Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size?

"Lowtarget" <sorry.RemoveThis@dont-want-spam.com> wrote in news:brde01$65s$0@
65.17.133.186:

 > I'm using 8KHA+ my self. I'm have two hdd's installed in the system. A
 > 120gig Western Digital and 80gig Western Digital. I don't have to use a
 > overlay driver at all. That mobo can handle a 120gig hdd very easy without
 > problems. I never any hdd's bigger then 120gig in the system. Then again I
 > don't own any hdd's bigger then 120gig's.

Thanks. I was looking at getting something of that size, at least, so it's
good to hear from someone who has one up and running.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

The motherboard should be able to support 127GB before the address
translation problem kicks in. If your board support 48-bit address
translation, then the limit becomes alot higher but until then... If I am
wrong then someone correct me on this.

--
Robert Pendell
shinji257 DeleteThis @uplink.net

"Dalamar" <no DeleteThis @no.net> wrote in message
news:NroCb.778$Jj.457@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com...
 > Does anyone know, what is the biggest hard drive that the 8KHA+ can use?
 > Specifically, I mean the largest drive that the BIOS can handle. I don't
want
 > to use an overlay driver.
 >
 > Epox says that the largest they have tested is 80 gigs, but that doesn't
tell
 > me if it can handle more than that.
 >
 > Is anyone using this board with something bigger?
 >
 > Thanks for any info anyone can provide.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

"Robert Pendell" <shinji257.DeleteThis@earthlink.net> wrote in news:MouCb.63$Yy5.39
@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

 > The motherboard should be able to support 127GB before the address
 > translation problem kicks in. If your board support 48-bit address
 > translation, then the limit becomes alot higher but until then... If I am
 > wrong then someone correct me on this.

Thank you for the help.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

Robert Pendell wrote:
 > The motherboard should be able to support 127GB before the address
 > translation problem kicks in. If your board support 48-bit address
 > translation, then the limit becomes alot higher but until then...

ATA33/66/100 is limited to <= 137MB hard disks (in practice, 120MB.)
ATA133 and SATA can support > 137MB hard disks.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
birder.RemoveThis@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I ticked.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

Nonsense. They are unrelated.

"Paul Taylor" <birder.DeleteThis@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:74CCb.774$Tq.19060@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
 >
 > ATA33/66/100 is limited to <= 137MB hard disks (in practice, 120MB.)
 > ATA133 and SATA can support > 137MB hard disks.
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

Paul Taylor <birder.TakeThisOut@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:74CCb.774$Tq.19060@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
 > Robert Pendell wrote:

  >> The motherboard should be able to support 127GB before the address
  >> translation problem kicks in. If your board support 48-bit address
  >> translation, then the limit becomes alot higher but until then...

 > ATA33/66/100 is limited to <= 137MB hard disks (in practice, 120MB.)

Wrong. There are hordes of those systems that dont have that limit.

 > ATA133 and SATA can support > 137MB hard disks.

And so can most of the others too.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 06:32:26 +1100, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com>
wrote:

 >
 >Paul Taylor <birder.TakeThisOut@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
 >news:74CCb.774$Tq.19060@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
  >> Robert Pendell wrote:
 >
   >>> The motherboard should be able to support 127GB before the address
   >>> translation problem kicks in. If your board support 48-bit address
   >>> translation, then the limit becomes alot higher but until then...
 >
  >> ATA33/66/100 is limited to <= 137MB hard disks (in practice, 120MB.)
 >
 >Wrong. There are hordes of those systems that dont have that limit.
 >
  >> ATA133 and SATA can support > 137MB hard disks.
 >
 >And so can most of the others too.

That just depends on the age of your mobo.

He is right that initially ATA100 boards were limited to 137MB. One of
the improvements of ATA133 was the support for larger disks.

But newer ATA100 devices also support larger disks now.
(Lots of companies didn't want to use ATA133 as defined by Maxtrox?
But they did see the need for larger disks)

So the correct answer is that you are sure that larger disks are
supported on ATA133, but you cannot be sure that larger disks are
supported on ATA100.

Since the 8KHA+ is a fairly old board, there is a good chance that it
is not supported.

I'm suprised at the terrible answer from Epox. They never tested with
larger then 80GB? They don't know the specifications of their own
boards?
The person at Epox that gave that answer should be ashamed of himself.

Marc<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

Bullshit. LBA-48 was introduced in ATA-6, which doesn't even mention
UDMA/133. Anyone know which came to market first?

You are far better off looking at your BIOS date rather than UDMA speeds.

"Marc de Vries" <marcdevries.TakeThisOut@geen.spam.zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:jvmqtvkcqdi6bv3ickkcf0fbm6b2i0luta@4ax.com...

 > He is right that initially ATA100 boards were limited to 137MB. One of
 > the improvements of ATA133 was the support for larger disks.
 >
 > But newer ATA100 devices also support larger disks now.
 > (Lots of companies didn't want to use ATA133 as defined by Maxtrox?
 > But they did see the need for larger disks)
 >
 > So the correct answer is that you are sure that larger disks are
 > supported on ATA133, but you cannot be sure that larger disks are
 > supported on ATA100.
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

Marc de Vries <marcdevries RemoveThis @geen.spam.zonnet.nl> wrote in
news:jvmqtvkcqdi6bv3ickkcf0fbm6b2i0luta@4ax.com:

 > That just depends on the age of your mobo.
 >
 > He is right that initially ATA100 boards were limited to 137MB. One of
 > the improvements of ATA133 was the support for larger disks.
 >
 > But newer ATA100 devices also support larger disks now.
 > (Lots of companies didn't want to use ATA133 as defined by Maxtrox?
 > But they did see the need for larger disks)
 >
 > So the correct answer is that you are sure that larger disks are
 > supported on ATA133, but you cannot be sure that larger disks are
 > supported on ATA100.
 >
 > Since the 8KHA+ is a fairly old board, there is a good chance that it
 > is not supported.
 >
 > I'm suprised at the terrible answer from Epox. They never tested with
 > larger then 80GB? They don't know the specifications of their own
 > boards?
 > The person at Epox that gave that answer should be ashamed of himself.
 >
 > Marc


"We have tested up to 80GB on this model."

I got exactly that one line answer. It wasn't even slightly useful since I
already have an 80 gig drive, so I know that it works.

You would think they wouldn't have to test, right? Aside from bugs, shouldn't
they know how much it will support simply because they have to *design* it to
support a certain size?

But I guess tech support card readers wouldn't know anything about that.

Thanks for the detailed info.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

"Marc de Vries" <marcdevries.RemoveThis@geen.spam.zonnet.nl> wrote in message news:jvmqtvkcqdi6bv3ickkcf0fbm6b2i0luta@4ax.com
 > On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 06:32:26 +1100, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
  > >
  > > Paul Taylor birder.RemoveThis@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message news:74CCb.774$Tq.19060@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
   > > > Robert Pendell wrote:
  > >
   > > > > The motherboard should be able to support 127GB before the address
   > > > > translation problem kicks in. If your board support 48-bit address
   > > > > translation, then the limit becomes alot higher but until then...
  > >
   > > > ATA33/66/100 is limited to <= 137MB hard disks (in practice, 120MB.)
  > >
  > > Wrong. There are hordes of those systems that dont have that limit.
  > >
   > > > ATA133 and SATA can support > 137MB hard disks.
  > >
  > > And so can most of the others too.
 >
 > That just depends on the age of your mobo.
 >
 > He is right that initially ATA100 boards were limited to 137MB.

 > One of the improvements of ATA133 was the support for larger disks.

No, it was not.

 >
 > But newer ATA100 devices also support larger disks now.

Of course they do. It's a software thing, not hardware.

 > (Lots of companies didn't want to use ATA133 as defined by Maxtrox?

Who?

 > But they did see the need for larger disks)
 >
 > So the correct answer is that you are sure that larger disks are
 > supported on ATA133, but you cannot be sure that larger disks
 > are supported on ATA100.

Which entirely depends on the manufacturer of the chipset
or the maintainer of the OS's willingness to support.

 >
 > Since the 8KHA+ is a fairly old board, there is a good chance that
 > it is not supported.
 >
 > I'm suprised at the terrible answer from Epox.

Al least it was an honest answer if somewhat shortsighted.

 > They never tested with larger then 80GB? They don't know the
 > specifications of their own boards?

When a third party supplies your bios, that may happen in the absence
of still to come out drive capacities.

 > The person at Epox that gave that answer should be ashamed of himself.

Well, you're not that much better.

 >
 > Marc<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

Marc de Vries <marcdevries RemoveThis @geen.spam.zonnet.nl> wrote in
message news:jvmqtvkcqdi6bv3ickkcf0fbm6b2i0luta@4ax.com...
 > Rod Speed <rod_speed RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote
  >> Paul Taylor <birder RemoveThis @ozemail.com.au> wrote
   >>> Robert Pendell wrote:

   >>>> The motherboard should be able to support 127GB before the address
   >>>> translation problem kicks in. If your board support 48-bit address
   >>>> translation, then the limit becomes alot higher but until then...

   >>> ATA33/66/100 is limited to <= 137MB hard disks (in practice, 120MB.)

  >> Wrong. There are hordes of those systems that dont have that limit.

   >>> ATA133 and SATA can support > 137MB hard disks.

  >> And so can most of the others too.

 > That just depends on the age of your mobo.

Nope, what the bios can do.

 > He is right that initially ATA100 boards were limited to 137MB. One
 > of the improvements of ATA133 was the support for larger disks.

Utterly mangled. There are plenty of ATA100
systems that support those bigger drives.

 > But newer ATA100 devices also support larger disks now.

So he was just plain wrong, like I said.

 > (Lots of companies didn't want to use ATA133 as defined
 > by Maxtrox? But they did see the need for larger disks)

48bit LBA is an entirely separate issue to ATA133.

 > So the correct answer is that you are sure that larger
 > disks are supported on ATA133, but you cannot be
 > sure that larger disks are supported on ATA100.

Its more complicated than that too. Plenty of
systems that claim to support say ATA133 dont
have everything its supposed to have implemented.

 > Since the 8KHA+ is a fairly old board, there
 > is a good chance that it is not supported.

I didnt even comment on that at all, JUST on his much
too simplistic and just plain wrong statements quoted.

 > I'm suprised at the terrible answer from Epox.

Yeah, looks like either the wires got crossed
with someone not having a very good grasp of
english or some pig ignorant monkey involved.

 > They never tested with larger then 80GB?

Corse they have. Presumably they actually mean that
that particular older motherboard was never CERTIFIED
with drives bigger than that, a different matter entirely.

 > They don't know the specifications of their own boards?
 > The person at Epox that gave that answer should be ashamed of himself.

Yeah, tho we dont know the exact words used in the question.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

It's nice to see how much info you can get when people get offended;)
I had no clue of all this ATA33/66/100/133/4/5/6/7/?, allways looked at
33/66/100/133/?
TNX all


"Dalamar" <no.RemoveThis@no.net> wrote in message
news:NroCb.778$Jj.457@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com...
 > Does anyone know, what is the biggest hard drive that the 8KHA+ can use?
 > Specifically, I mean the largest drive that the BIOS can handle. I don't
want
 > to use an overlay driver.
 >
 > Epox says that the largest they have tested is 80 gigs, but that doesn't
tell
 > me if it can handle more than that.
 >
 > Is anyone using this board with something bigger?
 >
 > Thanks for any info anyone can provide.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size? 

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:55:14 GMT, "JustDoIt" <doit_just.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com>
wrote:

 >It's nice to see how much info you can get when people get offended;)



Too bad that we couldn't get the same result without people getting
offended...<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Epox 8KHA+ - Maximum hard drive size?