Windows 10: PATA+SATA Woes

Hello.

I have an old pc which had w7 installed. Intel G41 chipset (ICH7).
It has got two hard disks:

Hard disk 1: PATA 165GB
Hard disk 2: SATA 500GB

When trying to install w10 to disk 2, disk layout is as follows:

HDD1 PATA: One NTFS partition (primary). Not active.
HDD2 SATA: One NTFS partition (primary). Active. Another NTFS partition (Primary)(DATA).

w10 insists on installing on PATA HD. If I select SATA hard disk I get the "BOOTMGR not found" message after first reboot. It seems booting portion is copied to HDD1 no matter which partition you specify.

I then physically unplugged the PATA HD and I was able to install w10 without issues, but as soon as I replug the PATA HD, I get a "inaccessible boot device" error message when trying to boot w10.

Any ideas?

PS - BIOS (which I updated to latest version too) has got some options for the ATA ports (Auto, disabled, Combined, not-combined, enhanced). I tried some of these but they seem to make no difference at all. Some of them even disable PATA port.

:)

 

PATA(IDE) Vs. SATA

There are converters for anything. The first sata hard drives simply had a bridge chip for the sata interface. Thats why the first western digital hard drives still had a molex connector, it was simply a pata drive with a bridge chip.

The term pata is a name given to ata drives so we all can differentiate easier with sata drives. PATA and SATA are different in that you cannot simply plug one into the other. The protocols are different along with signaling. Where as with all ATA drives they didn't matter if they were udma1 or udma6 they all worked.

ATA and PATA are the same exact thing.

All drives we use today are either serial ATA or parallel ATA. PATA is the name for any drive using the old style ribbon cable. By the way you will never bridge a pata drive such that its burst speed tops 133mb/s.

For history of ATA/ATAPI DMA etc Parallel ATA - Wikipedia

SATA was then adopted to remove the crosstalk bottleneck, bulky cables, and improve performance with NCQ etc.

 

PATA(IDE) Vs. SATA

lol, they are all in the same catagory also here is a converter to convert IDE to SATA: PC GEARS



here read this:

Parallel ATA

Parallel ATA (Parallel Advanced Technology Attachment or PATA) is a standard for connecting hard drives into computer systems. As its name implies, PATA is based on parallel signaling technology, unlike Serial ATA (SATA) devices that use serial signaling technology. Parallel ATA dates back to the 1980s. Integrated Drive Electronics (IDE) drives operate according to this standard.

The connections for PATA devices were originally made using 40-conductor ribbon cables. These were later supplanted by 80-conductor cables in which every other conductor is grounded, minimizing mutual capacitance (and consequent crosstalk) between conductors. The maximum workable cable length is 46 centimeters (about 18 inches). This means that PATA cables are only practical for use with internal drives.

Parallel ATA was originally called Advanced Technology Attachment (ATA) until the year 2003 when SATA was introduced. The cable for a SATA connection has seven conductors. These cables are more flexible than PATA cables and can be much longer, allowing the designer more latitude in the physical layout of a system. Because there are fewer conductors, crosstalk is less likely to be troublesome in SATA than in PATA. The signal voltage is lower as well (250 mV for SATA as compared with 5 V for PATA).

 

PATA(IDE) Vs. SATA

What in the hell are you talking about? SATA and PATA (or IDE) are two completely different formats. PATA started out as 33mb/s and moved up to 133mb/s max theoretical speed. No higher than 133 was attainable due to crosstalk from the many pairs of wires in the ribbon. It's like saying agp and pci-e are the same.

Sata stands for Serial ATA compared to Parallel ATA for PATA. The move to serial was due to the crosstalk that lowered output because of errors and the cap in max attainable speed.

The move from a parallel interface to serial allows higher max speed, less interference, smaller cables, what is bad about it?

By the way hat sata150 is 150 for a reason, max throughput is 150megabyte/second not 1.5gigabit/second divided by 8. You are forgetting protocol overhead in that calculation.