(Msg. 9) Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 10:41 pm
Post subject: Re: external eSata enclosure drive recognition? Add to elertz [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: microsoft>public>windowsxp>hardware (more info?)
Bill in Co. wrote:
>
> I do have a PCI and PCI Express slot available. But right now, I simply
> put the eSata connector cable and mounting bracket in there, so that I can
> plug in my external eSata HD enclosure into the computer in the back, using
> the SATA cables.
>
>> I didn't see mention of the Dell model number of your machine, and maybe
>
> I have a Dell Inspiron 530, and I am using Windows XP Home Edition.
> I know it has the ICH9 controller, at least, and NOT the newer ICH9R, etc,
> which has AHCI)
>
>> I could look at the motherboard picture, to see what other options are
>> available.
>
> Thanks.
> I also reread some more about that MSFN unofficial AHCI patch again, at this
> web site (referenced in that wiki article you mentioned), but am slightly
> wary of this. But, who knows??? And it is at one of the MSFN sites, so
> that ought to count for something. Here is the link:
>
> http://www.msfn.org/board/How-to-enable-AHCI-on-Intel-ICH9-under-X-t109450.html >
> If that patch worked, it sure would be a cheap way to get AHCI installed, as
> it "just" involves updating some files (uses a few tweaks to get AHCI to be
> "allowed").
>
> But your idea of a separate controller card sounds perhaps better, and
> safer, I guess, albeit more expensive. Although I'm not sure if it would
> mess up any of my other SATA stuff (like the primary HD, and possibly the
> DVD drive, although they are connected I presume through the ICH9 controller
> on the MB, which hopefully not conflict in any way with another controller
> being added to the system. I'm not sure how the Dell BIOS would handle or
> even recognize this changeover, however. As it is now, the Dell BIOS only
> shows the option for IDE emulation of SATA, since that goes with the Intel
> MB and chipsets I have on this Dell 530, presumably.
>
A separate card can be used two ways. It can be used for a "data only" disk,
one you don't care to boot from. In that case, it doesn't matter whether
the BIOS chip on the separate card, loads or not.
If you want to boot from a drive connected to a separate card, then the BIOS
chip on the card has to load. The BIOS does stuff like provide an extended
INT 0x13 routine, which provides the ability to read sectors from the disk
during bootup. Effectively, it is like a driver during boot time. Some
motherboard BIOS have an option called "Interrupt 19 capture". The difference
between the two statements I just made, is 0x13 is hexadecimal (1*16 + 3),
while the second statement uses a decimal number (19). Why the industry cannot
stick with one way of stating it, eludes me. Asus, in their BIOS, should really
refer to it as 0x13. I mean, when I first saw that setting, I didn't know
what it was for. Later, a little clue light bulb went on, that 0x13 and
19 were the same thing.
"Capture", means to load the BIOS on any separate cards. So my motherboard
has an option to disable all add-on ROMs, or allow them to be loaded.
If you allow them to be loaded, then the separate add-in cards can be
used for booting the computer.
On an add-in card that supports RAID, the BIOS chip on the card can even
include BIOS screens for declaring RAID arrays and the like. So the add-in
BIOS can add a user interface, for basic management functions before booting.
The Silicon Image cards I've seen, all have a BIOS chip on them. It can even
be reflashed, to change the functionality (RAID or non-RAID).
While I like the MSFN article you found, and don't doubt it would work,
I guess I look at the results, and ask how many situations will arise
at some future date, where I'd regret doing it. I keep very simple setups
here.
1) Ports set to vanilla IDE mode. This allows the default Microsoft driver
to load, so I don't need to press F6 during an install.
2) No dynamic disks.
3) No drive overlays.
4) No RAID. (If you're going to use RAID, then it pays to learn how to use
it. I recommend practicing repairing the array, installing a new disk and
the like, before real data goes on it. Nothing worse than that feeling
of panic, when the BIOS pops up a warning that a RAID array has "failed".
You don't want to learn how RAID really works, with live data on the disks
and no backup.)
Another way to look at it, is adding the ESATA card, means your computer
now supports up to six storage devices, rather than the four you had
previously.
About the only downside of add-in cards, is if there are too many add-in
BIOS ROMs in the system, you can actually run out of low memory to load
them all. Tyically 128KB, in the 0-640KB region, is reserved for add-in
BIOS ROMs to load, which is not a lot of space. The BIOS ROM on a video
card, can eat 64KB of that. Code loaded in that area, has a "shrinking"
function, where excess junk is jettisoned, so it is possible for
more stuff to fit in, if an add-in ROM is well written. (It means the
add-on ROM code is bigger initially, and after any initialization is
finished, the code can shrink to just the bits that are needed.)
As I understand it, the add-in ROMs are loaded in slot order, so the
card next to the processor is loaded first, then the next card, and so
on. That rule applies, as long as the motherboard designer set up the
address map properly, to make that happen. That is why there is a
recommendation, when there is trouble, to put the card you plan
to boot from, in slot #1. Now that computers have so many flavors of
slots, that isn't as practical a suggestion as it used to be.
I don't see any other storage options in the diagram here. As you note,
there is a PCI Express x1 connector, but you can only use it, if the
video card is thin enough. Some video cards are double slot width,
which would cover up the connector.
(Msg. 10) Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 10:57 pm
Post subject: Re: external eSata enclosure drive recognition? Add to elertz [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
Paul wrote:
> Bill in Co. wrote:
>
>>
>> I do have a PCI and PCI Express slot available. But right now, I simply
>> put the eSata connector cable and mounting bracket on the back, so that I
>> can
>> plug in my external eSata HD enclosure into the computer (in the back),
>> using
>> the SATA cables.
>>
>>> I didn't see mention of the Dell model number of your machine, and maybe
>>
>> I have a Dell Inspiron 530, and I am using Windows XP Home Edition.
>> I know it has the ICH9 controller, at least, and NOT the newer ICH9R,
>> etc,
>> which has AHCI)
>>
>>> I could look at the motherboard picture, to see what other options are
>>> available.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> I also reread some more about that MSFN unofficial AHCI patch again, at
>> this
>> web site (referenced in that wiki article you mentioned), but am slightly
>> wary of this. But, who knows??? And it is at one of the MSFN sites,
>> so
>> that ought to count for something. Here is the link:
>>
>> http://www.msfn.org/board/How-to-enable-AHCI-on-Intel-ICH9-under-X-t109450.html >>
>> If that patch worked, it sure would be a cheap way to get AHCI installed,
>> as
>> it "just" involves updating some files (uses a few tweaks to get AHCI to
>> be
>> "allowed").
>>
>> But your idea of a separate controller card sounds perhaps better, and
>> safer, I guess, albeit more expensive. Although I'm not sure if it
>> would
>> mess up any of my other SATA stuff (like the primary HD, and possibly the
>> DVD drive, although they are connected I presume through the ICH9
>> controller
>> on the MB, which hopefully not conflict in any way with another
>> controller
>> being added to the system. I'm not sure how the Dell BIOS would handle
>> or
>> even recognize this changeover, however. As it is now, the Dell BIOS
>> only
>> shows the option for IDE emulation of SATA, since that goes with the
>> Intel
>> MB and chipsets I have on this Dell 530, presumably.
>>
>
> A separate card can be used two ways. It can be used for a "data only"
> disk,
> one you don't care to boot from. In that case, it doesn't matter whether
> the BIOS chip on the separate card, loads or not.
That would be my case, since I'm only using with an external HD enclosure
for image backup purposes of my system partition.
Still, when you boot up, I would think the system BIOS would need to
recognize this controller too, and show at least some other options in there
(in BIOS). Or maybe it does, but that's beside the point for what I'm
doing here (not booting with it).
> If you want to boot from a drive connected to a separate card,
Not.
> then the BIOS chip on the card has to load.
Seems like the BIOS chip on that PCI card would have to load anyways, just
to allow it and its controller to function, with any connected device. I
must not be understanding something then.
> The BIOS does stuff like provide an extended
> INT 0x13 routine, which provides the ability to read sectors from the disk
> during bootup. Effectively, it is like a driver during boot time. Some
> motherboard BIOS have an option called "Interrupt 19 capture". The
> difference
> between the two statements I just made, is 0x13 is hexadecimal (1*16 + 3),
> while the second statement uses a decimal number (19). Why the industry
> cannot
> stick with one way of stating it, eludes me. Asus, in their BIOS, should
> really refer to it as 0x13. I mean, when I first saw that setting, I
> didn't
> know what it was for. Later, a little clue light bulb went on, that 0x13
> and
> 19 were the same thing.
Yeah. 13H = 16+3 = 19 decimal.
(Speaking of industry "standards", or rather the lack thereof, the gigabyte
ratings of most of the computer world (binary) VS that used by the hard
drive manufacturers, still bugs me.
> "Capture", means to load the BIOS on any separate cards. So my motherboard
> has an option to disable all add-on ROMs, or allow them to be loaded.
I'm not sure if I have that option, but if memory serves me right, I don't.
> If you allow them to be loaded, then the separate add-in cards can be
> used for booting the computer.
>
> On an add-in card that supports RAID, the BIOS chip on the card can even
> include BIOS screens for declaring RAID arrays and the like.
I don't need or want RAID, but then again, know little about it, anyways.
(I have noticed that this RAID capability often comes hand in hand with AHCI
controller stuff, however).
All I want is the hotplugable feature. That's the only reason I want
AHCI, so that I can turn on and off my external eSata drive at will, and
have it recognized that way.
> So the add-in
> BIOS can add a user interface, for basic management functions before
> booting.
>
> The Silicon Image cards I've seen, all have a BIOS chip on them.
I would expect they would have to to support their controller.
> It can even
> be reflashed, to change the functionality (RAID or non-RAID).
>
> While I like the MSFN article you found, and don't doubt it would work,
> I guess I look at the results, and ask how many situations will arise
> at some future date, where I'd regret doing it.
Yeah, and that's a good point. And I think in rereading that article
(there are several pages) that one or two had reported such problems, along
with some other problems.
> I keep very simple setups here.
> 1) Ports set to vanilla IDE mode. This allows the default Microsoft driver
> to load, so I don't need to press F6 during an install.
OK, that sounds good. Although I don't know what this "needing to press
<F6> during install" thing is that they're talking about, but I saw that
mentioned before).
<F2> gets me to BIOS on my computer, so it must be something else, I guess.
> 2) No dynamic disks.
> 3) No drive overlays.
> 4) No RAID. (If you're going to use RAID, then it pays to learn how to use
> it. I recommend practicing repairing the array, installing a new disk
> and
> the like, before real data goes on it. Nothing worse than that feeling
> of panic, when the BIOS pops up a warning that a RAID array has
> "failed".
> You don't want to learn how RAID really works, with live data on the
> disks
> and no backup.)
I agree - I don't want ANY of the above. I like to keep things simple,
too.
> Another way to look at it, is adding the ESATA card, means your computer
> now supports up to six storage devices, rather than the four you had
> previously.
Which for me is a bit overkill, but whatever.
I believe I've got the ICH9 Intel 2920 and 2926 controllers, and the 2926 is
a two port controller (but not in use now, I guess), and the 2920 is a four
port controller (being used by my internal SATA drive and my DVD drive).
> About the only downside of add-in cards, is if there are too many add-in
> BIOS ROMs in the system, you can actually run out of low memory to load
> them all. Tyically 128KB, in the 0-640KB region, is reserved for add-in
> BIOS ROMs to load, which is not a lot of space. The BIOS ROM on a video
> card, can eat 64KB of that.
Wow. But I expect that's for a higher end card, too, and that a more basic
card wouldn't use that full amount.
> Code loaded in that area, has a "shrinking"
> function, where excess junk is jettisoned, so it is possible for
> more stuff to fit in, if an add-in ROM is well written. (It means the
> add-on ROM code is bigger initially, and after any initialization is
> finished, the code can shrink to just the bits that are needed.)
>
> As I understand it, the add-in ROMs are loaded in slot order, so the
> card next to the processor is loaded first, then the next card, and so
> on. That rule applies, as long as the motherboard designer set up the
> address map properly, to make that happen. That is why there is a
> recommendation, when there is trouble, to put the card you plan
> to boot from, in slot #1.
The card you plan to boot from? You mean, assuming you are adding a
controller card for the boot drive, I presume. (Is that really that
common? maybe, if people want higher performance, I guess)
> Now that computers have so many flavors of
> slots, that isn't as practical a suggestion as it used to be.
>
> I don't see any other storage options in the diagram here.
??? I have both free PCI slots and PCI express slots at this point.
> As you note,
> there is a PCI Express x1 connector, but you can only use it, if the
> video card is thin enough. Some video cards are double slot width,
> which would cover up the connector.
I think it's clear. I'll take a look inside again. So at this point it
seems I could add a
PCI to external eSata II port card (seems most have two ports, but I only
need one).
Right?
And it could be EITHER a regular PCI card, OR a PCI express card.
Not sure which slot would be better to tie up with that card (leaving the
others free for something else later on). I assume it's a lot easier
finding std PCI cards, so maybe I should tie up the express slot, if I find
that card. I've been looking at amazon.com, and found some (not too
expensive, either).
(Msg. 11) Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:39 am
Post subject: Re: external eSata enclosure drive recognition? Add to elertz [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
On 2008-07-30, Paul hit the keyboard and wrote:
>>
<cut>
> A separate card can be used two ways. It can be used for a
> "data only" disk, one you don't care to boot from. In that
> case, it doesn't matter whether the BIOS chip on the
> separate card, loads or not.
>
> If you want to boot from a drive connected to a separate
> card, then the BIOS chip on the card has to load. The BIOS
> does stuff like provide an extended INT 0x13 routine,
> which provides the ability to read sectors from the disk
> during bootup. Effectively, it is like a driver during
> boot time. Some motherboard BIOS have an option called
> "Interrupt 19 capture". The difference between the two
> statements I just made, is 0x13 is hexadecimal (1*16 + 3),
> while the second statement uses a decimal number (19). Why
> the industry cannot stick with one way of stating it,
> eludes me. Asus, in their BIOS, should really refer to it
> as 0x13. I mean, when I first saw that setting, I didn't
> know what it was for. Later, a little clue light bulb went
> on, that 0x13 and 19 were the same thing.
>
> "Capture", means to load the BIOS on any separate cards.
> So my motherboard has an option to disable all add-on
> ROMs, or allow them to be loaded. If you allow them to be
> loaded, then the separate add-in cards can be used for
> booting the computer.
I'll just add this.
If one uses more HDD's in the PC and they are powered by the
PSU it could turn out that the PSU is too weak. I had one
gone bad on me, when I had 4 HDD and 2 CD/CD-RW installed.
the 4 HDD were set up on a raid-card, albeit not used as
raid. Still the PSU was too weak and died on me. In the Shop
they put in another unit, as I had removed the home-build
array and stuck in a single HDD, they couldn't figure out
why the PSU failed. How much more power do the newer eSata
HDD need, that the point I make could be of concern?
Dragomir Kollaric
--
This signature is licensed under the GPL and may be
freely distributed as long as a copy of the GPL is included...
(Msg. 12) Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:49 am
Post subject: Re: external eSata enclosure drive recognition? Add to elertz [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
On 2008-07-30, Bill in Co. hit the keyboard and wrote:
<cut>
> Still, when you boot up, I would think the system BIOS
> would need to recognize this controller too, and show at
> least some other options in there (in BIOS). Or maybe it
> does, but that's beside the point for what I'm doing here
> (not booting with it).
>
>> If you want to boot from a drive connected to a separate
>card,
>
> Not.
Well I'd like to boot from mine again.
And yes when I start up the PC I see messages related to the
card, it shows me among other things how many HDD (Names)
are connected. If a cable f.e fails (as it happened to me
once) one can easily see that something is gone bad.
In my older PC (Athlon 1800XP) I was able to boot from it,
but not from this motherboard. In any case the BIOS would
give one the option to boot from such cards. I suspect that
my NIC is interfering with this option, but this is another
story, for another NG.
>> Paul
>
> Thanks again!
>
>
Dragomir Kollaric
--
This signature is licensed under the GPL and may be
freely distributed as long as a copy of the GPL is included...
(Msg. 13) Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 10:45 am
Post subject: Re: external eSata enclosure drive recognition? Add to elertz [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
Bill in Co. wrote:
>> OK. When the BIOS starts, it enumerates the add-on cards. It visits them
>> one at a time, and reads the configuration info from the main chip.
>
> From the "main chip" on the add-on card, I presume that means. (Not sure
> what the "main chip" is, but I guess that depends on the nature of the
> card).
>
The chip connected to the bus present in that expansion slot. The SIL3132
chip has a PCI Express x1 interface on it, and it connects to the slot.
Probes by the BIOS, to the configuration space of the SIL3132, will
uncover it is a storage controller card. If a BIOS chip is detected,
then the next step would be to load code from the BIOS_chip.
SIL3132 ------ BIOS_chip
|
| (Enumerates via bus)
|
PCI_Express_x1_slot
If the above BIOS chip, has INT 0x13 code present, then that storage card
could contribute a drive to the boot list.
If the card is designed like this, then a disk drive connected to the SIL3132
cannot be used to boot the computer. But once you get into Windows,
and install a SIL3132 driver, it is still possible for the OS to read/write
a data hard drive.
SIL3132 ---/
|
| (Enumerates via bus, no BIOS to load)
|
PCI_Express_x1_slot
>> No BIOS chip is needed on the card to do that. You could unsolder the BIOS
>> chip from the card, and the only consequence, is you cannot boot from it.
>
> Boot from it? What kind of "cards" could you "boot from"? Maybe you're
> referring specifically to a controller card connected to a drive? And do
> you mean you could use that type of card without invoking its own BIOS (for
> that specific case) IF you didn't want to use it for a boot drive)?
You can boot from network cards, as another example of bootable devices.
A network card may have a BIOS chip, containing a PXE code module. If so, and
there is some kind of BOOTP server on the network, then it is possible
to boot a computer via an OS stored on a server. (I'm not up on the
details of this, and have just heard of the basic mechanism.)
>
>> The BIOS will effectively ignore a PCI card, after that point.
>
> After it has been initially enumerated - I assume that's what you mean)
Yes. Once resources are set up for a card, there is nothing else
to do.
>
>> If a BIOS ROM is detected, while the BIOS is doing its probes, then the
>> motherboard BIOS can attempt to load the add-in BIOS.
>
> But I would have thought that ithe system BIOS would *always* try to do
> that.
> (Or maybe you're saying it won't do that IF it is a controller card but is
> not being used for the boot HD).
It won't do that, if the "Capture" option in the BIOS screen, has disabled
it. It also won't do it, if there is something wrong with the add-in BIOS
code. Or there isn't room to store the code in the 128KB area reserved for such
things, in low memory. If other cards have used up the 128KB area, and
no memory is left, then the BIOS will not attempt to load the BIOS contents
from the next add-in card. Typically, that might happen with a PC having
three SCSI cards in it. The BIOS for the third card might not load.
>
>> This card is flashed with non-RAID BIOS, and has two ESATA connectors.
>> $25.
>> Install it, install the driver, then you should see a "Safely Remove"
>> icon, when you connect the ESATA drive.
>>
>> "Rosewill RC-219 Silicon Image PCI Express External eSATA II x2 NCQ
>> non-RAID"
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816132020 >>
>> Paul
>
> Thanks. I looked at that one, and (what appears to be) a slightly simpler
> SATA II card, using that SIL3132 chip that you mentioned. Here is the link
> for that card over at amazon.com, which seems pretty similar to the one you
> mentioned.
> Its also a PCI Express to 2 External e-SATA II Ports Controller Card
> (SIL3132):
>
> http://www.amazon.com/External-e-SATA-Ports-Controller-Card/dp/B0018TE.../ref=sr >
> Thanks again, Paul
>
While I have no experience with that card on Amazon, I can say I don't approve
of "two-headed" card designs. This is what the Amazon card is doing. It
offers four connectors, but the chip only has two electrical interfaces.
And that means, they are hanging two connectors from the same bus. The
design looks like this.
You can only use one connector on each branch, at any one time. And electrically
speaking, connecting a cable and drive to the internal_connector, leaves
a stub off the high speed bus.
The reason I picked the Rosewill card (even though I'm not a fan of Rosewill),
is because it is set up like this.
(Msg. 14) Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 1:59 am
Post subject: Re: external eSata enclosure drive recognition? Add to elertz [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
Paul wrote:
> Bill in Co. wrote:
>
>>> OK. When the BIOS starts, it enumerates the add-on cards. It visits them
>>> one at a time, and reads the configuration info from the main chip.
>>
>> From the "main chip" on the add-on card, I presume that means. (Not
>> sure
>> what the "main chip" is, but I guess that depends on the nature of the
>> card).
>>
>
> The chip connected to the bus present in that expansion slot. The SIL3132
> chip has a PCI Express x1 interface on it, and it connects to the slot.
> Probes by the BIOS, to the configuration space of the SIL3132, will
> uncover it is a storage controller card. If a BIOS chip is detected,
> then the next step would be to load code from the BIOS_chip.
>
> SIL3132 ------ BIOS_chip
> |
> | (Enumerates via bus)
> |
> PCI_Express_x1_slot
>
> If the above BIOS chip, has INT 0x13 code present, then that storage card
> could contribute a drive to the boot list.
I wonder if it does (or how many actually do). Interesting.
> If the card is designed like this, then a disk drive connected to the
> SIL3132
> cannot be used to boot the computer.
Cannot? And yet it would appear in the boot list. I don't understand
why if the system reads the BIOS on the card it's not able to boot the
computer (not that I want that, anyways). It seems you are saying above
that if the BIOS on the card is read, that it can't be used for booting?
OR that this is somehow tied into the INT 0 x 13 thing you mentioned, and
THAT is what creates that limitation?
So I'm trying to figure out exactly what *would* allow the card (and the
drive connected to it) to be bootable - just curious.
> But once you get into Windows,
> and install a SIL3132 driver, it is still possible for the OS to
> read/write
> a data hard drive.
>
> SIL3132 ---/
> |
> | (Enumerates via bus, no BIOS to load)
> |
> PCI_Express_x1_slot
>
>
>>> No BIOS chip is needed on the card to do that. You could unsolder the
>>> BIOS
>>> chip from the card, and the only consequence, is you cannot boot from
>>> it.
OK, now here you are saying that the card BIOS *is* needed for boot
capability.
>> Boot from it? What kind of "cards" could you "boot from"? Maybe
>> you're
>> referring specifically to a controller card connected to a drive? And
>> do
>> you mean you could use that type of card without invoking its own BIOS
>> (for
>> that specific case) IF you didn't want to use it for a boot drive)?
>
> You can boot from network cards, as another example of bootable devices.
> A network card may have a BIOS chip, containing a PXE code module. If so,
> and
> there is some kind of BOOTP server on the network, then it is possible
> to boot a computer via an OS stored on a server. (I'm not up on the
> details of this, and have just heard of the basic mechanism.)
>
>>
>>> The BIOS will effectively ignore a PCI card, after that point.
>>
>> After it has been initially enumerated - I assume that's what you mean)
>
> Yes. Once resources are set up for a card, there is nothing else to do.
>
>>
>>> If a BIOS ROM is detected, while the BIOS is doing its probes, then the
>>> motherboard BIOS can attempt to load the add-in BIOS.
>>
>> But I would have thought that ithe system BIOS would *always* try to do
>> that. (Or maybe you're saying it won't do that IF it is a controller
>> card but is
>> not being used for the boot HD).
>
> It won't do that, if the "Capture" option in the BIOS screen, has disabled
> it.
What "capture option"? (I mean, I know when you go to the BIOS screen,
you can see if it has been recognized there or not, and that this was due to
the earlier enumeration, but that's all I know about that).
> It also won't do it, if there is something wrong with the add-in BIOS
> code. Or there isn't room to store the code in the 128KB area reserved for
> such things, in low memory. If other cards have used up the 128KB area,
> and
> no memory is left, then the BIOS will not attempt to load the BIOS
> contents
> from the next add-in card. Typically, that might happen with a PC having
> three SCSI cards in it. The BIOS for the third card might not load.
OK.
>>
>>> This card is flashed with non-RAID BIOS, and has two ESATA connectors.
>>> $25. Install it, install the driver, then you should see a "Safely
>>> Remove"
>>> icon, when you connect the ESATA drive.
>>>
>>> "Rosewill RC-219 Silicon Image PCI Express External eSATA II x2 NCQ
>>> non-RAID"
>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816132020 >>>
>>> Paul
>>
>> Thanks. I looked at that one, and (what appears to be) a slightly
>> simpler
>> SATA II card, using that SIL3132 chip that you mentioned. Here is the
>> link
>> for that card over at amazon.com, which seems pretty similar to the one
>> you
>> mentioned.
>> Its also a PCI Express to 2 External e-SATA II Ports Controller Card
>> (SIL3132):
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/External-e-SATA-Ports-Controller-Card/dp/B0018TE.../ref=sr >>
>> Thanks again, Paul
>>
>
> While I have no experience with that card on Amazon, I can say I don't
> approve
> of "two-headed" card designs. This is what the Amazon card is doing. It
> offers four connectors,
Where are you seeing that? I'm seeing only TWO external eSata
connectors, and those are only for TWO (max) eSata drives - NOT four. Nor
are there any internal SATA connectors, from what I can tell.
> but the chip only has two electrical interfaces.
> And that means, they are hanging two connectors from the same bus. The
> design looks like this.
>
> SIL3132 -------------internal_connector--------external_connector
> -------------internal_connector--------external_connector
>
> You can only use one connector on each branch, at any one time. And
> electrically speaking, connecting a cable and drive to the
> internal_connector, leaves a stub off the high speed bus.
But again, I must be missing something, as I don't see it for that card.
(The PCI Express to 2 External e-SATA II Ports Controller Card at amazon)
> The reason I picked the Rosewill card (even though I'm not a fan of
> Rosewill),
> is because it is set up like this.
>
> SIL3132 -------------external_connector
> -------------external_connector
>
> That should give better electrical characteristics.
>
> You can find other card designs, such as a card with one ESATA and
> one internal SATA, if you want some flexibility. That would be like
> this.
>
> SIL3132 -------------external_connector
> -------------internal_connector
Right, I thought about that, but I've already some internal eSata headers
free, so I probably don't need it, as far as I can tell. I've got four
SATA headers on the MB, and three are in use now (but one being used for the
external eSata drive right now), but maybe it's worth thinking about.
(Msg. 15) Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 9:44 am
Post subject: Re: external eSata enclosure drive recognition? Add to elertz [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
Bill in Co. wrote:
>>
>> SIL3132 -------------internal_connector--------external_connector
>> -------------internal_connector--------external_connector
>>
>> You can only use one connector on each branch, at any one time. And
>> electrically speaking, connecting a cable and drive to the
>> internal_connector, leaves a stub off the high speed bus.
>
> But again, I must be missing something, as I don't see it for that card.
> (The PCI Express to 2 External e-SATA II Ports Controller Card at amazon)
>
OK. I downloaded the image of the card and zoomed in. What I was seeing,
is solder pads for internal connectors. There are no internal connectors
installed in this case. But I still don't like to see that style of
wiring. The idea here, is they could make two versions of card, but
if they decided to make a card with the two internal ones installed,
and the two external ones missing, then there would be stubs off the
bus. So this particular card is *OK*. But if they ship a version where
the internal connectors are installed, but the external ones are not,
that is still a stub off the bus. I prefer to see one connector per port,
for peace of mind. I have seen cards designed the same way this one is,
but with all four connectors soldered in place. And I would not buy
one designed like that.
(Msg. 16) Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2008 10:29 am
Post subject: Re: external eSata enclosure drive recognition? Add to elertz [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
Paul wrote:
> Bill in Co. wrote:
>
>>>
>>> SIL3132
>>> -------------internal_connector--------external_connector
>>>
>>> -------------internal_connector--------external_connector
>>>
>>> You can only use one connector on each branch, at any one time. And
>>> electrically speaking, connecting a cable and drive to the
>>> internal_connector, leaves a stub off the high speed bus.
>>
>> But again, I must be missing something, as I don't see it for that card.
>> (The PCI Express to 2 External e-SATA II Ports Controller Card at amazon)
>>
>
> OK. I downloaded the image of the card and zoomed in. What I was seeing,
> is solder pads for internal connectors. There are no internal connectors
> installed in this case. But I still don't like to see that style of
> wiring. The idea here, is they could make two versions of card, but
> if they decided to make a card with the two internal ones installed,
> and the two external ones missing, then there would be stubs off the
> bus. So this particular card is *OK*. But if they ship a version where
> the internal connectors are installed, but the external ones are not,
> that is still a stub off the bus. I prefer to see one connector per port,
> for peace of mind. I have seen cards designed the same way this one is,
> but with all four connectors soldered in place. And I would not buy
> one designed like that.
>
> This is the Amazon card.
>
> http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51LHEMcClEL._SS400_.jpg >
> *OK* design. Since the stub of the solder pads is minimal.
>
> SIL3132 ------------- (none) --------external_connector
> ------------- (none) --------external_connector
>
> This, on the other hand, I would not buy.
>
> SIL3132 -------------internal_connector-------- (none)
> -------------internal_connector-------- (none)
>
> I prefer to inspect and see designs that look like this. The absence
> of a position for a second pair of connectors, means no wiring issues.
>
> SIL3132 -------------internal_connector
> -------------internal_connector
>
> Paul
I notice the other card on Amazon, with the SIL3132 on it, doesn't reuse
the PCB with the four connector locations on it. This card offers two internal
connectors, and there are no stubs to be seen. I wouldn't mind buying this.
All times are: Eastern Time (US & Canada) (change) Goto page Previous1, 2, 3
Page 2 of 3
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You can edit your posts in this forum You can delete your posts in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum
Home
Forums
Home
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
Windows XP