ricsip wrote on 2025-12-09, 11:03:

Hello folks, […]
Show full quote

Hello folks,

I tried to search the forum here, but couldnt find any meaningful results for the questions I have. If I missed some definite topics that clearly describes this, pls let me know though.

So I managed to get a functioning Abit NF7-S V2.0 board. My goal was to have the -S version, that has the additional two SATA ports. So I can add a speedy 2,5" SSD instead of an old and slow IDE or SATA HDD to run Windows 2000 and XP much faster, than it was possible back in the days.
I did also some research, and it seems the on-board SATA controller is the Sil 3112A. I am not sure if the "A" at the end of the model number has any significance or not? I guess the A means its the embedded version, not the standalone PCI add-on card version?

I found the latest official BIOS for this motherboard is the Version 27 on theretroweb: https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/abit-ab-nf7-s-v2.x
Currently I received the board with BIOS Version 20, so its quite way behind. According to the release notes, version 27 updates the SATA ROM to V4.2.5.0. I have seen theretroweb also has a separate page for this controller, where there are dozens of different software downloads:
https://theretroweb.com/chips/4439

It lists a lot of more recent versions than the one I found in the v27 BIOS: e.g.

4.4.02 RAID, IDE
4.2.84 RAID, IDE
4.2.83 RAID, IDE
4.2.76 RAID, IDE
4.2.70 IDE
4.2.66 RAID

Here come my couple of questions:

1) If i have the Sil 3112A, does that mean I have an IDE version or a RAID one, or both? Checking the option ROM of the mainboard currently active, I can definitely enter a config/setup interface during POST, and that seems to me a RAID-capable ROM is running currently. Do I have the luxury to decide if I dont need RAID, I can upload a reduced-capability option ROM (labelled as IDE only, no RAID)? Why would anyone want to reduce from a RAID-capable hardware to an IDE-only one? What positive change could that give? More stable operation?

2) Checking the retroweb donwloads, these SATA ROM binaries, and the firmware update tools (if they even work?) do support my motherboards built-in chip, or these are all strictly for standalone PCI cards, and motherboard-integrated ones cannot be (safely) upgraded with these tools? Would it cause an interference between a different ROM version included in the V27 BIOS vs a standalone ROM uploaded separately? As for my NF7-S V2.0 I saw a modded V27 BIOS that includes an even more recent SATA ROM that was officially provided: BIOS mod by Utwig with updated SATA ROM 4.2.8.4

3) During POST, at the option ROM screen the SSD (Samsung 840 EVO) is recognised with correct total capacity. However of course Windows 2000 installer (nor the RTM/GOLD nor the slipstreamed SP4 one) did not recognize any storage attached via SATA. Tried with a slipsreamed XP SP2 and XP SP3, neither them recognized the SSD. Which I am very surprised, by 2003-2004 this SATA controller should have been already recognized at least with the updated XP SP2/SP3 installer. So I need to load the Sil 3112 driver through the character-based setup (press F6, load from a floppy). But the similar question popped up fro me, as in the SATA ROM question: which driver should I load from floppy? The IDE version, or the RAID version? What difference would it make? And which version(s) are considered stable, or which ones should I avoid like plague?

4) Additionally, doing my research I found many many complaints about this specific chip and the various bugs and data loss disasters many faced back in the days. So it would be great, if there is any collection of tribal knowledge about risky ROM version + driver version + attached storage devices, that are known to cause issues or data loss.

Sorry for the long text, just wanted to be very clear with the whole setup and conditions. Any help greatly appreciated.

This is a cheap software HBA (Host Bus Adapter).
Back then, if you needed a decent RAID, you'd buy an Adaptec for a lot of money.
If you wanted something else, you'd get something like this Silicon Image.
With performance similar to UDMA66, but with SATA and RAID.
1. Theoretically, there is a difference between IDE and RAID (without creating the disk RAID itself). There may be all sorts of bugs present in one firmware version and absent in another.
In practice, there are most likely no benefits.
2. CBROM - a utility for manipulating Award BIOS modules.
CBrom <bios_file. rom> /PCI release
CBrom <bios_file. rom> /PCI <new_PCI_rom.bin>
Utilities included - for add-in card
b4283.bin - add-in card BASE BIOS
r4283.bin - add-in card SATARAID BIOS
4283.bin - motherboard BIOS for OEM use in development. This BIOS is not intended for general end-users. End-users with a SiI3112 onboard a motherboard, please contact the motherboard manufacturer for a BIOS upgrade.
To integrate into the motherboard BIOS, you need the last one from the list.
3. The driver is required for both modes.
It is even available on the Microsoft Updates website, but is not included in the installation image.
Owners of this controller are bound to suffer; such is karma.
4. The controller itself is quite stable, but in its discrete version, the clumsiness of the add-in card's manufacture leaves its mark.
For example, there are problems with the circuit board layout or power supply.
If everything is done reasonably well, it works relatively normally, but very slowly.

It is preferable to have an IDE-SATA bridge based on Jmicron IC.
It is faster, causes fewer problems, and does not require drivers.

/upd
I retested the Silicone Image SIL3112 (SATA 4.5 firmware) on another SSD with the same chipset.
My opinion has changed significantly.
The performance is quite good.

A chap over on Vintage Computer Federation (VCFED) was trying to get Win7 up and running on an A7N8X-E Deluxe motherboard a decade ago - and he did so successfully for 5 years - his experience might be of assistance? The A7 board is based on the same nForce2 chipset and Sil3112A
https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/asu … xe.50890/page-4

Some of the issues he noted included backwards compatibility of SATA SSDs (so you'll likely have to source an older one), memory issues, AGP issues, etc. all carefully chronicled in his post. Mind you, he was using it as a Win7 gaming platform so this might not be your aim.

From my own experience (under XP and Vista), I had SATA drives (WD Black) in RAID on the A7N8X-E board, and even with the latest (i.e. last) BIOS and drivers there were stutters and performance issues. This was with a 3200+ as well. It also didn't play nice with Radeon boards, as suggested in the VCFED thread. Overall, it's a nice idea to get SATA SSD going, but YMMV and you'll need quite a bit of patience to set up a clean running system, presumably even under XP. Guessing you'll also need software for TRIM as it's not supported natively by XP, and older SSDs were less capable in this regard.

JidaiGeki wrote on 2025-12-09, 15:50:

it's a nice idea to get SATA SSD going,

Have you ever compared linear reading of SSD via Silicon Image versus UDMA100 on a really fast hard drive, such as IBM Deskstar?

This was my experience with a similar motherboard. Using a PCI 3114 controller for Win98 on an SSD with a Socket 7 board the non RAID BIOS boots up noticeably more quickly, so if you know you will never use any of the features of the RAID BIOS that's one reason.

My Socket A Epox 8KRA2 has the KT600 so it won't detect most SSDs, so I just used a Startech SATA to IDE adapter and that worked just fine.

Repo Man11 wrote on 2025-12-09, 17:34:

This was my experience with a similar motherboard. Using a PCI 3114 controller for Win98 on an SSD with a Socket 7 board the non RAID BIOS boots up noticeably more quickly, so if you know you will never use any of the features of the RAID BIOS that's one reason.

My Socket A Epox 8KRA2 has the KT600 so it won't detect most SSDs, so I just used a Startech SATA to IDE adapter and that worked just fine.

Can you test Silicone Image on the same board with the same disc/SSD for comparison?

shevalier wrote on 2025-12-09, 18:36:

Repo Man11 wrote on 2025-12-09, 17:34:

This was my experience with a similar motherboard. Using a PCI 3114 controller for Win98 on an SSD with a Socket 7 board the non RAID BIOS boots up noticeably more quickly, so if you know you will never use any of the features of the RAID BIOS that's one reason.

My Socket A Epox 8KRA2 has the KT600 so it won't detect most SSDs, so I just used a Startech SATA to IDE adapter and that worked just fine.

Can you test Silicone Image on the same board with the same disc/SSD for comparison?

Unfortunately, no. That board went up in smoke when my place burned in 2018 along with everything else.

I did try a PCI SiL 3114 in the 8KRA2+ but like most motherboards I tried that card in, it had resource conflicts and didn't work well. The 3114 card found a home with my TXP4, which works well with it.

To all of you: thank you for the contribution, I really try to digest all what you shared here.

Can I ask a small favor: can you please also have a look at my original 4 questions, and add your (factual) opinion to those as well? I already got some feedback to these, but I am still not feeling confident what I read here. I really try to understand if the Sil3112A topics and issues + the (optional?) RAID featureset applies to the NF7-S built-in one, or the experience is rather with those add-in cards.

Just a small progress update: since I updated the BIOS from V20 to V27 (the latest official, I am not yet ready to enter BIOS MOD territory), the SATARaid ROM interface during POST has completely disappeared now. I sort of found the reason for it:

BIOS ID: 23 , Bios Issue Date: 2004/03/24
--> 6. Hid "SATA ROM BIOS" function on NF7V2.0. --> what is not really clear for me, what that text really means? Hide the SATA ROM BIOS feature from all NF7-S V2.0 motherboards? Or just hide the feature from the NON-S motherboards, where it wasnt even supposed to be shown originally (remember: NF7 without S doesnt even have the Sil3112, so why would it show that ROM BIOS on such boards at all )?