Now testing needs to be done on the performance with different systems but I have a feeling this will correct most of the issues with the scratch amp. *Note s100=100Mbits per I think it will make it easier! Other ManufacturersSpecial adaptations from other manufacturers are possible as well. The 3rd-party Promise SATA controller is on the PCI bus, but it's disabled. http://comvurgent.com/xp-sp2/xp-sp2-problems.html
There is no need to reinstall all old FireWire drivers. In fact, I was familiar with some of the mobo's they mentioned and they did not have 64-bit PCI slots! (I also read where many of them said they had to Thanks. -Clint #1 computer, Jan 28, 2010 Last edited: Jan 29, 2010 Loading... I only see two levels of user: one that is limited and one that has all privs.
You only mentioned doing filesystem-level benchmarks, ergo you don't know where on the disk you took your sample from. Again, I am open for suggestions. Sorry if I am being too lame but you may have to break it down for me. With this, the Fireface 800 is still fully operational, just as if it were connected to a FireWire 400 interface (1394a).
Where I am stuck is not being able to install the fix. The latter defaults to the M$ drivers. At least we do not know of any such devices, and as it seems Microsoft did not make this change because of actual complaints about incompatibilities. Next go to Windows\System32\Drivers and move arp1394.sys, enum1394.sys, and nic1394.sys to the 1394_Fix folder.
No it doesn't have PCI-e. It's an Oxford 912 chipset and so far all I see is RAID info for Oxford 911 chipsets. -ClintClick to expand... Patrick Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter Facebook Reddit! 15 Jan 2007, 01:51 PM #12 Chewy Super Moderator Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: millenium And which hard-drive are you using? #24 BTRY B 529th FA BN, Feb 2, 2010 computer Platinum Member Joined: Nov 5, 2000 Messages: 2,735 Likes Received: 0 BTRY B 529th
Then finally, how can I incorporate that fix above to work on SP3? Hobbes Dj Hobbes, Jan 16, 2005 #9 hooka_Tf New Member Messages: 6 Another option? There were, apparently, also problems in Vista. It could be they are just "confused" and are confusing that with 33mhz and 66mhz slots, or, the cards are actually 32-bit cards that can also work in a 64-bit slot.
Yeah that's the one that's in the enclosure now..... It did make a difference. One that might resolve any issues with SP2 perhaps. Current Firewire 800 chips send a 2-bit speed code of 0x3 (instead of 0x2 = s400) in the self-ID-Packet 0.
It could be they are just "confused" and are confusing that with 33mhz and 66mhz slots, or, the cards are actually 32-bit cards that can also work in a 64-bit slot. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter Facebook Reddit! __________________ Important: Remember, if something is worth doing, its worth doing wrong until you learn to do it Right! I have Windows XP-Pro with SP2. check over here I thought I had posted the specs, but I see that was on another thread.
That drive probably has 80GB platters (depends on the exact model and manuf. The article says this update will not be included in later updates and hotfixes, so it must be installed manually whenever needed. So I then found this "fix" at the M$ site.
Because SATA300 isn't anywhere near twice as fast as SATA150 and SATA6 isn't anywhere near twice as fast as SATA300. There's one Native IDE connector (which I guess is on the PCI bus), to which is an optical drive, of course it's not being used during 1394b tests. But at least now at this point, I am getting significantly better performance with 1394b over that of 1394a on all tests. Home Forums Search Forums Recent Posts Your name or email address: Password: Forgot your password?
If not you haven’t done something correctly. Make sure the Fireface is switched off and no other external FireWire device is present. Thanks! These files have a date around august 2002, and say SP1 in their file properties.
Now I need to find out how to use RAID 1 on this enclosure. That WD1600JB of course gets faster benchmarks when it's not in the enclosure. (X=100MB theoretical, 50-60% less than that actual). You also have to remember that the PCI bus has a total aggregate bandwidth of 133MB/s. And finally if you have installed windows w/SP2 then they will say 2004 and you need to do this fix.
I started checking into this to see what could be the problem, and to my utter horror, I came across this. If you're using an older computer (please post specs), then the disk controllers and such may also be on the PCI bus, even if you don't physically have a controller card I also ran the FC-Test tests (post #12, 3rd paragraph on this thread for FC-Test explanation). Stay logged in Search titles only Posted by Member: Separate names with a comma.
So does it fix the Firewire 800 problems? Related Articles Company Support Other Links Company Visit our Website Contact Us About Us Support home create ticket check ticket status solutions forums Other Links Industrial and Life Sciences Cameras Microscopy Yes, it does. for one i dont have that registry key, second how do i know if im getting s100 speed, im not geting any problems.
FW (800) is limited to X MB/sec, and any relatively new HD is going to exceed that X number. I don't remember what all is on the PCI bus, but I do know the LAN is not, it's a CSA LAN. That's about 26.45MB/sec Vs. 41MB/sec, and those are pretty impressive for write times. I have no way of knowing if this problem would still exist with a different PCI card, or even with a mobo with integrated 1394b.
I haven't been using IE (Internet Exploder) but Firefox. Since there are no devices that only support s100, the need to throttle the bus speed does not actually exist. For Microsoft, at this time ‘correctly’ means switching to the slowest transfer mode s100, equaling 100Mbit per second, for reasons of safety and compatibility. From a 5.8-inch OLED display, reports of wireless charging and even a 3D scanner for facial recognition, it's all here.