN98SE AMD 1Mhz CPU and 640 RAM (which hasn't caused a problem before) I have 60GB and 80 Gb HDDs already installed and have added to last 200Gb drive on the 2nd IDE channel with my DVD RW. I have tested the problem by putting the new 200 GB drive without the dvd on the same channel and used it on the primary ide channel with just one other (60GB) Hdd and the problem is the same. Running scandisk on it did show up read and write errors - repartitioning it and reformatting was a flaky process as the partitions remained unstable - the partitions on the 200GB drive weren't being recognized properly in windows. I also used partition magic to try to format it (FAT32) but it often said the drive may be damaged. I suspect after some research its may be the 137GB limit making the data unstable. So I wonder if anybody has had similar problem with these big drives and what if any was a reliable patch/fix workaround. Thanks Derek -- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Here is a better reference...137 GB Limitation:
http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/di.../os/win98.html -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "glee" wrote in message ... What are the sizes of the partitions on the 200GB drive? What are the cluster sizes used for each partition? Does your BIOS support greater than 137GB drives, or are you using a controller card that does? from http://support.octek.com.au/FAQ/faq_0113.htm : "The only current Windows operating systems that natively support the full capacity of ATA drives larger than 137GB a Windows XP Home Service Pack 1 (SP1) or higher Windows XP Professional SP1 or higher Windows 2000 Professional SP3 or higher Windows 2000 Server SP3 or higher " "If you do not have one of the operating systems listed above, we recommend that you limit the partition size to 137GB or upgrade your operating system or try one of the solutions listed" on the web page. Has it occurred to you that scandisk and PM may actually be telling you the truth....that the drive may be damaged? -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "Derek" wrote in message ... Hi I've just added a 200GB HDD to my system and have found that transferring files across to it is very slow - taking hours instead of seconds. I have WIN98SE AMD 1Mhz CPU and 640 RAM (which hasn't caused a problem before) I have 60GB and 80 Gb HDDs already installed and have added to last 200Gb drive on the 2nd IDE channel with my DVD RW. I have tested the problem by putting the new 200 GB drive without the dvd on the same channel and used it on the primary ide channel with just one other (60GB) Hdd and the problem is the same. Running scandisk on it did show up read and write errors - repartitioning it and reformatting was a flaky process as the partitions remained unstable - the partitions on the 200GB drive weren't being recognized properly in windows. I also used partition magic to try to format it (FAT32) but it often said the drive may be damaged. I suspect after some research its may be the 137GB limit making the data unstable. So I wonder if anybody has had similar problem with these big drives and what if any was a reliable patch/fix workaround. Thanks Derek -- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I have tried different partition sizes, the largest setup being two at
c.94GB each, so this is below the 137 limit. The cluster sizes have always been 32K. I have just scrolled scrolled through the various preset HDD sizes in the bios and none match up to the 200GB size - and auto detect only show the total size of the HDD (203GB) but no the cyls head sector etc. details as it does for my other HDD's so perhaps the bios is at fault here. My motherboard is an AMD athlon processor one - GA-71XE4 which i flashed some time ago to the latest update. I will see if I can get more details of the drive from the maxtor site and manual put them into the bios to see if that helps Derek "glee" wrote in message ... Here is a better reference...137 GB Limitation: http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/di.../os/win98.html -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "glee" wrote in message ... What are the sizes of the partitions on the 200GB drive? What are the cluster sizes used for each partition? Does your BIOS support greater than 137GB drives, or are you using a controller card that does? from http://support.octek.com.au/FAQ/faq_0113.htm : "The only current Windows operating systems that natively support the full capacity of ATA drives larger than 137GB a Windows XP Home Service Pack 1 (SP1) or higher Windows XP Professional SP1 or higher Windows 2000 Professional SP3 or higher Windows 2000 Server SP3 or higher " "If you do not have one of the operating systems listed above, we recommend that you limit the partition size to 137GB or upgrade your operating system or try one of the solutions listed" on the web page. Has it occurred to you that scandisk and PM may actually be telling you the truth....that the drive may be damaged? -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "Derek" wrote in message ... Hi I've just added a 200GB HDD to my system and have found that transferring files across to it is very slow - taking hours instead of seconds. I have WIN98SE AMD 1Mhz CPU and 640 RAM (which hasn't caused a problem before) I have 60GB and 80 Gb HDDs already installed and have added to last 200Gb drive on the 2nd IDE channel with my DVD RW. I have tested the problem by putting the new 200 GB drive without the dvd on the same channel and used it on the primary ide channel with just one other (60GB) Hdd and the problem is the same. Running scandisk on it did show up read and write errors - repartitioning it and reformatting was a flaky process as the partitions remained unstable - the partitions on the 200GB drive weren't being recognized properly in windows. I also used partition magic to try to format it (FAT32) but it often said the drive may be damaged. I suspect after some research its may be the 137GB limit making the data unstable. So I wonder if anybody has had similar problem with these big drives and what if any was a reliable patch/fix workaround. Thanks Derek -- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
According to Maxtor, Windows 9x (95/98/ME) do not support drives over 137 GB. They
went so far as to include their Ultra ATA 133 PCI card free of charge when the DiamondMax Plus 9 200GB Hard Drive was introduced....with this card, older Windows versions can use the entire 200 GB. See here, from Maxtor's Knowledge Base: http://snipurl.com/8t4s It seems that the partition size is not relevant....the drive cannot be used in its entirety unless you use add-in Ultra ATA PCI adapter card with a 48-Bit LBA compliant BIOS and controller driver. -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "Derek" wrote in message ... I have tried different partition sizes, the largest setup being two at c.94GB each, so this is below the 137 limit. The cluster sizes have always been 32K. I have just scrolled scrolled through the various preset HDD sizes in the bios and none match up to the 200GB size - and auto detect only show the total size of the HDD (203GB) but no the cyls head sector etc. details as it does for my other HDD's so perhaps the bios is at fault here. My motherboard is an AMD athlon processor one - GA-71XE4 which i flashed some time ago to the latest update. I will see if I can get more details of the drive from the maxtor site and manual put them into the bios to see if that helps Derek "glee" wrote in message ... Here is a better reference...137 GB Limitation: http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/di.../os/win98.html -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "glee" wrote in message ... What are the sizes of the partitions on the 200GB drive? What are the cluster sizes used for each partition? Does your BIOS support greater than 137GB drives, or are you using a controller card that does? from http://support.octek.com.au/FAQ/faq_0113.htm : "The only current Windows operating systems that natively support the full capacity of ATA drives larger than 137GB a Windows XP Home Service Pack 1 (SP1) or higher Windows XP Professional SP1 or higher Windows 2000 Professional SP3 or higher Windows 2000 Server SP3 or higher " "If you do not have one of the operating systems listed above, we recommend that you limit the partition size to 137GB or upgrade your operating system or try one of the solutions listed" on the web page. Has it occurred to you that scandisk and PM may actually be telling you the truth....that the drive may be damaged? -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "Derek" wrote in message ... Hi I've just added a 200GB HDD to my system and have found that transferring files across to it is very slow - taking hours instead of seconds. I have WIN98SE AMD 1Mhz CPU and 640 RAM (which hasn't caused a problem before) I have 60GB and 80 Gb HDDs already installed and have added to last 200Gb drive on the 2nd IDE channel with my DVD RW. I have tested the problem by putting the new 200 GB drive without the dvd on the same channel and used it on the primary ide channel with just one other (60GB) Hdd and the problem is the same. Running scandisk on it did show up read and write errors - repartitioning it and reformatting was a flaky process as the partitions remained unstable - the partitions on the 200GB drive weren't being recognized properly in windows. I also used partition magic to try to format it (FAT32) but it often said the drive may be damaged. I suspect after some research its may be the 137GB limit making the data unstable. So I wonder if anybody has had similar problem with these big drives and what if any was a reliable patch/fix workaround. Thanks Derek -- |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I've decided to buy a PCI ATA card - I think this will be the simplest
answer. I think this 137GB limit will catch quite a few people out, seeing as how broadband lets us fill up our hard drives much quicker these days, till it becomes common knowledge of how to get around it - i.e. Win XP or PCI card. Thanks for your feedback glee Derek "glee" wrote in message ... According to Maxtor, Windows 9x (95/98/ME) do not support drives over 137 GB. They went so far as to include their Ultra ATA 133 PCI card free of charge when the DiamondMax Plus 9 200GB Hard Drive was introduced....with this card, older Windows versions can use the entire 200 GB. See here, from Maxtor's Knowledge Base: http://snipurl.com/8t4s It seems that the partition size is not relevant....the drive cannot be used in its entirety unless you use add-in Ultra ATA PCI adapter card with a 48-Bit LBA compliant BIOS and controller driver. -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "Derek" wrote in message ... I have tried different partition sizes, the largest setup being two at c.94GB each, so this is below the 137 limit. The cluster sizes have always been 32K. I have just scrolled scrolled through the various preset HDD sizes in the bios and none match up to the 200GB size - and auto detect only show the total size of the HDD (203GB) but no the cyls head sector etc. details as it does for my other HDD's so perhaps the bios is at fault here. My motherboard is an AMD athlon processor one - GA-71XE4 which i flashed some time ago to the latest update. I will see if I can get more details of the drive from the maxtor site and manual put them into the bios to see if that helps Derek "glee" wrote in message ... Here is a better reference...137 GB Limitation: http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/di.../os/win98.html -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "glee" wrote in message ... What are the sizes of the partitions on the 200GB drive? What are the cluster sizes used for each partition? Does your BIOS support greater than 137GB drives, or are you using a controller card that does? from http://support.octek.com.au/FAQ/faq_0113.htm : "The only current Windows operating systems that natively support the full capacity of ATA drives larger than 137GB a Windows XP Home Service Pack 1 (SP1) or higher Windows XP Professional SP1 or higher Windows 2000 Professional SP3 or higher Windows 2000 Server SP3 or higher " "If you do not have one of the operating systems listed above, we recommend that you limit the partition size to 137GB or upgrade your operating system or try one of the solutions listed" on the web page. Has it occurred to you that scandisk and PM may actually be telling you the truth....that the drive may be damaged? -- Glen Ventura, MS MVP W95/98 Systems http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "Derek" wrote in message ... Hi I've just added a 200GB HDD to my system and have found that transferring files across to it is very slow - taking hours instead of seconds. I have WIN98SE AMD 1Mhz CPU and 640 RAM (which hasn't caused a problem before) I have 60GB and 80 Gb HDDs already installed and have added to last 200Gb drive on the 2nd IDE channel with my DVD RW. I have tested the problem by putting the new 200 GB drive without the dvd on the same channel and used it on the primary ide channel with just one other (60GB) Hdd and the problem is the same. Running scandisk on it did show up read and write errors - repartitioning it and reformatting was a flaky process as the partitions remained unstable - the partitions on the 200GB drive weren't being recognized properly in windows. I also used partition magic to try to format it (FAT32) but it often said the drive may be damaged. I suspect after some research its may be the 137GB limit making the data unstable. So I wonder if anybody has had similar problem with these big drives and what if any was a reliable patch/fix workaround. Thanks Derek -- |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Derek wrote:
I've decided to buy a PCI ATA card - I think this will be the simplest answer. I think this 137GB limit will catch quite a few people out, seeing as how broadband lets us fill up our hard drives much quicker these days, till it becomes common knowledge of how to get around it - i.e. Win XP or PCI card. Thanks for your feedback glee Derek Promise already makes it for many of the other brand names anyway, like Maxtor, etc, and I've found you'll pay more for them and as well will also have to update its drivers and flash it too, and so I would suggest the latest version Promise ULTRA133 TX2 from the link below, or anywhere else you want, but it comes with an excellent brand 80wire cable and it's bios is already flashed to the very latest; has a manual and new driver floppy ..it's top shelf in my book. http://www.newegg.com/app/viewProduc...ption=16% 2D1 02%2D007&searchdepa=0 Anyway the advantages of using one are far more than just the 137gb issue, such as the extra ports for neat abilities, and for W98x especially with faster processors the cards remarkable ability similar to an application accelerator but better - to Dramatically improve overall data transfer speed system wide. W2K & WXP show an improvement also. Rick |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
MS-DOS Compatability & 2 Hard Drives | Dave | General | 0 | August 23rd 04 08:26 PM |
Trouble W/ ext USB Hard drives | Scott Ford | General | 0 | August 3rd 04 01:49 AM |
Dual boot ME and XP with 4 hard drives (questions) | [email protected] | General | 6 | July 6th 04 08:57 PM |
How to thoroughly clean hard drive for Win98 installation? | Old Geezer | General | 10 | July 6th 04 05:03 AM |
Install Win98 on second hard drive | fruitlesspuppy | General | 3 | June 21st 04 01:15 AM |