Installing Windows XP x66 + SATA DVD drive = BSOD?

[djBon2112]

Alright. I got myself a nice LiteOn SATA DVD-RW drive so I would be completely standards-compliant, and because I hate IDE ribbon cables. Well, all as well, except, whenever I go to install Windows, I get a BSOD related to it not finding the volume. It does this regardless of what drivers I install (even if I set Windows setup to load my SATA drivers), right after it says "Setup is starting Windows".

Anyone have any ideas? I don't have a spare IDE DVD drive around to install Windows with, and I'd really like to get this working.

For reference, I'm using a LiteOn SATA DVD-RW drive on the Silicon Image SiI 3132 SATALink, installing Windows XP Professional x64 edition from a DVD (it's a custom image with other crap on it [programs, etc. to get my computer running quickly], so no, I can't just burn it to a CD).

 

[djnes]

Sounds like the dreaded F6 problem, except this is with the optical drive. I have an SATA burner and I can load any OS just fine. Of course, I'm using an Intel chipset, which never had these driver problems. Is that the only SATA controller you have? If so, you might be borrowing an IDE burner for now.

On a non-serious note...is Vista x66 any faster than Vista x64? Do those two bits help any?

 

[djBon2112]

Edit: Oh wow, the first time I read that, the smiley didn't load, so I completely missed the joke! I thought you were actually serious!

 

[djnes]

I'm not a big fan of nLite's features to remove XP sections, but you may want to use it's slipstream option to put your SATA drivers into your XP CD and give that a shot.

 

[Menelmarar]

It has nothing to do with SATA, as I have loaded Vista and XP multiple times from SATA optical drives, Lite-On and whatever OEMs are using now. But they have all been Intel chipsets.

It's gotta be a compatibility issue with your AMD motherboard mix and match

Check the silicon image homepage for the latest driver diskette. If that fails, get installed on an IDE drive and then remove it once installed and hope you don't need to boot to an optical drive again for awhile.

 

[djnes]

It has nothing to do with SATA,

You're conflicting your own post. It's definitely due to SATA, as in the drivers not being included with XP. Intel's have always been included, which is why they work of the bat.

 

[Menelmarar]

You're conflicting your own post. It's definitely due to SATA, as in the drivers not being included with XP. Intel's have always been included, which is why they work of the bat.

Negative. XP, even the SP2 slipstream, was released something like 1.5-2 years before the 965 chipset.

XP has no specific knowledge of these newer Intel chipsets, does not have built in drivers, but XP is still able to boot and run on the onboard SATA ports. It's an implementation issue with his AMD based motherboard.

Silicon Image should have an updated driver to fix it I would hope. IMO that or temporarily using an IDE optical drive as life support to get you going is your best bet.

 

[Menelmarar]

Further research shows you have some whacky ULi chipset, not familiar with those...

ULi M1575 South Bridge:
- 2 x UltraDMA 133/100/66/33
- 4 x Serial ATA I/II 3.0Gb/s with RAID 0, 1, 0+1, 5 and JBOD support

Silicon Image� 3132 SATA controller supports
- 1 x Internal Serial ATA 3 Gb/s hard disk
- 1 x External Serial ATA hard disk (SATA On-the-Go)
- Support RAID 0, 1

Put your optical drive on one of the 4 ULI SATA ports, it may work then as they are built into the south bridge and *should* hopefully not need drivers and will not BSOD you. Your motherboard manual should be able to show you which is which.

 

[djnes]

Negative. XP, even the SP2 slipstream, was released something like 1.5-2 years before the 965 chipset.

XP has no specific knowledge of these newer Intel chipsets, does not have built in drivers, but XP is still able to boot and run on the onboard SATA ports. It's an implementation issue with his AMD based motherboard.

That's because they follow the same general architecture. That's why they have the unified driver structure. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with SP2's release. It's the controller of choice for the different chipsets. Some SATA controllers conform, and some do not. It's not a fault of AMD, unless you want to blame them for not forcing compliance by their controller suppliers.

 

[djBon2112]

Just to let you guys talking about XP SP2 know, I'm using the x64 edition, SP1, so it was released in 2005.

But yea, asside from attaching a PATA drive (which requires me going and buying one), does anyone have any other suggestions? It never even gets to any semblance of the setup. It loads all the drivers (and yes, I used the latest driver disk from SI), and regardless, as soon as it goes "Starting Windows", it BSODs. I forget the specific error code, but it involves Windows not finding the boot device.

I'll reboot and get the specific error code. It will be in an edit to this post.

 

[djBon2112]

Update: the BSOD is a stop 0x0000007b error.

Further research shows you have some whacky ULi chipset, not familiar with those...

ULi M1575 South Bridge:
- 2 x UltraDMA 133/100/66/33
- 4 x Serial ATA I/II 3.0Gb/s with RAID 0, 1, 0+1, 5 and JBOD support

Silicon Image� 3132 SATA controller supports
- 1 x Internal Serial ATA 3 Gb/s hard disk
- 1 x External Serial ATA hard disk (SATA On-the-Go)
- Support RAID 0, 1

Put your optical drive on one of the 4 ULI SATA ports, it may work then as they are built into the south bridge and *should* hopefully not need drivers and will not BSOD you. Your motherboard manual should be able to show you which is which.

Doesn't work. The ULi controller is in RAID mode (for my primary HDD raid), and won't boot off the DVD.

 

[Menelmarar]

That's because they follow the same general architecture. That's why they have the unified driver structure. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with SP2's release. It's the controller of choice for the different chipsets. Some SATA controllers conform, and some do not. It's not a fault of AMD, unless you want to blame them for not forcing compliance by their controller suppliers.

Reading comprehension dude, I pointed out several times it's the motherboard implementation, even where you quoted me, the AMD blaming are your words. Why are you focusing on jumping down my throat, not helping the OP? Chill...

Update: the BSOD is a stop 0x0000007b error.
Doesn't work. The ULi controller is in RAID mode (for my primary HDD raid), and won't boot off the DVD.

Here's what you do... maybe... total long shot, see if you can follow this, not gonna be fun.

1. Remove your 2 hard drives your trying to raid.
2. Use a separate single hard drive, hook it up on the onboard ULi controller with your DVD-rom so they are all on the onboard, built-in controller. Back in regular mode or whatever, non-raid so you can boot to it.
3. Install windows, see if the install works now that are you are on the native controller.
4. Once installed, get raid drivers all setup and happy.
5. Remove sata dvd rom
6. You have 4x sata ports, setup your raid array how you want it on the first 2, put your fresh install of windows on the 3rd sata port.
7. Boost up ghost and ... ghost over. Ghost can clone from a smaller drive to a larger one, it will fully enlarge the partition to take up the full space if you need it to.

 

[SuperSubZero]

On the XP64 wikipedia page they used to *specifically* refer to this problem but someone removed it and I don't know why. The problem definitely sounds like drivers, this happened to me too.

Sorta derail, but on Intel chipsets there is an option in the BIOS to put the onboard SATA into "Legacy IDE" mode. In this mode, the ports answer like plain old IDE, which makes their compatibility extremely high. This is how XP 32-bit can load off a SATA optical drive on a chipset that didn't exist when XP 32-bit was released. This is how I got XP64 installed.

With your 3rd-party SATA setup you definitely will need to use F6 and install the drivers.

 

[djnes]

Why are you focusing on jumping down my throat, not helping the OP? Chill...

Speaking of reading comprehension, check the order of the posts. I gave him the answer, with an explanation. You then followed up with the line, it's not about SATA, when it's clearly about SATA. Had he been using an IDE burner, this thread wouldn't be here, because he wouldn't have had a problem. You tried correcting me by basically saying exactly what I did.

Now, if we really want to point fingers on who shifted focus away from helping the OP, go ahead...but I do hope you're standing in front of a mirror when you do so. All you did was troll your way into the thread, trying to one-up me by restating the solution.

I explained the issue, and even gave the suggestion of using an IDE burner (not real feasible for the OP, based on the first post), or using nLite. Using F6 from a floppy isn't going to help here, and I believe the OP already stated he tried that. Hence, the suggestion of nLite.

 

[Menelmarar]

You then followed up with the line, it's not about SATA, when it's clearly about SATA. Had he been using an IDE burner, this thread wouldn't be here, because he wouldn't have had a problem

Again, it has nothing to do with SATA, as reported even pre-SP2 Windows can load off of SATA drives. It is the chipset's compatibility with Windows. You skimp on quality motherboard components, your bound to run into compatibility issues and have to find work arounds or hunt for correct drivers, etc. I used to have lots of various issues back when I used to run AMD/VIA boards.

This particular SATA implementation is a function of the motherboard chipset.

 

[djnes]

You skimp on quality motherboard components, your bound to run into compatibility issues and have to find work arounds or hunt for correct drivers, etc. I used to have lots of various issues back when I used to run AMD/VIA boards.

It's not really about the quality of components. It was about the chipset manufacturer's to get their drivers approved and added to the Windows install code and media. It has nothing to do with who make better controllers and what not. If this is true, you just pissed off all the non-Intel chipset users.

If you want to generalize, it's not about all SATA ports or the SATA spec in general. It's about some SATA controller manufacturers getting their SATA chipset drivers included, and some not putting in the effort, at the customer's chagrin.

Many people had issues like the ones you described with AMD/VIA chipset boards. That's not saying SATA in general was a problem (as you assume I mean). It's saying those particular SATA chipsets didn't get the certification needed (for whatever reason) to be included in the base set of XP drivers. We could start a whole other thread to debate on where to assign blame, but I think we can both agree, the consumers were the ones suffering.

 

[Menelmarar]

If you want to generalize, it's not about all SATA ports or the SATA spec in general. It's about some SATA controller manufacturers getting their SATA chipset drivers included, and some not putting in the effort, at the customer's chagrin.

We went through this already, Windows XP2, was released back in 2004, the more recent 965 chipsets were released in 2006. 2 years newer, there's no way Intel got drivers included and this doesn't account for the people who have installed XP SP1 either.

So Intel didn't get certified either, they just implemented their controller in a way that its windows compatible. So yes, I agree with your statement about these others not putting in the effort to be compatible with windows, I mean, who the hell runs windows these days? ULi/SI obviously didn't plan for you to easily be able to.

 

[djnes]

We went through this already, spinning my wheels in place, Windows XP2, was released back in 2004, the more recent 965 chipsets were released in 2006. 2 years newer, there's no way Intel got drivers included and this doesn't account for the people who have installed XP SP1 either.

That's why I brought up the concept of unified architecture, to explain why a newer chipset is supported out of the box by an older OS. Not only it it easier on the end users in terms of finding drivers, but it aids in the exact situation you describe.

 

[djBon2112]

If you guys are going to argue, please do it elsewhere. I'm trying different drivers when I get home, I think I might've been using the wrong ones. If anyone has any other ideas though, please tell me.

 

[djnes]

If it doesn't work, I would start researching your chipset to see if F6 drivers are needed. If they are, considering this is an optical drive, you're only two options may be nLite or using an IDE burner to get the install going.

 

[djBon2112]

BTW "F6" drivers are what I've been using the entire time.

But I got everything working now. It turns out for whatever reason that I was using the wrong SATA drivers from SI, but now these ones work; setup is running fine! (I can finally repair my 180 day XP x64 trial to the real version I got )