Sprocket's New Home

[Virtualbody1234]

Originally posted by Duffman3@10 June 2004 - 06:54
no no no, jigawats!

Your right. I know how its supposed to sound. Just didn't type it right.

[tesco]

Originally posted by Virtualbody1234@10 June 2004 - 00:20
1.21 gigawatts?

are you sure it was 1.21? i know how he says it, where he repeasts it like he can't beleive it, and 1.21 doesn't seem to sound right...

[Virtualbody1234]

Yup its 1.21 jigawatts.

Listen -> http://www.angelfire.com/retro/bttf/jigawatts.wav

[Tormentor]

How does it not sound right? one point twenty one jigawats.

[tesco]

Originally posted by Tormentor@10 June 2004 - 10:07
How does it not sound right? one point twenty one jigawats.

lol, ok.

i was reading it wrong, makes sense as "one point twenty one jigawatts"

but i was reading it this morning as "one point two one jigawatts", shich as you can see sounds wrong...

[clocker]

What has happened here?
Sprocket's thread has morphed into a Back To the Future trivia quiz.
Hhrrrummph.

*sigh*

Back on topic.
Included with the new Abit mobo was a little device called "Serielle" which converts a PATA HDD to run off the SATA header. I had been so preoccupied with the HSF dilemma that I ignored it till this morning.
The unit plugs into the standard IDE cable header on the drive and accepts a SATA cable on the other end. It also requires power from a floppy-style power connector.
Ah-ha, thought I, what a great opportunity to get rid of a clunky IDE cable ( mine are the ultra-hip rounded ones, but still...) and use the new, uber-sexy SATA cables that have been mouldering away in their plastic bags for so long. This could really make cleaning up the cable clutter easier.

Of course, no real instructions were included with this little wonder and I was left to my own devices to figure out the installation requirements.
It has been a real learning experience.
Clever sprat that I are, I figured that I would load the SATA drivers from the mobo CD before I did the conversion.
OK.
Then I entered BIOS and switched the boot order to have S-ATA HDD as the second boot device.
All my ducks being neatly lined up, I powered down and installed the Serielle device.

I must admit to feeling quite a glow when I had it all wired in place...SATA beats IDE hands down in the clutter department. Very sleek install.

Power up...."Error reading boot device".
Huh?

Turns out , you have to load the drivers in DOS also...which requires a floppy...which of course I don't have.
Well, I do now.
Hours of fumbling about and ranting and raving ( my speciality is hardware...I'm a complete know-nothing when it comes to software)finally I have it working.
The guys down at my local shop had never actually installed this device, they always went IDE, so I was the guinea pig for them.
The question was- would there be a performance difference using this Serielle thingie?
Basically, no.
Not better, not worse.
Stands to reason, really.
It's a PATA device after all, so just running through the SATA controller shouldn't make much difference.
And it doesn't.
But...
There is no performance loss either, so the biggest difference is the cabling.
Which, to my way of thinking, is worth the extra hassle.
Now, for the sixty four million dollar question.

I have two optical drives.
Currently they are running as master and slave on IDE1.
Is there any advantage to running them both as masters on individual IDE headers?

Any thoughts, class?

[tesco]

no ideas, but it's great that it makes less clutter. can't type much now, im gonna be late for school

[Virtualbody1234]

Is there any advantage to running them both as masters on individual IDE headers?

Absolutely. Do it.

[kaiweiler]

Originally posted by clocker@11 June 2004 - 01:01
I have two optical drives.
Currently they are running as master and slave on IDE1.
Is there any advantage to running them both as masters on individual IDE headers?

Myself, I would not bother really.
Sure you may get a tiny bit of performance increase, but on what? a mere optical drive...so what?
In my opinion it would not be worth the extra clutter from a whole nother IDE cable.
Just my opinion, but if you do not mind the extra clutter, go to er!

[lynx]

I considered that option when I got my SATA drive, but decided having only one IDE cable was better than the marginal speed increase on the odd occasion (if ever) that I would use both optical drives together.