A7N8X Deluxe and SATA Drivers Bluescreening Norton Ghost
 

Hi,

Is there a reason for running the .29 drivers?
the asus supplied .22 and the silicon image .33 seem to be final, but the
silicon image .47 seem to be beta.
also the .29 dont seem to be availiable from asus or silicon image. are the
..29 drivers the uber drivers that need to be used with the uber bios?
thanks

Eyman

"Nom" wrote in message
...
"Eyman" wrote in message
...
Hi,

Ive got a A7N8X Deluxe PCB 2.0 board with a 1005 bios on a WindowsXP
Home
system.

The system is stable but my problem is that Norton Ghost does not seem
to
like the Silicon Image serial ATA drivers and the system bluescreens
with
"an invalid page fault" listing the "SI3112A.inf" file as the guilty
culprit.

I can do an image backup with Ghost with the Asus supplied SATA drivers
(1.0.2.2) but upon reboot I get a bluescreen due to the SATA drivers.

The other newer Silicon Image SATA drivers (both 1.0.3.3 and 1.0.4.7)
bluescreen the system when Norton Ghost is started within windows.

Has anyone else experienced this, or can anyone help overcoming this
problem?

Boot from the Ghost floppies, and use those. No SATA drivers required, and
they work just fine.

You should really be running the .29 drivers within Windows - get em from
me
http://web.newsguy.com/nomnet/silicon_v10029.zip

"Eyman" wrote in message
...
Hi,

Is there a reason for running the .29 drivers?
the asus supplied .22 and the silicon image .33 seem to be final, but the
silicon image .47 seem to be beta.

The .29s tend to be the quickest, and most stable.
Try em yourself if you don't believe me :)

also the .29 dont seem to be availiable from asus or silicon image. are
the
.29 drivers the uber drivers that need to be used with the uber bios?

The .29 drivers will work with any BIOS version, any SATA version, any
number of drives, whether in RAID or not, etc. etc.
I have no idea why they aren't on the Silicon Image site - they were on
there at one point !

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 08:55:57 +0100, "Nom"
wrote:

"Eyman" wrote in message
...
Hi,

Is there a reason for running the .29 drivers?
the asus supplied .22 and the silicon image .33 seem to be final, but the
silicon image .47 seem to be beta.

The .29s tend to be the quickest, and most stable.
Try em yourself if you don't believe me :)

also the .29 dont seem to be availiable from asus or silicon image. are
the
.29 drivers the uber drivers that need to be used with the uber bios?

The .29 drivers will work with any BIOS version, any SATA version, any
number of drives, whether in RAID or not, etc. etc.
I have no idea why they aren't on the Silicon Image site - they were on
there at one point !

Nom,
Have you tried the SI-supplied .33 drivers for comparison to the .29?
If you did and returned to the .29, what problems did you encounter
with the .33's?

Ron

"Ron Miller" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 08:55:57 +0100, "Nom"
wrote:

"Eyman" wrote in message
...
Hi,

Is there a reason for running the .29 drivers?
the asus supplied .22 and the silicon image .33 seem to be final, but
the
silicon image .47 seem to be beta.

The .29s tend to be the quickest, and most stable.
Try em yourself if you don't believe me :)

also the .29 dont seem to be availiable from asus or silicon image. are
the
.29 drivers the uber drivers that need to be used with the uber bios?

The .29 drivers will work with any BIOS version, any SATA version, any
number of drives, whether in RAID or not, etc. etc.
I have no idea why they aren't on the Silicon Image site - they were on
there at one point !

Nom,
Have you tried the SI-supplied .33 drivers for comparison to the .29?

Nope.
But plenty of other folks have, and the general concensus is that the .29s
are the best.

I've personally found the .29s to be 100% stable, and hence I won't change
to another version without good reason.