Here is the news from the very enjoyable and competent support chat with agent Yogesh:
"... to keep you informed on Intel Desktop motherboard we have checked maximum of 1 TB of HDD capacity only and which was found to be working perfectly fine, ..."
"... we need to work on your request, hence I will be escalating your request to local customer center for further research on your request. ..."
Sorry, I forgot to ask about the "no-email-support", but will post backhen I get an answer.
Sorry, for my delay. I was somewhat annoyed about Intel's answer, which I cite below and so posted it erroneosly in an other thread with a similar problem ( http://communities.intel.com/thread/22839 ).
The information you provided regarding this issue indicates that the WDC20EARS-00J2GB0 and the DP43TF board are incompatible.
We do not provide a compatibility list for any harddrives that have been tested. Indications are that the HDD takes too much time to initialize then the board is expecting, this ist most likely due to the size of the drive.
Since the board is not showing any issues with the smaller Samsung drive, there are not technical failures affecting the board.
As this board is a couple of years old now and will soon be discontinued, it is unlikely that new firmware or hardware changes will be provided for this board.
Unfortunatly we have not means to solve the issue. We recommend to use another Harddrive or to replace the board for a newer model, more suitable to detect newer and larger harddrives.
Nice move, Intel! :]
Btw, WD says the do not have any firmware updates for their drives.
Since 2TB is the maximum size allowed for in the older formatting I was expecting it would suffer in performance as well. This is supported by some reviews of large drives. With the conversion it seems that 1TB or 3TB are better options to avoid the extremes. The average drive size sold is still around 350 GB with larger drives primarily for graphics or audio storage. The latest boards may provide better support, but 2TB is an awkward size to deal with. Any larger drives added would need to be formatted differently. Recovery services are much more expensive than having too many hard drives. I hope you can use this one at some point.
Sorry, for my delay. I was somewhat annoyed about Intel's answer,
Btw, WD says the do not have any firmware updates for their drives.
I understand that Intels answer isn't what you wanted to hear but in fairness they do have to draw the line with regard to updates to address compatibility issues with new items of add-in hardware otherwise the possibilities are endless for what people would expect. I think on the other hand, there should be some onus on the hard disk drive supplier to see you right with a different model that is compatible with your board - especially if they knew what board you'd be connecting it to and they want your repeat business!
If WD don't have any firmware upgrades and won't budge on that, then that may be your best option. If you don't yet have an external HDD (for backup purposes) you could always put your 2 TB drive into a compatible external eSATA/USB housing and make use of it that way (although make sure the housing is compatible). You could then buy another drive from a shop which will install and test it with your board to make sure it's compatible - my Samsung 2 TB HDD is fully compatible with my DG45ID in an Antec MX-1 External case so maybe a change of HDD brand is called for!
No, certainly this was not what I liked to hear, but, please, keep in mind that there are specs for SATA devices and their detection. I believe -I think with good reason- that WD fulfills those and Intel's "SATA AHCI driver ver.1.10.5" does not. Considering further that Intel is of course copyright owner of a working version of this AHCI BIOS component (doing its task in various BIOSes), bur have NOT changed this part in the BIOS of my mobo leaves me somehow -let's say- disappointed.
Thank you for your "external" suggestion, but I am more the kind of guy who buys a newer, bigger, faster HDD and keeps the older one just as an archive down in the private oblivion, saving the cost for housings,
I do not get it why you stick to your formatting problem which is certainly not my problem. Anyhow, it helped to increase your (irrelevant) post count. You also seem to never ever heard noise from your multitude of HDDs?
Thanks and bye!
The reputation of irrelevant posts seems to have started after I was attacked for providing a relevant Intel guideline concerning AHCI. No, the formatting I discuss differs from what I referenced earlier. You may be unaware of changes discussed in various articles. This falls within the guidelines of the forum for discussing developing trends but may be more suitable for posts specifically targeting those trends, which are few. You have provided one confirmation of my decision to avoid the 2 TB drives for older systems. The placement of your post under desktop boards was appropriate and may help others, if not you.
If you reread your posts I believe you will understand that you have either appeared evasive or confusing. You are not alone in this regard.
The 650GB and 1TB WD Blue drives are all the quietest drives I have used and the Black 750GB drive is nearly as quiet. Some of the reviews posted for various hardware on NewEgg are clearly attacks meant to harm the vendor, the buyer or the hardware. Nothing is immune to valid complaints but using a "shotgun" is not the appropriate means.
No, certainly this was not what I liked to hear, but, please, keep in mind that there are specs for SATA devices and their detection.
Specs which no doubt adapt to changing circumstances over time. Intel are EXTREMELY careful about making sure their devices are to spec AT THE TIME OF MANUFACTURE and I have no doubt that back then the board suited all the current SATA drives on the market. If you don't believe me, google and read up about Intels approach to standards on the internet. There have been complaints from people about Intels unwillingness to provide products which don't work with unratified standards (even though other manufacturers release things which clearly work using proprietary approaches and fill a gap in the market).
You keep coming back and pointing the finger at Intel and to be honest, I really think they have a point in what they say. You don't seem to be willing to go down the path of approaching your HDD supplier about the problem. They'd have to be a pretty mean and stingy bunch if they won't see you right with a replacement drive which will work with your board - even if you have to pay a restocking fee. I don't understand why the reluctance to change drives.... I suspect that any further effort to get Intel to make changes to it's motherboard BIOS are akin to flogging a dead horse but going back to your supplier opens up many more options. Let us know what your supplier has to say - I honestly believe that's the way forward for you and I hope you try it.
Since you two both reply to my bye I feel sort of obliged, not to say unpolite if I did not not, to reply again:
@ Flying _Kiwi
By no means I ever intended to express that Intel is -regarding my case- not acting on sure (legal AND reasonable) grounds. I just think I am missing an aspect of something what is called "Produktpflege" (perfective maintainance?) in German, which is something one may expect to some extent, considering e.g. the not empty list of BIOS updates. AND it is this crucial AHCI driver which has NOT been replaced from the beginning(!) till the the end(!) of the life cycle for this mobo, although, as I mentioned, Intel HAS developed at least one AHCI BIOS driver working with 2TB HDDs. And -perhaps unlawfully- I insinuate, that Intel knows about "incompatibility" between this driver and large HDDs. They certainly also "have a point" (and the right!) in doing so without any doubt and I am not on the way to buy AMD only in the future, but I have seen other mobos growing old in more graceful way than Intel's.
Concerning WD, they offered an "advance exchange" but not of an other drive type. Since I do not expect any remedy from this, I decided not to take all the efforts and risks to avoid a problem which comes up only rarely and is solved in a simple way - reboot!
Perhaps I consider it to simple a task embedding(!) an other, existing(!) AHCI driver in an existing(!) BIOS and offer it for download (considering all the quality assurance oligatory at Intel's - honestly!).
Comparing my personal alternatives I decided to avoid an HDD change and to press Intel as hard as I can (and be it pointing finger, so what!) to improve their outdated mobo! I respect your evidently lesser reluctancy to change drives, but for now I will not change mine (reluctancy and drive).
Believe me, I had a faint foreshadow of the outcoming.
I apologize for anything that sounded like a shotgun for you! Especially the "relevance" was intended only to apply to your postings in this thread concerning my and only my problem. Perhaps English not being my native tongue and still living in Austria is a reason for these misunderstandings and also for your experience of my evasingness or confusingness.
1. post: reformatting(!) and fans
2. post: cables and formatting(!)
3. post: cables, OS aspects of AHCI/IDE, formatting(!)
4. post: HDMI, formatting(!), IDU, SMART
5. post: bad sectors(formatting!), OS aspects of AHCI/IDE, AHCI praise
6. post: formatting(!) and size, esoterics about avoiding 2TB
I do not know your "relevant contributions" (you missed citing them!) but the above are really irrelevant to the stated problem, even considering my evasingness or confusingness.I prefer bigger drives (as they are mainstream!), you like having more of them, you believe 350MB being the average drive size being sold nowadays, I think you missed a development, you consider cable faults with serial(!) devices restricted to one specific phase of connection relevant in frequency, I do not, ...., OK, OK, ...
Believe in the wisdom of the masses, I do not!
You have demostrated that you have a working knowledge of computers. The only drives I have had initial problems with were the last 640GB and 1TB. The drives had been sent with progressivley less packaging, to the point of none, over hundreds of miles. Another factor was that I had reverted to IDE from AHCI. I don't know how this matters but a potential relationship exists. I can't form a proper hypothesis without more data, information or training. Excuse me if the information I have shared is of no value to you, assuming WD is being forthright and correct. The large number of complaints for such drives argues against a motherboard solving your issue.
The hard drive size should be less of a concern where it is partitioned as you do. That is up to you but I don't like the complication this has on of backups and background processes such as defragmentation (Vista and Windows 7).
The average size of shipped hard drives is that reported by Seagate and WD, reported via TomsHardware in July. The 250GB WD drive I have is now quite noisy but still less than other drives I have used.
My conversational style is commensurate with the experience I present. I am seriously(!) short on authoritative pretense regarding computer hardware.
I have reread your posts again and still feel your problem originated with the migration.
On 6/24 you stated - driving the HDD as IDE (excluding AHCI!) also avoids detection probs but forces WIN-XP to install IDE- instead of SATA drivers. Strongly recommends migration.
On 6/26 you stated suspend to RAM restarts Win-XP.
You must be referring to the original migration or multibooting.
You did agree on 6/25 that formatting is relevant. This is logical since it must be determined whether an OS is present.
In my case the problem appeared only with new drives installed as backup drives. The BIOS became confused and in one case one motherboard port was no longer detected. This required multiple reconfigurations of ports and eventually proper detection and booting was established on the correct ports. Since your situation is different it would not be too helpful to detail precisely what I did. I still suspect that the state of the OS is somehow involved and others have commented that new drives should be detectable as backup drives, not requiring the installation of an OS as a boot drive.
The shortest path to success would be to get a new drive for installation of the OS, or use the XP drive if it was on a separate drive. Proceed from there with the 2TB as a reformatted backup drive. If you are trying to use a separte partition for XP I have no suggestions since I have never attempted that.
If you do not consider this to be a contribution then I will not offer any more assistance.
It is so very nice and commited of you to be helpful, but please, focus on the specification of the problem I gave and, please, do not misinterpret my perhaps not absolutely welldefined stated propositions, which I will try to make once more clear.
On 6/24 I reported my experience that after the smooth detection of my drives as IDE by the BIOS, not surprisingly, WIN-XP tried to install WIN-XP drivers for this newly detected device (IDE controller). This happened exactly to the WIN-XP installation which already contained the WIN-XP SATA drivers, so naturally I cancelled the installation of IDE drivers and reverted to AHCI in the BIOS! On the same day, I added my recommendation to you for migrating a healthy OS, compared to an install from scratch.
On 6/26 I stated in a sloppy manner that WIN-XP "restarts" after "suspend to RAM". Of course this should read "WIN-XP is resumed after being suspended before" and does not involve the drive detection by the SATA AHCI driver in the BIOS!
All my statements on these two days contain absolutely no reference to the long before finished factual migration of the OS or to a multiboot situation. To be clear: the migrated OS was always strictly SATA and contained the SATA drivers back then of course.
On 6/25 I tried to make clear that formatting -while not only relevant but indispensdable for storing data- is absolutely of NO RELEVANCE for my problem and also of absolutely NO RELEVANCE for the mere detection of HDDs. The determination if there is an OS or not is done only afterwards (reading the partition block(s)).
Please, also have a look at the documentation I supplied with pictures in the thread I mentioned in my post on 6/28 which made it clear to Intel support and should also make it clear to you that it is the (in-)compatibility of the drive and the mobo and no formatting effect which is THE reason for this issue.
You certainly contributed to this case, but I must leave it to your esteem if it was a valuable contribution.
I understand your interest in having one drive and apparently the XP is still present. You should probably trust the WD response but it would seem to me that it would be better if the XP partition were removed. If this were on a separate drive this would accomadate all of the scenarios which you may be involved in. For example waiting for a functional system before deleting it. Device Manager and Disk Management can handle this more readily with physical, rather than virtual drives. I even have my Virtual PC OS on a separate drive as suggested by one site. In my case the system partition for Win 7 ended up on the backup drive after adding the only backup (new) drive on a different system. No one knew how this could occur but I was able to fix it with the system disk and the managers. This could also be a BIOS issue that needs to be fixed but I had never had problems with other drives. Perhaps I had always used the new drives as boot drives or they preceded Win 7. Good luck, whatever you do.