Max HD Size with A8N-E, nForce 4 Ultra Chipset and WinXP SP3

I have a 250GB drive, running XP SP2.

I want to replace the system drive with a new one and consider a
larger drive but I can't remember or find what the size limit for this
hardware/software combo is.

Any help appreciated.

DC

I have an a8n-sli deluxe (similar?) and a 500 gb sata hard disk attached
working...

hope it helps

TJ

On 12/11/08 09:11 pm DennyCrane@MadCow.net wrote:

> I have a 250GB drive, running XP SP2.
>
> I want to replace the system drive with a new one and consider a
> larger drive but I can't remember or find what the size limit for this
> hardware/software combo is.
>
> Any help appreciated.

I have an A8N-E with a 500GB Seagate drive. I haven't tried anything
larger. WinXP Home SP3 -- and SP2 before that.

Perce

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:56:13 +0100, TJ <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>I have an a8n-sli deluxe (similar?) and a 500 gb sata hard disk attached
>working...
>
>hope it helps
>
>TJ

Thanks, that's about as large as I'd want to go.

DC

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:36:00 -0500, "Percival P. Cassidy"
<nobody@notmyISP.net> wrote:

>On 12/11/08 09:11 pm DennyCrane@MadCow.net wrote:
>
>> I have a 250GB drive, running XP SP2.
>>
>> I want to replace the system drive with a new one and consider a
>> larger drive but I can't remember or find what the size limit for this
>> hardware/software combo is.
>>
>> Any help appreciated.
>
>I have an A8N-E with a 500GB Seagate drive. I haven't tried anything
>larger. WinXP Home SP3 -- and SP2 before that.
>
>Perce

Good to know. The next size barrier is probably over 1 TB.

Thanks,

DC

On 12/12/08 11:36 am I wrote:

>> I have a 250GB drive, running XP SP2.
>>
>> I want to replace the system drive with a new one and consider a
>> larger drive but I can't remember or find what the size limit for this
>> hardware/software combo is.
>>
>> Any help appreciated.
>
> I have an A8N-E with a 500GB Seagate drive. I haven't tried anything
> larger. WinXP Home SP3 -- and SP2 before that.

I forgot to mention that the BIOS revision may make a difference to the
max. drive size supported. I have the latest, but I can't be sure of the
number now -- 1102??

Perce

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:02:51 -0500, "Percival P. Cassidy"
<nobody@notmyISP.net> wrote:

>On 12/12/08 11:36 am I wrote:
>
>>> I have a 250GB drive, running XP SP2.
>>>
>>> I want to replace the system drive with a new one and consider a
>>> larger drive but I can't remember or find what the size limit for this
>>> hardware/software combo is.
>>>
>>> Any help appreciated.
>>
>> I have an A8N-E with a 500GB Seagate drive. I haven't tried anything
>> larger. WinXP Home SP3 -- and SP2 before that.
>
>I forgot to mention that the BIOS revision may make a difference to the
>max. drive size supported. I have the latest, but I can't be sure of the
>number now -- 1102??
>
>Perce

I just looked at ASUS and 1013 is the latest and that's what I have.

DC

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:40:22 -0600, DennyCrane@MadCow.net wrote:

>Good to know. The next size barrier is probably over 1 TB.

With 48-bit LBA, at least in theory the limitation in the
controller-hardware is 128 PiB @ 512 byte sectors if I remember
correctly. But there are other issues in the efficiency in todays
filesystems when comes long before the 48-bit LBA-limit is reached


--
Clas Mehus
- "Den som har flest prylar när han dör vinner..."

Clas Mehus wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:40:22 -0600, DennyCrane@MadCow.net wrote:
>
>> Good to know. The next size barrier is probably over 1 TB.
>
> With 48-bit LBA, at least in theory the limitation in the
> controller-hardware is 128 PiB @ 512 byte sectors if I remember
> correctly. But there are other issues in the efficiency in todays
> filesystems when comes long before the 48-bit LBA-limit is reached
>

The limits I know of -

1) 128GiB/137GB limit. That is the transition point from
28 bit LBA to 48 bit LBA on IDE. 2**28 512byte sectors.

2) 2.2TB Windows limit. May be due to using a 32 bit integer
to hold a sector number. So even though a computer may have
support for 48 bit LBA, the container used to hold the
sector number may truncate it. This typically affects
people who set up RAID arrays. One workaround is a hardware
hack to change sector size (used on some high end RAID cards).

3) That 128 PiB due to the 48 bit LBA.

Yet, we do see other limits. USB enclosures that fail to work
with 250GB, 500GB, 1TB drives etc. Some motherboards not
seeming to work with 1TB SATA. Perhaps similar issues with
chips like SIL3112/SIL3114 ? I haven't been keeping track
of this, and really don't have any suggestions as to why
some of these intermediate storage sizes have an issue.

Paul

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:41:03 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.com> wrote:

>Clas Mehus wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:40:22 -0600, DennyCrane@MadCow.net wrote:
>>
>>> Good to know. The next size barrier is probably over 1 TB.
>>
>> With 48-bit LBA, at least in theory the limitation in the
>> controller-hardware is 128 PiB @ 512 byte sectors if I remember
>> correctly. But there are other issues in the efficiency in todays
>> filesystems when comes long before the 48-bit LBA-limit is reached
>>
>
>The limits I know of -
>
>1) 128GiB/137GB limit. That is the transition point from
> 28 bit LBA to 48 bit LBA on IDE. 2**28 512byte sectors.
>
>2) 2.2TB Windows limit. May be due to using a 32 bit integer
> to hold a sector number. So even though a computer may have
> support for 48 bit LBA, the container used to hold the
> sector number may truncate it. This typically affects
> people who set up RAID arrays. One workaround is a hardware
> hack to change sector size (used on some high end RAID cards).
>
>3) That 128 PiB due to the 48 bit LBA.
>
>Yet, we do see other limits. USB enclosures that fail to work
>with 250GB, 500GB, 1TB drives etc. Some motherboards not
>seeming to work with 1TB SATA. Perhaps similar issues with
>chips like SIL3112/SIL3114 ? I haven't been keeping track
>of this, and really don't have any suggestions as to why
>some of these intermediate storage sizes have an issue.
>
> Paul

Thank you, professor. That certainly does answer the question within
the scope of what I'm planning to do. I'll save this for reference
when my old brain no longer remembers it.

DC