Prev: Code 38 When Inserting USB FD
Next: Local printer not ready after Windows restart
From: Paul on 7 Apr 2010 03:30
General Mailbox wrote:
> Thank you for bringing this up. I vaguely remember that I played around
> with the jumpers on the drives at least 2 years ago, then disconnected a 2nd
> drive. Now the end of the ribbon cable is connected to the master drive,
> and the middle of the cable is connected to the slave drive. BIOS shows
> Primary Master WD120 drive, Primary Slave WD40 drive, Secondary Master CD-RW
> drive, Secondary Slave DVD ROM drive. I changed back the jumpers and added
> the 2nd HDD as I had quite awhile ago to get the new readings below. I say
> this so you don't have to guess how the new readings came to be *smiles*.
>
> The Primary IDE shows Device 0
> Device Type "Auto Detection" greyed out,
> Transfer Mode "DMA if available",
> Current Transfer Mode: "Ultra DMA Mode 2"
>
> The Primary IDE shows Device 1
> Device Type "Auto Detection" greyed out,
> Transfer Mode "DMA if available",
> Current Transfer Mode "Ultra DMA Mode 2".
>
> Secondary IDE shows Device 0
> Device Type "Auto Detection" greyed out,
> Transfer Mode "PIO only",
> Current Transfer Mode "PIO Mode".
>
>
> Secondary IDE shows Device 1
> Device Type "Auto Detection" greyed out.
> Transfer Mode "DMA if available",
> Current Transfer Mode "Ultra DMA Mode 2".
>
> Changing "PIO only" to "DMA if available" did nothing. Again removing
> Secondary IDE channel and scan for hardware changes did not change
> anything. I am expecting you to say that a CD-RW drive wouldn't have DMA
> ability, right? But it didn't hurt.
>
> I just got an added bonus here because of your sharp eye! Thank you!
>
> Best in life to you,
> Kevin
>

The description of your chipset, suggests it can do 66MB/sec transfer rate
on the IDE cables.

http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/legacy/pro133a/

If you take a look at this article, UDMA 4 was introduced in ATA/ATAPI-5
(see table near the bottom of the page). It is enabled in part, by the usage
of 80 wire cables, rather than 40 wire cables. So the cheapest improvement
to your system, would be an 80 wire IDE cable for the hard drives.
(You can use one for the optical drives, but it might not make as much
practical difference.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_ATA

Another improvement possible, is to install a PCI IDE card, such as one
of the now extinct Ultra133 TX2 cards.

http://www.promise.com/upload/product/Ultra133_TX2.jpg

I don't remember all the trivia about VIA chipsets, so I can't tell you
right off hand, what bugs the 82C596B might have. My last motherboard
had a VIA chipset, and even though the chipset was very modern (using
one of the last Southbridges VIA ever designed), the PCI bus still had
issues.

In any case, there are some tricks to improving the performance of
the disks a little bit more. If you're using 40 wire cables, then an 80
wire cable might be a cheap upgrade. You might squeeze the next level of
interface speed, from your chipset.

I have an Ultra133 TX2 in my computer right now, and I'm using it since
the new motherboard doesn't have enough IDE interfaces. The worst part of
it, is the drivers don't have an "uninstall" item in Add/Remove. I use nothing
but 80 wire cables for the disks.

Paul
From: Paul on 7 Apr 2010 05:22
General Mailbox wrote:
> Greetings.
> I hope everyone enjoyed their weekend.
> Thank you all for the suggestions. I have tried just about every one of
> them.
>
>
> Paul: MemTester86+ showed Memory 512MB 309MB/s

I compared to my machine here. I have a 440BX board with a Celeron 1100
on it. The memory bus only runs at 100MHz. Memtest86+ 1.40 reports
a memory bandwidth of 276 MB/sec on my machine. Your memory could be
133MHz, and that is why you're able to get a bit more at 309 MB/sec.
So I'd say your memory results are OK.

It's amazing how much that has changed. My current machine is still
slow by modern standards, but it gets 3000MB/sec in memtest86+. That
is 10x faster. There are lots of machines with faster memory than mine.

Paul
From: General Mailbox on 9 Apr 2010 13:00
I wish to make public a correction in my findings as to the reason, for my
system, that memory was slow.
I've discovered, by reinstalling the original OS from scratch, that my
memory access increased slightly above what I expected in all areas. As soon
as I installed Service Pack 1a, it dropped just a little. Then I added the
driver for my USB expansion card which supports USB2.0. That brought the
readings down a good 20% below par. Still not shabby until I actually turned
on one or more of the external drives or other equipment connected to the
USB ports. So, in my case, I was getting variable readings not knowing it
was due to the amount of additional hardware the system had to support.
While some may not use Spybot S&D anymore, I take back my accusation of that
being the problem.

Rgds,
Kevin

"General Mailbox" <nospampls(a)home.net> wrote in message
news:nFDun.15015$vC3.10082(a)newsfe04.iad...
> Greetings.
> I hope everyone enjoyed their weekend.
> Thank you all for the suggestions. I have tried just about every one of
> them.
>
> Bob I: I had wondered how to set the DMA mode to always be Ultra DMA 2,
> but didn't get a reply a few weeks ago. I install a DVD burner program and
> upon first use after installation, it wants to set the DMA to work and has
> me reboot. Since I restore my OS to near fresh OS installation about every
> 4 months, I have to repeat this process, along with installing the latest
> versions of other softwares. This routine has been the easiest for me to
> ensure no, or little, chance of malware/spyware or registry errors. I
> update an archive of the OS with MS updates then save it again, making it
> easy to restore to something fairly recent. Now, about the channel
> properties:
> The Primary IDE shows Device 0 Device Type "Auto Detection" Transfer Mode
> "DMA if available", Current Transfer Mode: "Not applicable".
> Device 1 Device Type "Auto Detection" but greyed out. Transfer Mode "DMA
> if available", Current Transfer Mode "Ultra DMA Mode 2".
> Secondary IDE shows Device 0 Device Type "Auto Detection" greyed out,
> Transfer Mode "DMA if available", Current Transfer Mode "PIO Mode".
> Device 1 Device Type "Auto Detection" but greyed out. Transfer Mode "DMA
> if available", Current Transfer Mode "Ultra DMA Mode 2".
> Removing Secondary IDE channel and scan for hardware changes did not
> change anything. Is this a problem that neither Device 0 is showing the
> current mode as DMA?
>
> db and Anteaus: Sorry, I didn't get to you ideas of safe mode, or
> resetting the bios.
>
> Paul: MemTester86+ showed Memory 512MB 309MB/s
> I have tried CPUZ in recent years, and tried again. Just doesn't beat
> Everest.
> I could show more than what I sent originally, i.e. processes involved,
> but I didn't think anything would be wrong with processes as they have
> been fairly consistant for years and I kept the number low (28-34
> processes). Which brings me to Jose.
>
> Jose: You have made a long and detailed list of procedures of how to
> obtain information you wanted without cost of software for me. We are
> alike in how we try to think ahead of possible replies of "I don't know
> how to do it." I do know a couple of ways to provide you a list of
> processes without having to sign up on a free image server. HijackThis
> seems to give a lot on processes while my text report from Everest (or
> CPUZ) can give details on hardware, voltages, and timings (benchmark
> tests). Before I give you more information, you can tell me if we need to
> take this any further as conditions have changed.
>
> Memory Read
> My expectations: 840 MB/s
> Yesterday 281 MB/s
> Today 767 MB/s
>
> Memory Write
> My expectations 190 MB/s
> Yesterday 93 MB/s
> Today 158 MB/s
>
> Memory Latency
> My expectations 178.5 ns
> Yesterday 343.1 ns
> Today 124.5 ns
>
> The culprit; Spybot Search & Destroy software version 1.6 was somehow
> involved as after Jose mentioned Spybot was a waste of virtual memory, I
> uninstalled it then ran the Everest report again. My system properties
> for physical memory vs. commit charges never got that close to 512MB that
> it needed to use page file, meaning excessive drive access. I am not
> clear on how a program can slow up memory, yet not use all of the
> available memory first before it slows down.
>
> Jose: Patience is a virtue.
>
> To everyone: You can see I have a couple of outstanding questions that
> related to this subject. If you think it wiser, I can start a new thread
> on DMA question or just tell me it's ok or not from what I already wrote.
> Paul, is 309 MB/s a decent reading for a P3 cpu at 800Mhz? If anyone is
> still seeing a problem, we can go on. Else, I "think" the readings are
> close to par and will try to run the computer for awhile yet while
> shopping for another one. I just want to take my time researching the
> best value of parts to build my own machine. Gee, now we're up to i7 chip?
> Gee whiz!
>
> Take care!
> B.rgds,
> Kevin
>
> P.S. You may see my name again as I usually share what I know a few times
> before I move on.
>


First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Code 38 When Inserting USB FD
Next: Local printer not ready after Windows restart