Anyone using a 80gig HDD on a BX mobo?

I am intending to purchase a 120GXP IBM 80gig capacity HDD. Due to my mobo chipset being a bit outdated, I am a afraid that the full capacity might not be detected via the bios.

Windows 2000 and Linux can overcome BIOS limitations on harddrive size. XP might but I wouldn’t know. 2000 scans for hardware itself and pretty much ignores the BIOS. As for linux, its just super. and super complicated. but super.

My i440BX mainboard (MSI MS6163 v1.0) detects HDDs of 80 GB and works properly with them, but of course, it supports only UDMA 33.
So I bought an additional UDMA 100 controller to fix this.

Is your data so unimportant that you want to store them to an IBM?

Hey alexnoe,

I have an Intel 440BX2 Mainboard and a 40GB UDMA 100 hard disk. My hard disk operates at UDMA33. Have you noticed any performance increase after getting the ATA 100 controller? I know its theoretically faster, but does it have any practical benefit?

I may consider getting one then.

The linear rate was 20 MB/s @ UDMA33, and 32 MB/s @ UDMA 100.

BUT: I changed from 2x UDMA33, both of them on one channel, to 2x UDMA100, one channel for each…

I’d say, the bootup was faster after this upgrade (while makeing a Raid-0 from these HDs didn’t make bootup any faster in comparision to using them as single HDs in UDMA 100 mode).

But overall performance is about the same (note that I do not need or really use a swap file, due to 768 MB RAM), with a better speed when copying large files (because now, each of my 5 ATAPI devices has its own channel)

Originally posted by alexnoe
[B]My i440BX mainboard (MSI MS6163 v1.0) detects HDDs of 80 GB and works properly with them, but of course, it supports only UDMA 33.
So I bought an additional UDMA 100 controller to fix this.

Is your data so unimportant that you want to store them to an IBM? [/B]

You make it sound as if IBM has a high failing rate. :bow:

Overall, its performace is pretty good and the RMA procedure is a snap.