440 chipset and hard drive limitation

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte (More info?)

"Mark M" <MarkM_csiphsCANT_RECEIVE_MAIL@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:94CC968FDACB93A75@130.133.1.4
> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
>
> > "Mark M" MarkM_csiphsCANT_RECEIVE_MAIL@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:94CA9C681959B3A75@130.133.1.4...
> > > "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Clear enough for me. Doesn't change a word of what I said.
> > > > Just pushing a few chips around in a predetermined
> > > > rectangle in a CAD program to make the design look
> > > > different from someone elses and then ordering some
> > > > sweatshop to make it and plonk a BIOS on it directly from
> > > > AWARD with their name in it, doesn't make them more than
> > > > just a marketing operation.
> > >
> > >
> > > So can you explain why Gigabyte are saying there in a 75 GB
> > > limit on this board which their BIOS upgrade overcomes?
> >
> > Because some clown sent them the revised bios saying that it
> > resolved the 75GB limitation (or something similar obscure).
>
>
> Well Folkert you wont believe this but the last email I got from
> Gigabyte tech support said this:
>
> <QUOTE>
> I am correct i have one of these boards myself.

Aha, so Gigabyte tech support is a one person operation.
And now that person is covering for himself.

>
> Question :
> I think you are wrong when you say "im afraid the 440 chipset only
> allows up to 75GB".
> <UNQUOTE>
>
> Maybe this belief pervades the whole of the Gigabyte organization?
> Maybe, just maybe, they are correct.

We already established that they weren't. It's not the chipset.

>
> But I am left wondering what the hell they are talking about and
> why they say there is a 75 GB limit. Any ideas what they could be
> referring to (bearing in mind that a BIOS flash is said to fix it)?

Read my response to Roger.

>
> Surely it could not be that they are unable to write "137 GB" or
> "128 GB" and instead they wrote 75 GB by mistake?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte (More info?)

-- snip --

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
>>
>> Maybe this belief pervades the whole of the Gigabyte
>> organization? Maybe, just maybe, they are correct.
>
> We already established that they weren't. It's not the
> chipset.
>
>>
>> But I am left wondering what the hell they are talking about
>> and why they say there is a 75 GB limit. Any ideas what they
>> could be referring to (bearing in mind that a BIOS flash is
>> said to fix it)?
>
> Read my response to Roger.
>

I must confess I don't really understand the details of what you
have written to him. To take a guess maybe "P-CHS" means "physical
CHS" and you are referring to an emulation of the physcial CHS.

Anyway, it seems it may lie deep in the BIOS so I will just accept
that the BIOS flash fixes it. I can't try the BIOS flash for a
while so I will have to wait to see if it really does do the trick.

>>
>> Surely it could not be that they are unable to write "137 GB"
>> or "128 GB" and instead they wrote 75 GB by mistake?
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte (More info?)

"Mark M" <MarkM_csiphsCANT_RECEIVE_MAIL@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:94CCEE246E8A43A75@130.133.1.4
> -- snip --
>
> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
> > >
> > > Maybe this belief pervades the whole of the Gigabyte
> > > organization? Maybe, just maybe, they are correct.
> >
> > We already established that they weren't. It's not the
> > chipset.
> >
> > >
> > > But I am left wondering what the hell they are talking about
> > > and why they say there is a 75 GB limit. Any ideas what they
> > > could be referring to (bearing in mind that a BIOS flash is
> > > said to fix it)?
> >
> > Read my response to Roger.
> >
>
> I must confess I don't really understand the details of what you
> have written to him. To take a guess maybe "P-CHS" means "physical
> CHS" and you are referring to an emulation of the physcial CHS.

L-CHS is the CHS as used by the software interface (int13 etc.)
P-CHS is a translated CHS as used by the harddrive interface.

For some odd reason software makers and hardware makers went a dif-
ferent route expanding the old 20-bit (528MB) CHS (1024 16 63) to 24-
bit (8GB) CHS. L-CHS expanded the Heads register with 4 bits (1024 256
63) and P-CHS expanded the Cylinder register with 6 bits (65536 16 63).
Although 2 bits more P-CHS is still limited to C*H*S= 8GB.

>
> Anyway, it seems it may lie deep in the BIOS so I will just accept
> that the BIOS flash fixes it. I can't try the BIOS flash for a
> while so I will have to wait to see if it really does do the trick.
>
> > >
> > > Surely it could not be that they are unable to write "137 GB"
> > > or "128 GB" and instead they wrote 75 GB by mistake?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte (More info?)

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message
news:c5muuf$3k25l$1@ID-79662.news.uni-berlin.de...
> "Mark M" <MarkM_csiphsCANT_RECEIVE_MAIL@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:94CC968FDACB93A75@130.133.1.4
> > "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
> >
> > > "Mark M" MarkM_csiphsCANT_RECEIVE_MAIL@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:94CA9C681959B3A75@130.133.1.4...
> > > > "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Clear enough for me. Doesn't change a word of what I said.
> > > > > Just pushing a few chips around in a predetermined
> > > > > rectangle in a CAD program to make the design look
> > > > > different from someone elses and then ordering some
> > > > > sweatshop to make it and plonk a BIOS on it directly from
> > > > > AWARD with their name in it, doesn't make them more than
> > > > > just a marketing operation.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > So can you explain why Gigabyte are saying there in a 75 GB
> > > > limit on this board which their BIOS upgrade overcomes?
> > >
> > > Because some clown sent them the revised bios saying that it
> > > resolved the 75GB limitation (or something similar obscure).
> >
> >
> > Well Folkert you wont believe this but the last email I got from
> > Gigabyte tech support said this:
> >
> > <QUOTE>
> > I am correct i have one of these boards myself.
>
> Aha, so Gigabyte tech support is a one person operation.
> And now that person is covering for himself.
>
> >
> > Question :
> > I think you are wrong when you say "im afraid the 440 chipset only
> > allows up to 75GB".
> > <UNQUOTE>
> >
> > Maybe this belief pervades the whole of the Gigabyte organization?
> > Maybe, just maybe, they are correct.
>
> We already established that they weren't. It's not the chipset.
>
> >
> > But I am left wondering what the hell they are talking about and
> > why they say there is a 75 GB limit. Any ideas what they could be
> > referring to (bearing in mind that a BIOS flash is said to fix it)?
>
> Read my response to Roger.
>
> >
> > Surely it could not be that they are unable to write "137 GB" or
> > "128 GB" and instead they wrote 75 GB by mistake?
Both Folkert, and I think that this problem, is probably down to a numeric
'translation' limit inside the BIOS. There is definately no 'chipset' limit
at this point (given that a BIOS change fixes it, and thousands of other
boards with the same chipset do not have a problem). Basically, there are a
number of different 'values' used inside the IDE code. There are the
'numbers' used to refer to cylinders, heads etc., that are translated inside
the drive to the 'real' geometry of the drive, and are also translated from
'LBA' values inside the BIOS. Now (for instance, not a real example...),
suppose you elected to take the values at one point in the BIOS, and do the
arithmetic using BCD, and use a register at some point in the maths, that
limited the maximum value in the 'maths' to 99999999. Since you are dealing
with 'sector counts', this would give a drive size 'limit' of 50GB. This
would be entirely a 'BIOS' problem (trying to blame it on the chipset, would
just be down to wanting to find somebody else to blame for the programmers
error). 75G, is a very 'odd' number in these terms, since generally all the
arithmetic is binary (with some silly 'oddities' in the actual numbers
allowed, which are the result of 'history' in the interface, and the upgrade
methods chosen at times). It sounds as though perhaps one part of the
conversion code, is thorougly 'screwed'...

Best Wishes

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte (More info?)

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:c5ngp6$3me7f$1@ID-79662.news.uni-berlin.de
> "Mark M" <MarkM_csiphsCANT_RECEIVE_MAIL@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:94CCEE246E8A43A75@130.133.1.4
> > -- snip --
> >
> > "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Maybe this belief pervades the whole of the Gigabyte
> > > > organization? Maybe, just maybe, they are correct.
> > >
> > > We already established that they weren't. It's not the chipset.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > But I am left wondering what the hell they are talking about
> > > > and why they say there is a 75 GB limit. Any ideas what they
> > > > could be referring to (bearing in mind that a BIOS flash is
> > > > said to fix it)?
> > >
> > > Read my response to Roger.
> > >
> >
> > I must confess I don't really understand the details of what you
> > have written to him. To take a guess maybe "P-CHS" means "physical
> > CHS" and you are referring to an emulation of the physcial CHS.
>
> L-CHS is the CHS as used by the software interface (int13 etc.)
> P-CHS is a translated CHS as used by the harddrive interface.
>
> For some odd reason software makers and hardware makers went a dif-
> ferent route expanding the old 20-bit (528MB) CHS (1024 16 63) to 24-
> bit (8GB) CHS. L-CHS expanded the *Heads* register with 4 bits (1024 256
> 63) and P-CHS expanded the *Cylinder* register with 6 bits (65536 16 63).
> Although 2 bits more P-CHS is still limited to C*H*S= 8GB.
>
> >
> > Anyway, it seems it may lie deep in the BIOS so I will just accept
> > that the BIOS flash fixes it. I can't try the BIOS flash for a
> > while so I will have to wait to see if it really does do the trick.

Btw: doing what trick?
You "have not come across a 75 GB limit" so what do you think you'll notice?

> >
> > > >
> > > > Surely it could not be that they are unable to write "137 GB"
> > > > or "128 GB" and instead they wrote 75 GB by mistake?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte (More info?)

"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:

>> > Anyway, it seems it may lie deep in the BIOS so I will just
>> > accept that the BIOS flash fixes it. I can't try the BIOS
>> > flash for a while so I will have to wait to see if it
>> > really does do the trick.
>
> Btw: doing what trick?
> You "have not come across a 75 GB limit" so what do you think
> you'll notice?



I hope that flashing this mobo's BIOS will allow it to see the
space about 75 GB on the drive.

After I flashed it I still can't see all of a 160 GB drive.

Maybe it has a 128/137 GB limit now.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte (More info?)

"Mark M" <MarkM_csiphsCANT_RECEIVE_MAIL@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:94CEB02E365E3A75@130.133.1.4...
>
> I hope that flashing this mobo's BIOS will allow it to see the
> space about 75 GB on the drive.
>
> After I flashed it I still can't see all of a 160 GB drive.
>
> Maybe it has a 128/137 GB limit now.

You have an ancient mainboard. Why do you expect more than 135GB?

Maybe you should follow all the other threads about LBA-48 and BIOS support.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte (More info?)

"Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@graffiti.net> wrote:

>> I hope that flashing this mobo's BIOS will allow it to see
>> the space about 75 GB on the drive.
>>
>> After I flashed it I still can't see all of a 160 GB drive.
>>
>> Maybe it has a 128/137 GB limit now.
>
>
> You have an ancient mainboard. Why do you expect more than
> 135GB?
>
> Maybe you should follow all the other threads about LBA-48 and
> BIOS support.


You are right. The mobo is far too old. I think it may destined
for the trash sometime soon.

Although it has no cash value, I had originally wanted to use the
mobo in a machine to get on the net when my main machine was down.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte (More info?)

"Mark M" <MarkM_csiphsCANT_RECEIVE_MAIL@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:94CEB02E365E3A75@130.133.1.4
> "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote:
>
> > > > Anyway, it seems it may lie deep in the BIOS so I will just
> > > > accept that the BIOS flash fixes it. I can't try the BIOS
> > > > flash for a while so I will have to wait to see if it
> > > > really does do the trick.
> >
> > Btw: doing what trick?
> > You "have not come across a 75 GB limit" so what do you think
> > you'll notice?
>
>
>
> I hope that flashing this mobo's BIOS will allow it to see the
> space about 75 GB on the drive.

Sigh! <plonk>

>
> After I flashed it I still can't see all of a 160 GB drive.
>
> Maybe it has a 128/137 GB limit now.