• Announcements

    • xper

      MSFN Sponsorship and AdBlockers!   07/10/2016

      Dear members, MSFN is made available via subscriptions, donations and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, become a site sponsor and ads will be disabled automatically and by subscribing you get other sponsor benefits.
go98

SATA installation

33 posts in this topic

Many users get problem when trying to install win 9x on a modern computer with sata only  for harddisks and optical media. It should be mentioned that for nostalgia and perhaps a bit more, it's easy to get around this problem:

 

You can for example selectively bypass the harddisk driver installation by putting a cut/"blank" version of the file mshdc.inf (contained in precopy2.cab in my case) in the win98-folder of your cd or other install media. I chose to remove everything after the line [Manufacturer] in mshdc.inf + an extra blank line if you want to be sure.

 

Maybe you can do it even simpler in some other way like using setup options (sure others here know better about this).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can also delete the ESDI_506.PDR file in Windows/System/IOSUBSYS directory in Command Prompt in F8 menu after you install Windows.

Either way, you'll revert back to 16bit realtime drivers (normally used in Safe Mode) which are slow.

OR, switch the SATA mode to RAID, then you'll not need to do anything! It will not use the ESDI_506.pdr, and you'll simply have a unknown RAID controller in the Device Manager, and no IDE stuff. Still realtime drivers :(

Edited by MrMateczko
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, you could simply spend $11 for rloew's SATA Patch and fix the issue the right way, and have full functionality without any drawbacks. :whistle:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Useful to me? Maybe. Useful to the OP? I doubt it.

 

Well, then you will have to thank me :yes: (and the OP is very welcome to unthank me ;)).

 

jaclaz

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Useful to me? Maybe. Useful to the OP? I doubt it.

Well, then you will have to thank me :yes: (and the OP is very welcome to unthank me ;)).

jaclaz

As written, it clearly cannot work properly on Windows 9x, so the thanks may be premature. I did say "Maybe".

I will recommend that an "Unthank" button be added to the Forum software.

Next time someone asks for help opening a can, don't send them an engineering drawing of a can opener.

Edited by rloew
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LoneCrusader, I will save my $11 and wait for rloew to finnish his HD audio driver.
:whistle:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As written, it clearly cannot work properly on Windows 9x, so the thanks may be premature. I did say "Maybe".

As written where?

AFAICR the Xeno port to Windows 9x worked (on some hardware).

 

I will recommend that an "Unthank" button be added to the Forum software.

Good. :)

But I believe that once you "Like" a post, you can later "Unlike" it.

 

Next time someone asks for help opening a can, don't send them an engineering drawing of a can opener.

Why not? :unsure:

Because business of can openers manufacturers may (hypothetically) become at risk ?

(though only a few of them remain, I don't think they are registered as "protected species" ;))

jaclaz

Edited by jaclaz
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As written, it clearly cannot work properly on Windows 9x, so the thanks may be premature. I did say "Maybe".

As written where?

AFAICR the Xeno port to Windows 9x worked (on some hardware).

I downloaded the versions you linked to. For one thing there is no INF File for Windows 9x.

Next time someone asks for help opening a can, don't send them an engineering drawing of a can opener.

Why not? :unsure:

Because business of can openers manufacturers may (hypothetically) become at risk ?

(though only a few of them remain, I don't think they are registered as "protected species" ;))

jaclaz

Because it won't help open the can.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...there is no INF..." :crazy: And I would be interested in this as well?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to jump in the thread without reading but

i was just looking up info on sil3112 + sil3114 pci raid controllers

i notice most of the silicon image pci addon cards have win98 + me listed

in their driver support

 

has anyone had a positive experience with these cards??

do they work for the boot/install drive is what im getting at i guess.

i know win98 has problems with sata which is why im asking (and the reason

for this thread i suppose!)

 

heres one example http://www.sybausa.com/productInfo.php?iid=509

amongst many other brand names (and non brand names) these cards are a dime a dozen

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to / should open a new Topic in this sub-forum.

Here is one such reference -

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/150641-problem-with-two-sata-hdd-dives-on-sil-3512-controller/

 

Granted, the MSFN Search has "somewhat" to be desired. I found the above using Google

"windows 98" sil3112 OR sil3114 site:msfn.org
Try the above to see if that gives any answer to your question.

 

HTH

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone else that actually has a sata pci adapter that boasts 98 support have any realworld experience..?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone else that actually has a sata pci adapter that boasts 98 support have any realworld experience..?

Yes.

I've used cards based on Sil 3112 and 3114. The 4-port cards have driver issues, so don't buy those. The 2-port SATA cards are fine and work perfectly under win-98 using the drivers you can get for them. I have drives over 1 tb and have no problems. I'm using SI3112r.mpd version 1.0.0.51.

Any sata controller that is SATA-1 (like the 3112 and 3114 chips) will have Win-98 drivers available. Somewhere. And these will be ordinary PCI cards. Any Sata card that is PCI-express will be Sata-2 or sata-3, and almost certainly no win-98 drivers exist for them. Any motherboard with Sata-1 controller (which usually means it was made no later than 2006) will have win-98 drivers (somewhere).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My SATA Patch works with all Motherboards SATA Controllers I have tested and with most PCI-Express SATA Cards.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just saying that anyone running win-98 on motherboards with relatively complete (or fully complete) driver availability for all hardware components will find it easy (with no additional cost) to attach sata hard drives. Running win-98 natively on a motherboard with PCI-e slots is probably not going to be very satisfying for many people, hence having a solution for sata PCI-e cards is of questionable value.

Any motherboard with an AGP slot and on-board sata controller will have no problems attaching large (1 or 2 tb) sata drives to these systems running win-98. If you don't have on-board sata controller, then a 2-port SIL 3112 PCI card that you can buy for $10 will also work just fine.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just saying that anyone running win-98 on motherboards with relatively complete (or fully complete) driver availability for all hardware components will find it easy (with no additional cost) to attach sata hard drives. Running win-98 natively on a motherboard with PCI-e slots is probably not going to be very satisfying for many people, hence having a solution for sata PCI-e cards is of questionable value.

Any motherboard with an AGP slot and on-board sata controller will have no problems attaching large (1 or 2 tb) sata drives to these systems running win-98.

That would limit you to a narrow range of Motherboards as older ones do not have SATA and newer ones use Chipset based SATA with no Windows 98 Drivers. The PCI-E solution is for people who want to add more Drives.

If you don't have on-board sata controller, then a 2-port SIL 3112 PCI card that you can buy for $10 will also work just fine.

Then you have paid roughly the same price, or more, for a solution that provides only two ports and ties up a PCI slot. Edited by rloew
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 ports but I'm sure an excellent BIOS (as all of their cards I've used have).

 

Also, if you have modern hardware it would probably be easier just to run Win9x on DOSBOX.

 

Any SATA card/motherboard that has Win98SE drivers is going to be 150mb/s, and if you're looking for speed you won't see much over UltraATA 133.

Edited by cpucollector
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what exactly is the max speed of sata drives when using ide legacy / compatibility mode in bios? is it 16 MB/s? also, if i were to use the intel d845pebt2 motherboard, does that motherboard have native windows 9x sata drivers so i would not need to use ide compatiblity / legacy mode and the operating system will just load with a working sata driver provided internally by the motherboard? i believe it uses sil 3112a sata controller, well at least for the raid portion, it mentions that, does that mean its also for sata? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, a raid controller can typically work in standard mode. As far as Windows 9x booting from a SATA hard drive connected to that motherboard, it really shouldn't matter. If it's detected in the BIOS and set as a boot device it should work. I remember when SATA first was starting to gain popularity, that part of why it was a slow start was because there wasn't much of a performance difference until 3.0gbs came out.

 

from wiki: The theoretical burst throughput of SATA 1.5 Gbit/s is similar to that of PATA/133, but newer SATA devices offer enhancements such as NCQ, which improve performance in a multitasking environment.

 

So I guess a newer SATA drive on a 150mb/s line should give you better performance. But not all early motherboards have support for NCQ. So if you've got the parts around, try it. If not, I wouldn't spend the money on a "might" be a little faster solution.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> So if you've got the parts around, try it.

> If not, I wouldn't spend the money on a "might" be a little faster solution.

The point of exploring the use of SATA-1 (1.5 gb/sec) controllers with win-98 has nothing to do with disk-transfer performance.

The use of SATA-1 controllers allows win-98 systems to utilize cheap high-capacity hard drives in the range of 160 gb to 2TB that have been available starting 10 years ago. More importantly, SATA-1 controllers always have (in my experience) full 32-bit driver support for win-98, which eliminates the 137gb problem that applies to most situtations using IDE (PATA) drives.

No system in daily use, regardless what OS it's running, should be using 40 or 80 gb IDE drives because those drives were made many years ago (10 or more years ago in most cases) and the reliability of those drives today will be questionable. When upgrading existing systems or building new ones, IDE drives are no longer an option for most people anyways.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More importantly, SATA-1 controllers always have (in my experience) full 32-bit driver support for win-98, which eliminates the 137gb problem that applies to most situtations using IDE (PATA) drives.

Apparently you've never had a system with an Intel ICH5 or later chipset. While they may be available for some third-party SATA controller chips, drivers are NOT available for most chipset-integrated SATA controllers. This is why rloew's patch is the best available solution, because it handles all possibilities without the need to purchase extra hardware.

 

No system in daily use, regardless what OS it's running, should be using 40 or 80 gb IDE drives because those drives were made many years ago (10 or more years ago in most cases) and the reliability of those drives today will be questionable. When upgrading existing systems or building new ones, IDE drives are no longer an option for most people anyways.

I depend on them every day. Have for the past 10 years. No signs of any trouble, and no plans to change either.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, if you have modern hardware it would probably be easier just to run Win9x on DOSBOX.

Thanks, I had no knowledge of this. What are the advantages of DosBox compared to other Virtual software?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.