What do you mean "shrinking". Just create <128GB partition as C, format and install. Then you can make other partitions but the C: boot part for Win98 (unpatched) must be <128GB since it is FAT32 and falls under MS 28 bits LBA support...
also native unpatched MS FDISK will mess up a >64GB partition so00...Just fdisk a 60GB part C and install.

Horun wrote on 2022-10-25, 01:50:

Just fdisk a 60GB part C and install.

You can fit a lot of Windows 98 software on a 60GB partition.

If you really want to go larger, you could try drive overlay software that should be able to get you closer to 137GB.

http://www.vogonsdrivers.com/getfile.php?file … 900&menustate=0

My thought was thinking the easiest senario: create max size native boot partition for Win98 w/o issues (~60GB), get it installed, then patch for the max 2TB HD size, then create another partition or three 😁 from within Windows and use the full 500GB HD. added: that assumes the BIOS actually sees the whole drive....

Horun wrote on 2022-10-25, 01:50:

What do you mean "shrinking". Just create <128GB partition as C, format and install. Then you can make other partitions but the C: boot part for Win98 (unpatched) must be <128GB since it is FAT32 and falls under MS 28 bits LBA support...
also native unpatched MS FDISK will mess up a >64GB partition so00...Just fdisk a 60GB part C and install.

By 'shrinking', I mean to create a size disk appropriate for Windows 98. I've set SeaTools to 32GB to be safe. I don't mean to permanently keep it at 32GB, I'm just trying to get the OS to install. For all intents and purposes, the drive is 32GB with a single 32GB partition. The BIOS sees the drive as 32GB. Seems fine, but then again... Here I am. Windows 98 fails to install.

I should also say that I'm used to the HDD limitations of older computers, I've used SeaTools and FDISK on plenty on systems between 486 and Pentium IIIs. This one is just being stubborn for some reason.

douglar wrote on 2022-10-25, 02:12:

You can fit a lot of Windows 98 software on a 60GB partition. […]
Show full quote

Horun wrote on 2022-10-25, 01:50:

Just fdisk a 60GB part C and install.

You can fit a lot of Windows 98 software on a 60GB partition.

If you really want to go larger, you could try drive overlay software that should be able to get you closer to 137GB.

http://www.vogonsdrivers.com/getfile.php?file … 900&menustate=0

Thanks, I failed to mention specifically what I've done with SeaTools. I have already reduced the drive size to 32GB with a single 32GB partition.

Can you post a pic of your adapter... an actual pic please, not a stock photo.

Hi there! 👋🙂

Just checked Gigabyte website..
For the GA-6oxet revision 1 exist a BIOS update which adds support for 137GB+ HDDs.
It's BIOS Version F9. There are two later versions, even.

https://www.gigabyte.com/de/Motherboard/GA-6O … -rev-1x/support

Edit: Again, I've merely checked the site. If you consider doing an update, make sure the PC runs stable on DOS for a while.
Please also check the web for more information, if the update helped other users etc.

Edit: Please keep in mind that Windows 98 itself has an 137GB limit (LBA-28) - by default.
There's an LBA-48 patch for Windows 98, however.

Edit: I've found one here (mirror seems to work):
https://retrosystemsrevival.blogspot.com/2018 … rive-patch.html

However, there's also the patch by R. Loew (sk)..

Edit: Another tip: You can try torun Windows 98 Setup from within your Windows 3.x installation,
depending on your Windows 98 release (OEM/Retail/Upgrade).
Because, that's what Windows 98 uses in the second part of the installation process, anyway.
It has stored a miniature Windows 3.1 inside of MINI.CAB.

If this still doesn't work, try loading Setup manually without SmartDrive.
There's a switch for SETUP which allows this (SETUP /C).

By the way, it's easier if you start installation from HDD anyway (inside WIN98 directory).
WIN98 and DRIVERS are the two important folders. Copy them to C:, after your HDD is partitioned/formatted.

If Windows 98 Setup complains about an existing MS-DOS installation.. Use FORMAT C: /B.

This won't make C: bootable yet, but preserves space for the DOS system files.
So Windows 98 Setup can transfer them later on.

adultlunchables wrote on 2022-10-25, 03:03:

By 'shrinking', I mean to create a size disk appropriate for Windows 98. I've set SeaTools to 32GB to be safe. I don't mean to permanently keep it at 32GB, I'm just trying to get the OS to install. For all intents and purposes, the drive is 32GB with a single 32GB partition. The BIOS sees the drive as 32GB. Seems fine, but then again... Here I am. Windows 98 fails to install.

I should also say that I'm used to the HDD limitations of older computers, I've used SeaTools and FDISK on plenty on systems between 486 and Pentium IIIs. This one is just being stubborn for some reason.

Ahh OK. curious why the BIOS sees the HD as just 32GB. If it had the typical BIOS limitations that is not one of them (unless it is the 33.8Gb one, which I personally since 1995 have never seen) even if Seatools did a DDO afaik...

In addition to what @jo22 mentioned about updating the BIOS, you will need to use a driver under Windows 98SE that supports HDDs >137GB . The default Windows driver for IDE controllers has a limitation that cause a crash during the first boot while installing Windows . You cannot work around this limitation by creating a partition smaller than 137GB .

EDIT : Once you've applied the updated BIOS and either option a) or b) , you will be able to use the full drive capacity, but will need to install an additional patch if you want to use partions than 137GB in size . If you stack to partitions smaller than 137GB each, you will not need to install anything more than the updated BIOS in addition to either a) or b) .

You have two options

a) Install one of the patched Windows 98 IDE drivers mentioned in [1], such as http://www.mdgx.com/files/BHDD31.ZIP or the one RLOEW created .

b) rename or delete c:\windows\system\ESDI_506.PDR from the command line before the first boot during Windows installation (you will need to change its attribute first), reboot and install iaa23_multi.exe (Intel's "Application Accelerator" IDE driver for >137GB support)

See
[1]
Re: Trying to figure out the cause of data corruption in Windows 9x
Re: Formating and partitioning disk for MSDOS 6.22
Re: Win98SE, DOS, Terabyte Plus
Adding XT-IDE option ROM to Asus P3B-F BIOS [Thanks to DenizOezmen, it actually works!!!]

For Win9x I like to keep the primary partition at 2GB, few reasons for this. it's well below Windows limitations, Windows Scandisk wont take forever whenever it complains Windows hasn't bee shut down properly, opens up duel booting options should you want to go down that track.

2GB should be more then enough for Windows and any programs. Games I install on another partition, I like to have install files and drivers on yet another partition but you can have it all in one big "data drive" if you prefer.

Also you could install Windows 2000 just as a test?
that would confirm if the drive or adapter is at fault as has better support for larger drives by default, again though I like to install to a 4GB partition for 2k, I like having boot partions well under the OS's limits

Horun wrote on 2022-10-25, 03:34:

adultlunchables wrote on 2022-10-25, 03:03:

By 'shrinking', I mean to create a size disk appropriate for Windows 98. I've set SeaTools to 32GB to be safe. I don't mean to permanently keep it at 32GB, I'm just trying to get the OS to install. For all intents and purposes, the drive is 32GB with a single 32GB partition. The BIOS sees the drive as 32GB. Seems fine, but then again... Here I am. Windows 98 fails to install.

I should also say that I'm used to the HDD limitations of older computers, I've used SeaTools and FDISK on plenty on systems between 486 and Pentium IIIs. This one is just being stubborn for some reason.

Ahh OK. curious why the BIOS sees the HD as just 32GB. If it had the typical BIOS limitations that is not one of them (unless it is the 33.8Gb one, which I personally since 1995 have never seen) even if Seatools did a DDO afaik...

likely https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host_protected_area

weedeewee wrote on 2022-10-25, 10:18:

Horun wrote on 2022-10-25, 03:34:

adultlunchables wrote on 2022-10-25, 03:03:

By 'shrinking', I mean to create a size disk appropriate for Windows 98. I've set SeaTools to 32GB to be safe. I don't mean to permanently keep it at 32GB, I'm just trying to get the OS to install. For all intents and purposes, the drive is 32GB with a single 32GB partition. The BIOS sees the drive as 32GB. Seems fine, but then again... Here I am. Windows 98 fails to install.

I should also say that I'm used to the HDD limitations of older computers, I've used SeaTools and FDISK on plenty on systems between 486 and Pentium IIIs. This one is just being stubborn for some reason.

Ahh OK. curious why the BIOS sees the HD as just 32GB. If it had the typical BIOS limitations that is not one of them (unless it is the 33.8Gb one, which I personally since 1995 have never seen) even if Seatools did a DDO afaik...

likely https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host_protected_area

I don't know if Seatools actually does that and a DDO itself doesn't do that either. If you test the drive in a modern PC and its BIOS also sees it as 32GB , then I agree that this is likely what Seatools is doing.

That being said, my experience is that not all BIOSes seem to "like" that method of reducing drive size.

For example, I have an Asus Pentium 4 board that handles >137GB disks just fine. It detects and uses a 500GB Samsung EVO SSD perfectly, but when I try using a 250GB Samsung EVO SSD that I reduced to <137GB using [1] , the BIOS sees a weirdly even smaller size and I get data corruption in actual use .

[1]
Re: Here's an idea: using high endurance (micro)SD cards meant for continuous video recording as storage for retro gear

What I usually do is use a actual ide 120gb hdd that’s best for these old 9x units easiest I mean.

If you want more speed then get a promise sata II tx4 and a 120gb sata or 128gb ssd.

Promise TX4 Sata II PCI Card Windows 95/98/ME Driver.

I usually just copy a partially done install to the sata drive on another computer then transplant it and let it continue. Easier than getting dos to see the drive sometimes

Okay guys. Long story short here. I gave in and went to Best Buy to buy a 120GB PNY SSD. Everything started working immediately. There must have been something about my motherboard, the StarTech IDE to Sata, and SeaTools shrinking the drive size from 500GB to smaller. The only things I changed was the hard drive. I'm still using the StarTech IDE to Sata. I now have Windows 98 installed. I hope to revisit the problem and still find a solution in case anyone finds this thread in the future. I'm sure there are plenty of people shrinking hard drives with SeaTools. Phil has a lot of videos about the subject and it seems pretty common. Maybe it's possible some BIOSs just don't like the method? I'm sure not. I've posted some pictures below. The most exciting of which showing my entire drive space being seen by Win98 (however, I might change how I want to split this drive up moving forward).

Now some responses:

Can you post a pic of your adapter... an actual pic please, not a stock photo.

mockingbird: yes, picture below

Just checked Gigabyte website..
For the GA-6oxet revision 1 exist a BIOS update which adds support for 137GB+ HDDs.
It's BIOS Version F9. There are two later versions, even.

Jo22: I had already updated the BIOS to the latest version per Gigabyte's website before I made my original post. The rest of your comment was very insightful and I appreciate your thoughtful response.

Darry, chinny22, weedeewee, Sphere478, and Horun... Thank you so much for your informed responses. Each of you have contributed to my understanding and have pushed me one step further in this hobby.

adultlunchables wrote on 2022-10-25, 23:38:

mockingbird: yes, picture below

I see yours has the newer revision 88SA8052 without the Marvell logo. I will be conducting an experiment in the near future with my Ableconn adapter, namely with swapping the newer logo-less part with a new old stock part from 2010 or so. I had issues with the Ableconn and I want to see if these newer chips are legitimately from Marvell.

mockingbird wrote on 2022-10-26, 00:07:

adultlunchables wrote on 2022-10-25, 23:38:

mockingbird: yes, picture below

I see yours has the newer revision 88SA8052 without the Marvell logo. I will be conducting an experiment in the near future with my Ableconn adapter, namely with swapping the newer logo-less part with a new old stock part from 2010 or so. I had issues with the Ableconn and I want to see if these newer chips are legitimately from Marvell.

I think after this I feel like there's a lot I don't know about SATA to IDE adapters. I'll keep an eye on your progress

adultlunchables wrote on 2022-10-26, 00:19:

I think after this I feel like there's a lot I don't know about SATA to IDE adapters. I'll keep an eye on your progress

The gist of it is that if you want DMA enabled, the Marvell chip is the only way to go, though there are some who say that if you're using other chips (Like JMicron) with something like the PIIX4 (read: only UDMA2), they might be ok.

mockingbird wrote on 2022-10-26, 02:43:

adultlunchables wrote on 2022-10-26, 00:19:

I think after this I feel like there's a lot I don't know about SATA to IDE adapters. I'll keep an eye on your progress

The gist of it is that if you want DMA enabled, the Marvell chip is the only way to go, though there are some who say that if you're using other chips (Like JMicron) with something like the PIIX4 (read: only UDMA2), they might be ok.

JMicron works with UDMA66 up to ICH2 for me . For some reason, my system defaults to that rather than UDMA100. If I force UDMA100 using Intel Application Accelerator, it does not work well unless I use a Marvell adapter instead. The JMicron does work will at UDMA100 with a Promise controller and, AFAICR, a SIL3114. The JMicron adapters do not play well with Intel ICH4 and Via 686B in DMA mode, AFAIK (have not tested personally), but the Marvell adapters do .

With ssd don’t forget to disable swap/page file and defraging