Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


  • Content count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Tomcat76

  • Birthday 01/16/1976

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • OS
    XP Pro x86
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

1,788 profile views
  1. Don't know if this will help, but the Soundblaster Audigy FX (not RX) PCIe card uses a Realtek chip.
  2. Installing SP4.

    QFE stands for quick-fix engineering. More info: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/instan/2009/03/04/qfe-vs-gdrldr-hotfixes/
  3. Windows XP: new Z68/Z77 rig in 2017

    It's a quad-channel board, and 32GB is definitely overkill for what I will be using the computer for (not to say expensive).
  4. Windows XP: new Z68/Z77 rig in 2017

    Looks like availability is a bigger problem than I imagined. I will go with the X79 chipset---more specifically, the Asus Rampage IV Formula coupled with a Core i7-3820 (SB) and a kit of 4x 4GB DDR3-1600 RAM. There are no PCI ports, but at least I won't need to worry about the number of available PCIe lanes. I hope I will still get bass/treble controls with the Audigy RX. The only dilemma for me is whether I should go with 8GB or 16GB of RAM. I find that Firefox is struggling hard with the <4GB available to Windows XP 32-bit; it easily uses up to 100% of one CPU core and more than 1GB of RAM, sometimes reaching 2GB, making it very sluggish after some time. But I intend to switch to XP 64-bit. Will Firefox ever use more than 8GB of RAM? I can't test it myself.
  5. I believe the 7200rpm versions are the newer Red Pro, but maybe there are 7200rpm Reds too that I'm not aware of. Either way, I ordered a 5400rpm. If the drive really needs upto 10 seconds to spin back up from standby (might be adjustable via a tool on WD's site), that's fine with me. So I loose 10 seconds performing a bi-monthly backup... On the noise they make... I currently have: PC1: 1x Western Digital Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7K3000 HDS723020BLA642 2TB 1x Hitachi Deskstar 7K2000 HDS722020ALA330 2TB PC2: 1x Western Digital Black WD3003FZEX 3TB (secondary) PC3: 1x Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000.C HDS721010CLA332 1TB 2x HGST Deskstar 7K4000 HDS724040ALE640 4TB PC4: 1x Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD5000AAKS 500GB PC5: 1x Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD2500AAKS 250GB PC6: 1x Western Digital Raptor WD740GD 74GB Something tells me I won't even hear the WD Red...
  6. Windows XP: new Z68/Z77 rig in 2017

    Yes, someone else pointed this card out to me as well. I'd still want to speak to someone who's actually using this card on Windows XP to verify that the primitive bass/treble controls that Windows XP offers inside its Volume Control panel (sys tray speaker icon > Advanced) are supported by the card's drivers. With most audio cards, those sliders are disabled.
  7. I want to clone because it's faster and keeps the timestamp on files and folders. I'll be holding on to the data on the source drive for a week or two to see how things go with the new drive. I'll be using either Macrium Reflect or MiniTool Partition Wizard for the job, both of which have served me well. I asked about the 512e to 512n conversion because I figured some cloning tools can do a low-level sector-by-sector copy, which (in my thinking) could screw things up.
  8. I eventually ordered the Red. According to the salesperson, "small" errors are corrected within the 7 second time frame that TLER allows; "serious" errors (CRC errors) that would require more than 7 seconds to correct, rarely happen, and if they do, it shouldn't be much of a concern as any damaged file(s) can be copied over to the backup again (preferably on a new hard drive). I'm still curious to know if it's OK to clone from a 512e disk to a 512n disk.
  9. This is a peculiar problem I've been having with one PC. It was originally running Windows Vista 64-bit, but later formatted and loaded with Windows 7 64-bit. I can't remember if the problem already existed when Windows Vista was still installed, but I presume it was because I now feel this to be a hardware problem. When hitting Start > Restart, I expect Windows to shutdown, the computer to restart, the POST to load, etc. However, something seems to be going wrong after Windows closes: the screen goes black as expected, but the POST never appears. All fans and hard drives are spinning and all lights are burning. The only way to get the computer running again when that happens is to either press the reset button or to shut the PC down and power it on again. The motherboard in question is an Asus M4A87TD EVO. I have tried to fix this on various occasions over the past year or so, without success. Some people suggested to disable the power saving settings on the Firewire port, but I had already done that before (out of habit). So I did the reverse, and re-enabled the power saving settings but that didn't help. Next, I disabled the Firewire port but that didn't change anything either. Recently, I also read somewhere that it could be a keyboard incompatibility; some people have fixed this by swapping their keyboard. This didn't seem to help me either. On the VERY odd occasion, over the past week or so, I have noticed the computer to shutdown instead of exhibiting the problem above, as if I clicked Start > Shutdown instead of Start > Restart. Don't know if that's a clue. Is there anything else to try? Change the power supply? Flip the connector of the reset switch cable in case it wasn't connected the right way? Change the power state setting in the BIOS (currently set to "S1 only")? Reload the latest BIOS?
  10. Usually, when you buy a low profile card, it comes with the full height bracket connected to it. The low profile bracket is included as an accessory. Do you still have the full height bracket? I just did four in the past week, including two repastes. Always a pleasure
  11. I'm trying to find the best 4TB hard drive I can get for the purpose of manually backing up (copying) files to at an average rate of once or twice a month (once or twice a week maximum). The hard drive will be placed in a computer running Windows 7 64-bit, so I suppose I should better avoid 4Kn drives. So far, though, it seems that everything I'm looking for in such a drive doesn't appear to be provided by any manufacturer; it's all black & white with nothing in between. I'm looking for a drive with a high level of reliability and durability, but without TLER (or at least the ability to disable it). I will be running it in a non-RAID setup in a regular PC, not in a NAS, so I would like the drive to do whatever it can to recover data in case of a failure. The drive should be internal and be able to work inside a computer that's running 24/7. High level of reliability = NAS or data center drives Without TLER = desktop drives See my problem? In addition, HGST doesn't even mention TLER in the spec sheet for their Ultrastar 7K6000 (data center) and Desktop NAS drives. Neither does Toshiba. Several online sources claim that you can use a tool to disable TLER on Western Digital Red and Gold drives, but it's intended for older drives and may corrupt the firmware. I'm a little tight on budget, so I'd prefer not to risk killing a drive. The list: - Toshiba MD04ACA400 (0.6M MTTF / 7200rpm / 128MB cache / 512e) - Toshiba N300 (1M MTTF / 7200rpm / 128MB / sector size not listed) - HGST Ultrastar 7K6000 (2M MTBF / 7200rpm / 128MB / 512n or 512e) - WD RED WD40EFRX (1M MTBF / 5400rpm / 64MB / 512e) - WD GOLD WD4002FYYZ (2M MTBF / 7200rpm / 128MB / 512n) I know the MTBF figures should be taken with a grain of salt, but I'm listing them anyway. Note that Toshiba uses MTTF as opposed to MTBF used by other manufacturers. A rough head calculation, though, indicates that their MTTF rating would amount to a little less than 1M MTBF. But that's probably a moot point. On the point of 512n (native) and 4TB, is it still safe to have 4TB crammed into a hard drive using 512b native sectors? Also, I intend to clone an existing 4TB hard drive to it, but it's a 512e (emulated) drive. Is it safe to clone 4TB 512e to 4TB 512n or should I take additional precautions?
  12. Windows XP: new Z68/Z77 rig in 2017

    Sorry about the delay. My budget is actually pretty close to nothing. I will have to borrow the money and pay them back later, so I'd like to keep the amount of components at a minimum. I've also decided to forgo having the option to overclock the CPU so I don't need to get a K. I also had a chat with a salesperson at a computer store I usually buy from, and he advised me to not go for something too old as I may have to buy it second-hand (due to unavailability), which has the added risk of getting components that ran overclocked for an extended period of time, especially in the case of enthousiast boards like the Asus P8Z68 Deluxe. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that appears to be software intended for Intel-made motherboards. Can it be used with Asus/Asrock boards? But that's an interesting point you raise there. A week ago, I couldn't immediately find a Z87 board to my liking; only Z97 boards. But I'll look again. Just in case somebody's wondering why I'm never mentioning Gigabyte boards... I have used them on computers for clients and think they are a good brand too, but I prefer not to get one for a computer of my own because of their policy on killing PCIe ports. I know CPUs provide only a limited amount of lanes, but Gigabyte's strategy on disabling PCIe slots or reducing their levels seems more aggressive than with Asus' or Asrock's. I still want the ability to use as many PCIe slots as possible, so I'd rather see a 16x slot reduced to 8x than having all 1x slots disabled. Another point I seem to have neglected is how much any PCI ports on more modern motherboards can handle. If I want to keep on using my Audigy 2 PCI card (I know it's considered the worst of all Audigy's, but still), it needs to work. In light of this, I'm wondering if there's any use in upgrading to an Audigy RX PCIe card. I've been told it's a "budget" card, but does it have at least the same quality as the Audigy 2?
  13. Windows XP: new Z68/Z77 rig in 2017

    There do appear to be drivers for the HD 4400 and 4600 graphics for XP. liquidLD posted HD 4600 drivers here but he needs to update the links. The same goes for the Killer E2200 chip, which appears to be an Atheros AR8161 for which XP drivers do exist (discussion here). Realtek audio isn't an issue either. As far as more recent chipsets go... I'd still like to have a working onboard video chip as a backup. My video card could die, or I may want to put it in a temporary replacement PC for a customer whose PC I need to repair. It can always come in handy. Also, all programs I use currently and intend to use in the "new" XP computer are single-core applications, so more cores aren't necessarily going to improve my experience as opposed to "raw power". The second computer I intend to build (storage + video editing) needs to be ready for programs like Premiere and Vegas Pro. Having more cores might serve me better there. So basically, we're back at USB 3 I don't mind a little tinkering around, but all USB 3 ports need to work, even if they operate at USB 2.0 speeds. Having only one usable USB 3 port to which a USB hub needs to be connected is a bridge too far for me. The same goes for a USB 3.0 PCIe expansion card; I don't want to waste PCIe slots. It's a bit unclear to me which chips work OK at 2.0 speeds, and which require the USB hub workaround. Would that be 7/8/9-series chipsets vs 100+ series chipsets? Or is it about USB 3.0 vs 3.1? Currently, I think I'd either go with: Z68 + Sandy Bridge, Z68 + Ivy Bridge, or Z97 + Haswell Refresh/Devil's Canyon (i5-4690K or i7-4790K) I'm not yet sure how Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge compare in terms of heat (OC'd or not). Still need to find that out.
  14. Windows XP: new Z68/Z77 rig in 2017

    Just wondering... Everyone keeps talking about USB 3.0, but what about the rest? How do I know there are chipset drivers, sata drivers, onboard video drivers, etc. compatible with Windows XP if the board manufacturer won't list any? For example: ASRock Z97 Pro4 ASRock Fatal1ty Z97 Killer I know mechanical hard drives don't saturate the SATA3 ports, but reading and writing operations are still faster than when connected to SATA2 ports. I have tested this myself, both with the onboard SATA2 ports of my P7H55 board, as well as with the HighPoint RocketRAID 2640X1 PCIe card with SATA2 ports. My onboard SATA3 ports are faster. I will. I don't plan to upgrade it again. The board needs to be durable and be able to withstand 24/7 operation.
  15. Windows XP: new Z68/Z77 rig in 2017

    @jaclaz: thanks for the info. Sorry, I meant H55, not P55. I didn't say there was anything wrong with H61, just that the upgrade level isn't that big with H55>H61 as it is with H55>Z68. The H61 you linked to has PCIe 2.0, doesn't have USB 3.0, there are 3 usable PCIe ports and 2 SATAIII 6Gbps ports, exactly like on my P7H55 board. The Asus P8Z68 Deluxe/Gen3 has PCIe 3.0, has USB 3.0 (including front panel), 4 usable PCIe ports (if installing a dual slot graphics card) and 4 SATAIII 6Gbps ports. I suppose I can get away with PCIe 2.0, but I would like to have the rest. I read about this in another thread on MSFN. Do I understand correctly if I read that only one USB 3.0 port on the motherboard will be usable, and that a USB hub is required to split it across multiple USB devices? I wouldn't call that a fix, but I don't want to get into semantics. I haven't used a USB hub in well over 15 years (even the internal 5.25" floppy drive stayed in much longer), but if people can live with it... great. "Better" is usually better, but I think it's over the top for me. I'd also prefer to use a VelociRaptor over a SATA/mSATA/NVMe on Windows XP. Too lazy to trim... ::scratches-beard::