• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

IDE users beware

D

Duvie

Elite Member
Newer boards for core 2 duop appear to only have 1 IDE channel (2 devices)....So for the ppl who laike to have a DVD-rom reader and burner for disc to disc copy, prepare to IO limited....

Also ppl with older IDE HDD's and optical drives may have to make some sacrifices....

Guess I may have to get an SATA DVD-/+RW or get an IDE controller...
 
Uh, wouldn't the people who like to have a DVD-rom reader and burner for disc to disc copy have 1 IDE channel(2devices) required to do so?

 
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
Uh, wouldn't the people who like to have a DVD-rom reader and burner for disc to disc copy have 1 IDE channel(2devices) required to do so?
Click to expand...


I am not quite sure what you mean....

MOst ppl try to put read and write functions on opposite channels....If I am reading from a disc and writing to another I will be limited when they share the same channel....Only one operations whether it be read or write can be done at a time. See the issue???.....OPtimal settings for something like this is to have them be on their own channel
 
I see your point but I haven't had a throughput problem when disc copying since my 500Mhz Celeron days.

Multiple question marks for the win????????
 
There'd be less of a problem if ROM devices had made the switch as quickly as hard drives. As far as I know, there's only the one Plextor that offers SATA connectivity - and not only is it expensive (Plextor), I've read about how it isn't a flawless device like other IDE burners.

Of course, if they're really starting to eliminate IDE, I'd hope we start seeing an increase in standard number of SATA ports. I didn't think I would do it this quickly, but I've actually maxed out all 4 SATA ports on my DFI Ultra-D. It has worked out well, because it left the 2 IDE channels separate for 2 DVD burners.
 
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
I see your point but I haven't had a throughput problem when disc copying since my 500Mhz Celeron days.

Multiple question marks for the win????????
Click to expand...



i dont see what cpu speed has to do with it....Try burning at faster speeds...try burning at the fastest speeds you could when you ran them on separate channels...

the problem still exist....not much has changed in terms of bandwidth restrictions and read/write operations...
 
08. Is it ok to have 2 IDE drives on one cable?
Yes it is, but bear in mind that you are sharing the bandwidth of the cable & controller equally. Thus you may loose performance, especially when copying from one drive to the other.
If you have two modern (fast) IDE drives you may see better performance with each drive on a dedicated IDE channel. Care must also be exercised when dealing with Hard drives and Optical drives. Ideally for maximum performance you would want each hard drive to have its own cable, with any optical drives sharing a seperate cable. This can be a complex balancing issue, so read the following 2 links for more details.



# Master/Slave Channel Sharing: By its very nature, each IDE/ATA channel can only deal with one request, to one device, at a time. You cannot even begin a second request, even to a different drive, until the first request is completed. This means that if you put two devices on the same channel, they must share it. In practical terms, this means that any time one device is in use, the other must remain silent. In contrast, two disks on two different IDE/ATA channels can process requests simultaneously on most motherboards. The bottom line is that the best way to configure multiple devices is to make each of them a single drive on its own channel, if this is possible. (This restriction is one major disadvantage of IDE compared to SCSI). An add-in controller like the Promise "Ultra" series is a cheap way of adding extra IDE/ATA channels to a modern PC.

http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/if/ide/confPerformance-c.html
Secondary IDE channel - DVD master & CD-RW slave.
Onboard RAID channel 1 - backup HDD.
 
Yeah, this is one thing that's not making me terribly happy about my eventual switch to C2D.

I find it incredibly annoying that SATA optical drives are pretty much nonexistant or stupidly overpriced if you can find any.

Duvie, which mobo did you get BTW?
 
Originally posted by: broly8877
IDE -> SATA converters ftw.

Bought a rosewill one off the egg, works flawlessly on an old 80GB WD HDD.
Click to expand...


cool!!! I have never used one on an optical drive....
 
Originally posted by: n7
Yeah, this is one thing that's not making me terribly happy about my eventual switch to C2D.

I find it incredibly annoying that SATA optical drives are pretty much nonexistant or stupidly overpriced if you can find any.

Duvie, which mobo did you get BTW?
Click to expand...



Haven't ordered one...I will feel a more sense of urgency once tankguys tell me my order is shipping....

I will play with my 265's for awhile...😉

That 142 dollar one at newegg seems good...A guy has hit 485fsb with no mods so I am feeling better about the board....

NOt sure if that is done all in the bios or using clockgen...I like Bios overclocking if I ca prefer it...
 
Yeah the Gigabyte looks pretty hawt, & like so many newer mobos, it's passive cooling (something i always liked; & one could rarely find a couple years ago).

I need something that can hit nice high FSBs from bios (i ain't using software for OCing anytime soon) for the E6600 i'll get when they show up in Canada.
 
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
I see your point but I haven't had a throughput problem when disc copying since my 500Mhz Celeron days.

Multiple question marks for the win????????
Click to expand...



i dont see what cpu speed has to do with it....Try burning at faster speeds...try burning at the fastest speeds you could when you ran them on separate channels...

the problem still exist....not much has changed in terms of bandwidth restrictions and read/write operations...
Click to expand...


Read "500Mhz Celeron days" as ATA/33 days then it is obvious that much has changed.

Try buying a disc replicator if the minuscule amount of time it takes to copy an image to the HD and then to disc is so prohibitive.

 
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: broly8877
IDE -> SATA converters ftw.

Bought a rosewill one off the egg, works flawlessly on an old 80GB WD HDD.
Click to expand...


cool!!! I have never used one on an optical drive....
Click to expand...

I tried it a while back and couldn't get it to work for the life of me, but I'll admit I haven't tried recently. Perhaps it is possible now?

edit, that is to say I could do it for HDs, but not ROM drives...
 
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
I see your point but I haven't had a throughput problem when disc copying since my 500Mhz Celeron days.

Multiple question marks for the win????????
Click to expand...



i dont see what cpu speed has to do with it....Try burning at faster speeds...try burning at the fastest speeds you could when you ran them on separate channels...

the problem still exist....not much has changed in terms of bandwidth restrictions and read/write operations...
Click to expand...


Read "500Mhz Celeron days" as ATA/33 days then it is obvious that much has changed.

Try buying a disc replicator if the minuscule amount of time it takes to copy an image to the HD and then to disc is so prohibitive.
Click to expand...


While HDDs may have migrated to ATA133 your optical drives are still limited to ATA33...

The main issue is sharing controller....

It wont be a big deal if I jus get some SATA converters...

I need (2) plugs for my 250's in Raid 0 ...I will backup stuff through the network to my opteron quad box...that leaves me (2) plugs for my optical drives...will be nice to get rid of the thicker IDE cables...
 
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
Originally posted by: Duvie
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
I see your point but I haven't had a throughput problem when disc copying since my 500Mhz Celeron days.

Multiple question marks for the win????????
Click to expand...



i dont see what cpu speed has to do with it....Try burning at faster speeds...try burning at the fastest speeds you could when you ran them on separate channels...

the problem still exist....not much has changed in terms of bandwidth restrictions and read/write operations...
Click to expand...


Read "500Mhz Celeron days" as ATA/33 days then it is obvious that much has changed.

Try buying a disc replicator if the minuscule amount of time it takes to copy an image to the HD and then to disc is so prohibitive.
Click to expand...


While HDDs may have migrated to ATA133 your optical drives are still limited to ATA33...

The main issue is sharing controller....

It wont be a big deal if I jus get some SATA converters...

I need (2) plugs for my 250's in Raid 0 ...I will backup stuff through the network to my opteron quad box...that leaves me (2) plugs for my optical drives...will be nice to get rid of the thicker IDE cables...
Click to expand...


Yea the fading out of IDE will be an inconvenience for some but the time has come.

Enjoy.
 
This kinda sucks. I do have 2 SATA drives (I buy SATA drives) but when burners still come in IDE.. boo.

My NEC3540 is IDE and then my CD burner is IDE. So that requires 1 channel at least.

I also have a PATA HD (just 1), and so this really sucks. Oh well. I <3 DFI's LanParty NF4 for coming with 2 IDE + 4SATA. Yayz. I do hope to be phasing all my HDs into SATA soon. I laugh at those who jump onto slickdeals or hot deals (here) for those cheap PATA drives. I don't get why anyone would even get those...
 
Originally posted by: DLeRium
This kinda sucks. I do have 2 SATA drives (I buy SATA drives) but when burners still come in IDE.. boo.

My NEC3540 is IDE and then my CD burner is IDE. So that requires 1 channel at least.

I also have a PATA HD (just 1), and so this really sucks. Oh well. I <3 DFI's LanParty NF4 for coming with 2 IDE + 4SATA. Yayz. I do hope to be phasing all my HDs into SATA soon. I laugh at those who jump onto slickdeals or hot deals (here) for those cheap PATA drives. I don't get why anyone would even get those...
Click to expand...

Perhaps because they have no SATA ports. Or because they want broader compatbility with older motherboards, which SATA certainly doesn't deliver.

Or would you have them buy drives they cannot use?

You might just as well wonder why people buy in on good deals for AGP cards. AGP is no longer the latest and greatest, but it is what lots and lots of people have, and it still does its job. Just because you may have moved to the newer tech doesn't mean everyone has.
 
MY AM2 board only has a single IDE channel, and since I'm still using a 120GB Seagate IDE HDD I have to share that with my DVD-RW drive. Doesn't seem like too much of a performance loss, though, since I almost never use the optical drive anyway.
 
The real problem here is that most DVD burners are bad citizens on the IDE bus - they block the bus for much longer than they would have to for the transfer. Disks are usually careful about this.

If you are using a DVD burner and your main disk on the same bus you can expect very sucky disk performance while you use the burner.
 
I think during Anand's CES coverage BenQ was saying that they would be shipping 20% of their optical drives as SATA by the end of this year, so they are coming hopefully.
 
Well anything based on ICH7 will typically still have 2 IDE channels on it, it's the P965 that has 0 natively so AIB partners will put in 1.
 
I got a PATA 400gb on IDE 0
A PATA 250gb on SATA 0 (using Abit Serillel2 converter)
A DVD-+RW on IDE 2
and a DVD-+RW on USB 1 (using IDE->USB 2.0 converter)

Imagine burning 16x on each DVD burner, with one "dedicated" drive for each. Since every single I/O device is on a separate channel, 0 hiccups FTW!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top