• 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.

Raid channel as non-Raid???

P

pinecone

Member
Considering the ATA100 issues with the KT133A boards, would it be simple to use the Raid channels as just IDE channels? If so, how about running the ATA100 devices non-Raid on Raid channels 3 and 4. Then the ATA66 devices i.e. CDRW's on IDE channels 1 and 2? Would you still need the VIA drivers?
 
Using the RAID channels for ATA-100 hard drives is even better. It can be used by default but do update your VIA drivers for better performance, compatibility, and stability.
 
Pinecone, the setup you are asking about is what everyone recommends. Regardless of whether you have a raid setup or not. HDD's on the raid channels. Other IDE devices (e.g. DVD, CDRW) on the IDE 1 and 2 channels.

The Abit manual also advises this. In fact it seems to warn AGAINST attaching lower speed ide devices like CDRW's to the Highpoint controllers.
 
Thanks for the advice. Please explain why use the VIA drivers as opposed to the drivers for the onboard Raid controller i.e. Highpoint, Promise? Man, I'm getting confused as to which IDE controller does what and is controlled by what!!!!!

Thanks for all the help.
 
im sure Anand was supposed to be doing a RAID review/round up ... its getting more and more popular and theres little comparitive resource data ... Id just like to see this integrated highpoint v dedicated cards compared, incl the Fasttrak 100, and also find if one highpoint board is better than another (eg 133 v 815)
 
You need both the Via 4-in-1 (and USB) drivers, and the Highpoint drivers. The Via ones cover everything else on the motherboard other than the Highpoint controller.
 
Yo MadAd, your suggestion that a review be done is valuable and indeed is in need of being undertaken. Anand is a good choice for this as his reviews are some of the better/best around. But speculatively speaking, since the PCI bus operates at a normal clock speed of 33Hz and overclocking (OC) the PCI bus is generally not advisable, except slightly (maybe up to as much as 39 Hz), then I would think that by design the onboard controllers would indeed be better/faster than a dedicated PCI controller card. These onboard controllers can indeed be OC?d and are tied to the front side bus (FSB) ?NO? If so, then the onboard controller would indeed benefit from the faster FSB OC? YES?

Am I not thinking clearly here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top