Configuration of 2 HDD's

[yabbadoo]

My pc currently has 1 HDD, a CD-RW and DVD drive.
Am about to get a second HDD.
Using XP Home.

Configuration suggested to me is to have the C: drive on IDE 0, with CD-RW
as slave, and 2nd HDD on IDE 1 cable, with DVD drive as slave.

Alternative is to have 2nd HDD as "slave" to C:, on IDE 0, with the CD/DVD
on IDE1

Which is best? 2nd HDD is 7200 rpm 120 GB (primary C: is 7200 40GB, and I
will NOT be swapping the drives/OS over).

Len.

 

[Jon_Hildrum]

My recommendation is to install both harddrives on EIDE 1 with the CDRW as
primary on cable two and the DVD as slave on cable 2.

Sometimes DVD and CDRW drives doesn't seem to like each other in which case
you can change the configuration

 

[Guest]

The reason for setting IDE0 with System Files HDD and one Optical then IDE1
with Data / Applications HDD and second optical is purely performance related.

One has the system SWAP file causing constant read / write activity on the C
Drive and thus if your Data is on D Drive then you have a second IDE path to
access.

Same goes for CD / DVDs. Data can be written to cache [or temp] file on C
Drive before being written to the burner on IDE1. It can read from IDE0 and
write to IDE1 reducing conflicts and or waiting.

Now this presupposes that your IDE cable allows that you can physically
connect the drives in such a manner. Some IDE cable are too short to
accomodate this in mini or full tower cases.

 

[yabbadoo]

Jon, BAR - thank you.
Len.

 

[Anna]

My pc currently has 1 HDD, a CD-RW and DVD drive.
Am about to get a second HDD.
Using XP Home.

Configuration suggested to me is to have the C: drive on IDE 0, with CD-RW
as slave, and 2nd HDD on IDE 1 cable, with DVD drive as slave.

Alternative is to have 2nd HDD as "slave" to C:, on IDE 0, with the
CD/DVD on IDE1

Which is best? 2nd HDD is 7200 rpm 120 GB (primary C: is 7200 40GB, and I
will NOT be swapping the drives/OS over).

Len.

Len:
As you've already discovered, you can make book on the fact that you'll get
responses to your query that will cover the gamut on where to connect your
four IDE devices. And guess what? They'll all be correct. Friends and I have
made detailed experiments re connecting IDE/ATAPI devices to this or that
IDE channel and varying their Master/Slave relationships in every
conceivable configuration. In our tests, in nearly every case, we discerned
no perceptible differences in data transfer rates or speed enhancements of
any kind, regardless of how the devices were configured and/or connected. I
say "nearly in every case" because we did come across some motherboards that
would allow a HD to be booted *only* from a Primary Master position.

But don't take my word, or anyone else's word for it. Experiment for
yourself. It's relatively simple to connect your IDE/ATAPI devices in
various configurations and perform speed tests to determine if there's any
appreciable differences resulting from one configuration over another. In
each instance, measure the speed of the day-to-day tasks you ordinarily
carry out, e.g., accessing programs, copying/moving files, photo/graphics
editing, burning CDs, and the like. It's conceivable that you may have some
special function(s) that favor this or that configuration.
Art

 

[Kerry Brown]

It depends on how old your motherboard and the CD/DVD drives are. Anything
from the last couple of years it won't matter how you hook them up. Older
than that you may have to experiment to determine the best configuration.
With older hardware it is usually best to hook up the hard drives on the
same cable. Some older CD-RW drives don't burn well when set up as a slave.
Likewise some older DVD-ROM drives don't like being set as a slave.
Hopefully your system is new enough that you can just hook up the new drive
anywhere.

Kerry Brown
KDB Systems

 

[Trent©]

My pc currently has 1 HDD, a CD-RW and DVD drive.
Am about to get a second HDD.
Using XP Home.

Configuration suggested to me is to have the C: drive on IDE 0, with CD-RW
as slave, and 2nd HDD on IDE 1 cable, with DVD drive as slave.

Alternative is to have 2nd HDD as "slave" to C:, on IDE 0, with the CD/DVD
on IDE1

Which is best? 2nd HDD is 7200 rpm 120 GB (primary C: is 7200 40GB, and I
will NOT be swapping the drives/OS over).

Len.

It depends on your work habits. But, in general, you should have the
drive going FROM and the drive going TO on separate controllers.

So...

If yer gonna do a lot of burning from the DVD to the cdrw, put them on
opposing controllers.

If yer gonna constantly be moving files from one hard drive to the
other, then THESE should be on opposing controllers.


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[yabbadoo]

Anna, Terry, Trent - thanks. At present a theoretical question, I don't get
the new drive till end of this week, butr it's good to know that it needs no
special set-up. I'd hoped to have the 2 HDD's on different IDE's, so all I
now need to know is - on IDE 1 (second HDD) should it be set to "master" or
"slave" on that ribbon cable?

My m/b is a 3 year-old ASUS A7V266E manufactured 23/1/2002 (per Everest
report), Athlon1800+ chip (1.533Ghz).

Thanks again, Len

 

[Alex Nichol]

My pc currently has 1 HDD, a CD-RW and DVD drive.
Am about to get a second HDD.
Using XP Home.

Configuration suggested to me is to have the C: drive on IDE 0, with CD-RW
as slave, and 2nd HDD on IDE 1 cable, with DVD drive as slave.

Alternative is to have 2nd HDD as "slave" to C:, on IDE 0, with the CD/DVD
on IDE1

I would have the HDDs separate as the masters. That means that copying
files from one to the other is faster because transfers can go on on
both at once

Put the burner on the cable with the HDD you are less likely to burn
from

 

[Anna]

I would have the HDDs separate as the masters. That means that copying
files from one to the other is faster because transfers can go on on
both at once

Put the burner on the cable with the HDD you are less likely to burn
from

yabbaddoo...
As I responded in a prior post...
As you've already discovered, you can make book on the fact that you'll get
responses to your query that will cover the gamut on where to connect your
four IDE devices. And guess what? They'll all be correct. Friends and I have
made detailed experiments re connecting IDE/ATAPI devices to this or that
IDE channel and varying their Master/Slave relationships in every
conceivable configuration. Using "modern" devices, i.e., those manufactured
within the past four years, our tests revealed that in nearly every case, we
could discern *no* perceptible differences in data transfer rates or speed
enhancements of any kind, regardless of how the devices were configured
and/or connected. I say "nearly in every case" because we did come across
some motherboards that would allow a HD to be booted *only* from a Primary
Master position. But aside from that one anomaly, it simply made no
difference in performance as to how the devices were connected/configured.

But don't take my word, or anyone else's word for it. Experiment for
yourself. It's relatively simple to connect your IDE/ATAPI devices in
various configurations and perform speed tests to determine if there's any
appreciable differences resulting from one configuration over another. In
each instance, measure the speed of the day-to-day tasks you ordinarily
carry out, e.g., accessing programs, copying/moving files, photo/graphics
editing, burning CDs, and the like. It's conceivable that you may have some
special function(s) that favor this or that configuration.
Anna

 

[Trent©]

Anna, Terry, Trent - thanks. At present a theoretical question, I don't get
the new drive till end of this week, butr it's good to know that it needs no
special set-up. I'd hoped to have the 2 HDD's on different IDE's, so all I
now need to know is - on IDE 1 (second HDD) should it be set to "master" or
"slave" on that ribbon cable?

It depends on how you WANT it set!! You can set it either to master
or to slave.

If its set to master, you should have a slave attached (depending on
the manufacturer...(check the literature and/or drive for precise
instructions).

If you set it to slave, you should have a master attached to that
cable.

Good luck.


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Anna]

Anna, Terry, Trent - thanks. At present a theoretical question, I don't
get
the new drive till end of this week, butr it's good to know that it needs
no
special set-up. I'd hoped to have the 2 HDD's on different IDE's, so all
I
now need to know is - on IDE 1 (second HDD) should it be set to "master"
or >>"slave" on that ribbon cable?

[/QUOTE]

It depends on how you WANT it set!! You can set it either to master
or to slave.

If its set to master, you should have a slave attached (depending on
the manufacturer...(check the literature and/or drive for precise
instructions).

If you set it to slave, you should have a master attached to that
cable.

Good luck.


Have a nice one...
Trent

Trent:
I may have misunderstood what you've stated, but if you're saying that it is
necessary to have a IDE device present that is connected and configured as
Slave whenever a device is connected and configured as Master on an IDE
cable, this is simply not so. It's entirely possible to have a device
connected/configured as Master without any Slave being present on that IDE
cable. The same is true when a device is connected/configured as Slave;
there's no need to have a Master device connected/configured on that IDE
cable. Obviously it would be an odd situation (to say the least!) where a
IDE device would be connected/configured as a Slave when no Master was
present.

Let me repeat my previous posting...
As you've already discovered, you can make book on the fact that you'll get
responses to your query that will cover the gamut on where to connect your
four IDE devices. And guess what? They'll all be correct. Friends and I have
made detailed experiments re connecting IDE/ATAPI devices to this or that
IDE channel and varying their Master/Slave relationships in every
conceivable configuration. Using "modern" devices, i.e., those manufactured
within the past four years, our tests revealed that in nearly every case, we
could discern *no* perceptible differences in data transfer rates or speed
enhancements of any kind, regardless of how the devices were configured
and/or connected. I say "nearly in every case" because we did come across
some motherboards that would allow a HD to be booted *only* from a Primary
Master position. But aside from that one anomaly, it simply made no
difference in performance as to how the devices were connected/configured.

But don't take my word, or anyone else's word for it. Experiment for
yourself. It's relatively simple to connect your IDE/ATAPI devices in
various configurations and perform speed tests to determine if there's any
appreciable differences resulting from one configuration over another. In
each instance, measure the speed of the day-to-day tasks you ordinarily
carry out, e.g., accessing programs, copying/moving files, photo/graphics
editing, burning CDs, and the like. It's conceivable that you may have some
special function(s) that favor this or that configuration.
Anna

 

[Trent©]

Trent:
I may have misunderstood what you've stated, but if you're saying that it is
necessary to have a IDE device present that is connected and configured as
Slave whenever a device is connected and configured as Master on an IDE
cable, this is simply not so.

Sorry...but it IS so...with many drives...but not with ALL drives.

If you have the drive configured as 'master'...and there is no slave
attached (a drive cannot be a 'master' without a 'slave')...then the
drive will not be recognized...in some cases.

It's entirely possible to have a device
connected/configured as Master without any Slave being present on that IDE
cable.

Yes...it is possible. But that does not negate the fact that
sometimes its NOT possible. It depends on the drive.

Let me repeat my previous posting...

WHY do you keep repeating this post?! lol Trust us...we've READ it!!


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Anna]

Trent:
Please see my inline comments...

Sorry...but it IS so...with many drives...but not with ALL drives.

If you have the drive configured as 'master'...and there is no slave
attached (a drive cannot be a 'master' without a 'slave')...then the
drive will not be recognized...in some cases.

This is simply not so. I've installed hundreds, repeat, hundreds! of
different model hard drives over the years from virtually every manufacturer
of hard drives and I have NEVER encountered even a single instance where a
hard drive that was connected/configured as Master refused to boot because
no Slave device was connected on its IDE cable.

Yes...it is possible. But that does not negate the fact that
sometimes its NOT possible. It depends on the drive.

WHY do you keep repeating this post?! lol Trust us...we've READ it!!

That's swell. Now I hope you've learned something from it.
Anna

 

[Trent©]

This is simply not so. I've installed hundreds, repeat, hundreds! of
different model hard drives over the years from virtually every manufacturer
of hard drives and I have NEVER encountered even a single instance where a
hard drive that was connected/configured as Master refused to boot because
no Slave device was connected on its IDE cable.

Are you saying that you installed hundreds of drives...jumpered as
master...with no slave attached? Why would you do that?

Why wouldn't you install them as 'single' drive?

I can't believe that you would purposely make that
mistake...especially hundreds of times. That would be irresponsible.

That's swell. Now I hope you've learned something from it.
Anna

I thought it was a good post. I just didn't understand why you quoted
it AGAIN to me. It has nothing to do with what we're talkin' about
now...although I did find it objective and fairly accurate. I have no
problem with it...it was a good reply.

P.S. I've run across some drives that were hard jumpered INSIDE the
drive. There were jumper terminals on the outside of the drive...as
on most drives...but the jumpers simply were not connected.

The drives were jumpered internally as master. If you didn't have a
slave attached, the machine simply wouldn't boot. You could only run
the machine with a cable-select cable...and the slave had to be
manually jumpered as a slave.

There's a lot of things out there with computers...that neither you
nor I have seen yet! lol


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Anna]

Trent writes...

Trent - Again, see my online responses...

Are you saying that you installed hundreds of drives...jumpered as
master...with no slave attached? Why would you do that?

Because the hard drives were installed on hundreds of different computers.
In these instances the only other IDE device on the machine was a CD/DVD-ROM
or burner, in which case that latter device was connected as Secondary
Master. So there were no slaved devices on either IDE channel. And as I
previously stated, I can't recall a single instance of having any difficulty
with a hard drive booting in the absence of a device configured as Slave on
the same IDE cable.

Why wouldn't you install them as 'single' drive?

Virtually all the hard drives (IBM, Maxtor, Seagate, etc.) do not have a
"Single" jumper setting. They could be jumpered as Master, Slave, or Cable
Select. Western Digital does have the Single jumper setting and we would
configure that HD accordingly.

I can't believe that you would purposely make that
mistake...especially hundreds of times. That would be irresponsible.

Trent, I won't even dignify that comment with a response.
Anna

I thought it was a good post. I just didn't understand why you quoted
it AGAIN to me. It has nothing to do with what we're talkin' about
now...although I did find it objective and fairly accurate. I have no
problem with it...it was a good reply.

Frankly, even though my remarks are directed to you, in a wider sense
they're directed at the audience perusing this newgroup's postings, many of
whom are relatively inexperienced and are prone to accept misinformation and
distortions as fact simply because the posting they've come across seems to
be authored by a competant commentator, well-meaning as that person may be.
Anna

 

[Timothy Daniels]

Are you saying that you installed hundreds of drives...jumpered as
master...with no slave attached? Why would you do that?

Why wouldn't you install them as 'single' drive?

I can't believe that you would purposely make that
mistake...especially hundreds of times. That would be irresponsible.

Trent, you're distributing disinformation. Please desist.

If you are sincere, you are making the mistake of assuming that
all hard drives have a "Single" jumper setting. That is only found
AFAIK, on Western Digital hard drives. On all other hard drives
there is no need to jumper a hard drive as either Master or Slave
if it is the only hard drive on the IDE channel (i.e. on a dual-device
cable).

*TimDaniels*

 

[Trent©]

Because the hard drives were installed on hundreds of different computers.
In these instances the only other IDE device on the machine was a CD/DVD-ROM
or burner, in which case that latter device was connected as Secondary
Master. So there were no slaved devices on either IDE channel. And as I
previously stated, I can't recall a single instance of having any difficulty
with a hard drive booting in the absence of a device configured as Slave on
the same IDE cable.

I never suggested that you WOULD have a problem. What I *DID* suggest
is that, with many drives, you WILL have a problem if you jumper the
drive as 'master'...and there is no slave.

You seemed to suggest that you did exactly THAT...hundreds of times.
That you jumpered the drives as 'master'...with no slave attached.

The jumper setting on many drives is for 'master OR single drive'.
Maybe THAT'S what you did. That is NOT the same as jumpering it as
the master.

Virtually all the hard drives (IBM, Maxtor, Seagate, etc.) do not have a
"Single" jumper setting.

Virtually ALL? What about Western Digital? They don't fit into the
scheme of things?! lol

They could be jumpered as Master, Slave, or Cable
Select. Western Digital does have the Single jumper setting and we would
configure that HD accordingly.

Then they WEREN'T configured as master? Is that what yer tellin' us
now? If so, they re-read my comments that initiated these comments
from you.

Trent, I won't even dignify that comment with a response.
Anna

My point is...you really DIDN'T test it hundreds of times...by
configuring a WD as master with no slave attached.

I think, in retrospect, you find my initial comments quite accurate.

Frankly, even though my remarks are directed to you, in a wider sense
they're directed at the audience perusing this newgroup's postings, many of
whom are relatively inexperienced and are prone to accept misinformation and
distortions as fact simply because the posting they've come across seems to
be authored by a competant commentator, well-meaning as that person may be.
Anna

You should test your comments...then get back to us.

Try the OEM Seagates that I mentioned in my previous post...although
they're very rare and hard to find nowadays.

Try to remember...just because YOU'VE never had a particular computer
experience doesn't automatically make the other person wrong.


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Trent©]

Honestly, this is not a plant, but I just found this post in this
group...posted by someone else.

He posted, in part...

My new DVD burner would not read or recognize CDs so I removed it from
my system for replacement. My system would not boot or even recognize
my hard drives. I removed one of my hard drives and put it into an
external USB case and was able to read it on my laptop. My conclusion
was that I had a motherboard failure. I replaced my Asrock K7S8X with
the Asrock K7VT6 (closest shipping model) and still had the boot
problem. Turned out that my drive was jumpered for Master w/ Slave
present and since I removed the DVD system would not recognize HD so I
jumpered HD to Master w/ no slave present.

(e-mail address removed)



Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!

 

[Trent©]

If you are sincere, you are making the mistake of assuming that
all hard drives have a "Single" jumper setting.

Where did I even SUGGEST what yer sayin'? lol

That is only found
AFAIK, on Western Digital hard drives.

Yup...exactly. And what I stated is completely accurate.

On all other hard drives
there is no need to jumper a hard drive as either Master or Slave
if it is the only hard drive on the IDE channel (i.e. on a dual-device
cable).

Every drive ever made? Not true!


Have a nice one...

Trent

Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!