Odd. The bootrom should let you partition beyond 127gbyte, and win98(patched) should see it.

wierd_w wrote on 2026-03-19, 17:14:

Odd. The bootrom should let you partition beyond 127gbyte, and win98(patched) should see it.

The RAID utility on boot sees the full capacity and the same goes for the Windows utility, but beyond that...

I'm guessing the next thing I'll need to do is find a Promise ATA PCI card...?

Progress! Thanks to some advice on Reddit, I just needed to use a utility like Ontrack again, delete the partition and re-create it. Now it's recognising 298GB. 😁 ScanDisk still crashes with a BSOD, but it looks as though that's expected behaviour. Someone did suggest I try and replace it with Windows ME's version.

Looks like things aren’t quite so clear cut after all. BIG surprise… I’ve transferred all my CD images back via my main PC, but when I tried copying and pasting one on my retro PC, it’s caused the system to lock up. 😕
Reading images seems to be fine, though it hasn’t been tested for long periods. Copying/writing (big) files, either with copy and paste or using Alcohol 120%, causes the system to lock up.

It’s looking likely that I may just have to settle on a 127GB drive and be done with it. This is causing too many headaches.

I ended up settling on a main OS drive, a 128GB SD2IDE to store game images for 98SE and a 128GB USB drive via the PicoGUS to store images for DOS. The 98SE image drive certainly does fill up but it's more than enough to store whatever I'm playing at the time and then some.

NeoG_ wrote on 2026-03-20, 22:20:

I ended up settling on a main OS drive, a 128GB SD2IDE to store game images for 98SE and a 128GB USB drive via the PicoGUS to store images for DOS. The 98SE image drive certainly does fill up but it's more than enough to store whatever I'm playing at the time and then some.

Yeah, I think that's what I'll end up doing. It's just causing too many problems. I'm now having to reinstall Windows, though (hopefully) still retaining my personal files/installed programs, due to this BSOD that I can't seem to fix. No idea how it triggered. It could have been an issue even before messing around with bigger hard drives. But I really don't want to have to wipe everything and start over again. 🙁

So I'll probably just settle for a 128GB HDD for CD images, get myself a PicoGUS, and then get a 128GB pen drive (or less) for DOS games.

Nope. Looks like I'm going to have to reformat after all. The whole system is screwed up. Even after doing a clean install whilst retaining my files, the BSOD still happened, and now it won't boot at all. 🙁

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-03-20, 23:36:

Nope. Looks like I'm going to have to reformat after all. The whole system is screwed up. Even after doing a clean install whilst retaining my files, the BSOD still happened, and now it won't boot at all. 🙁

It's really hard to say what's going on here, but it sounds like you may have kept the existing partitions after you got LBA 48 access or used a version of FDISK that doesn't handle large drives correctly.

Did you delete all the volumes after switching from LBA28 to LBA48? If not, there's a good chance that the sectors after 128GB are not arranged as expected by the operating system.

Let's review--

1) You need LBA48 BIOS when booting the computer. Sounds like you are there.
2) You need to use an FDISK that understands LBA48 and drives > 128GB when partitioning the drive. Don't use the Win98 FDISK. Use FreeDOS 1.4 or WinMe or something else.
3) You need to install Win98 in the first 128GB and keep all the OS files in the first 128GB, ideally by making your boot partition the first partition and smaller than 128GB
4) You need to patch Win98 to understand LBA48 asap after installing with the Win98 patch
5) You need all additional Win98 storage drivers installed to support LBA48

douglar wrote on 2026-03-21, 00:46:

It's really hard to say what's going on here, but it sounds like you may have kept the existing partitions after you got LBA 48 […]
Show full quote

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-03-20, 23:36:

Nope. Looks like I'm going to have to reformat after all. The whole system is screwed up. Even after doing a clean install whilst retaining my files, the BSOD still happened, and now it won't boot at all. 🙁

It's really hard to say what's going on here, but it sounds like you may have kept the existing partitions after you got LBA 48 access or used a version of FDISK that doesn't handle large drives correctly.

Did you delete all the volumes after switching from LBA28 to LBA48? If not, there's a good chance that the sectors after 128GB are not arranged as expected by the operating system.

Let's review--

1) You need LBA48 BIOS when booting the computer. Sounds like you are there.
2) You need to use an FDISK that understands LBA48 and drives > 128GB when partitioning the drive. Don't use the Win98 FDISK. Use FreeDOS 1.4 or WinMe or something else.
3) You need to install Win98 in the first 128GB and keep all the OS files in the first 128GB, ideally by making your boot partition the first partition and smaller than 128GB
4) You need to patch Win98 to understand LBA48 asap after installing with the Win98 patch
5) You need all additional Win98 storage drivers installed to support LBA48

I’m not even sure if it was changed from LBA 28 to 48. Initially, no, the HDD didn’t have its partition set up correctly, which I then deleted and re-set up the other evening after connecting it to my RAID controller.

1. Do I have an LBA48 compatible motherboard though? I’m still not even sure. Someone on Reddit flat out told me Slot 1 motherboards don’t support it. But I have no idea if mine does or if the latest update I installed made it LBA48 compatible.
Ontrack is unable to add any overlay thingie. That patch can be installed, but doesn’t that patch the standard IDE controller driver? I forget which it’s called. If I have the HDD connected to my RAID controller though, that uses its own driver.
2. When I reformat again, I can do a test and see about setting it up with a different FDISK and see if it’s stable after a clean install. I suspect though, I may have issues again with copying any large files to it.
3. Windows 98 is installed on its own HDD. I have a 30GB drive for it. Unpartitioned. It’s the E drive I’m using just for CD images/backups.
4. So do I install 98 and then after the first restart, install the LBA48 patch via a boot disk? Though you mentioned a Win98 patch? What’s that exactly?
5. I presume this will be a modified IDE controller driver patch? If so, which one exactly? But again, if my HDD is going to be connected to my RAID controller only, will it be necessary still to patch the standard IDE controllers?

1. Do I have an LBA48 compatible motherboard though? I’m still not even sure. Someone on Reddit flat out told me Slot 1 motherboards don’t support it. But I have no idea if mine does or if the latest update I installed made it LBA48 compatible.

TheBIOS thing that needs to support LBA48 is called the “INT 13h handler”. The BIOS on your PCI card replaces the motherboard INT 13h handler during the boot process, so you have passed this hurdle.

1b. Ontrack is unable to add any overlay thingie. That patch can be installed, but doesn’t that patch the standard IDE controller driver? I forget which it’s called. If I have the HDD connected to my RAID controller though, that uses its own driver.

The ontrack drive overlay resides on the hard drive and replaces the int13h handler again. This probably isn’t advisable to have, since the int 13h code in the hard drive controller is likely the one you want here. You want a controller with an option rom or a drive overlay. It’s a pretty rare scenario when you want both. It’s bad news if you have an older drive overlay replacing the int 13h handler at this point.

2. When I reformat again, I can do a test and see about setting it up with a different FDISK and see if it’s stable after a clean install. I suspect though, I may have issues again with copying any large files to it.

If you ever installed ontrack on the boot drive, there is a good chance it is still there, gumming things up. You want to make sure it is gone because if the 9.x version is there, it will replace your int 13h handler again with one that doesn’t understand lba48. Drive overlay software can reside in a couple different hidden places outside of partitions and fdisk is not able to see it. I recommend booting from the ontrack install disk to see if it thinks it is installed.

There are bugs in the fdisk from win98 that show up when it tries to make large partions, so you need an FDisk that makes large partitions correctly, like the one from Free dos 1.4.

3. Windows 98 is installed on its own HDD. I have a 30GB drive for it. Unpartitioned. It’s the E drive I’m using just for CD images/backups.

ok, good to know. having windows 98 installed on your larger hard drive makes things trickier.

4. So do I install 98 and then after the first restart, install the LBA48 patch via a boot disk? Though you mentioned a Win98 patch? What’s that exactly?

https://vogonsdrivers.com/getfile.php?fileid=1814

When win98 goes into protected mode, it replaces INT13h with a protected mode storage driver. The one that comes with win 98 doesn’t know LBA 48, so you need a driver that understands large disks. That link is to a modified version of the 98 driver that can support LBA 48. Since you are not booting from a large partiton, you can do this at any time, it does not need to get slip streamed into the install, but you do need to get it installed before you try to use the large partition in windows

5. I presume this will be a modified IDE controller driver patch? If so, which one exactly? But again, if my HDD is going to be connected to my RAID controller only, will it be necessary still to patch the standard IDE controllers?

What I’m talking about here is if you install athird party driver for your ide controller, don’t use a driver dated earlier than 2003. We don’t want to get this far and then regressback to an old storage driver.

douglar wrote on 2026-03-21, 15:58:

1. Do I have an LBA48 compatible motherboard though? I’m still not even sure. Someone on Reddit flat out told me Slot 1 motherbo […]
Show full quote

1. Do I have an LBA48 compatible motherboard though? I’m still not even sure. Someone on Reddit flat out told me Slot 1 motherboards don’t support it. But I have no idea if mine does or if the latest update I installed made it LBA48 compatible.

TheBIOS thing that needs to support LBA48 is called the “INT 13h handler”. The BIOS on your PCI card replaces the motherboard INT 13h handler during the boot process, so you have passed this hurdle.

1b. Ontrack is unable to add any overlay thingie. That patch can be installed, but doesn’t that patch the standard IDE controller driver? I forget which it’s called. If I have the HDD connected to my RAID controller though, that uses its own driver.

The ontrack drive overlay resides on the hard drive and replaces the int13h handler again. This probably isn’t advisable to have, since the int 13h code in the hard drive controller is likely the one you want here. You want a controller with an option rom or a drive overlay. It’s a pretty rare scenario when you want both. It’s bad news if you have an older drive overlay replacing the int 13h handler at this point.

2. When I reformat again, I can do a test and see about setting it up with a different FDISK and see if it’s stable after a clean install. I suspect though, I may have issues again with copying any large files to it.

If you ever installed ontrack on the boot drive, there is a good chance it is still there, gumming things up. You want to make sure it is gone because if the 9.x version is there, it will replace your int 13h handler again with one that doesn’t understand lba48. Drive overlay software can reside in a couple different hidden places outside of partitions and fdisk is not able to see it. I recommend booting from the ontrack install disk to see if it thinks it is installed.

There are bugs in the fdisk from win98 that show up when it tries to make large partions, so you need an FDisk that makes large partitions correctly, like the one from Free dos 1.4.

3. Windows 98 is installed on its own HDD. I have a 30GB drive for it. Unpartitioned. It’s the E drive I’m using just for CD images/backups.

ok, good to know. having windows 98 installed on your larger hard drive makes things trickier.

4. So do I install 98 and then after the first restart, install the LBA48 patch via a boot disk? Though you mentioned a Win98 patch? What’s that exactly?

https://vogonsdrivers.com/getfile.php?fileid=1814

When win98 goes into protected mode, it replaces INT13h with a protected mode storage driver. The one that comes with win 98 doesn’t know LBA 48, so you need a driver that understands large disks. That link is to a modified version of the 98 driver that can support LBA 48. Since you are not booting from a large partiton, you can do this at any time, it does not need to get slip streamed into the install, but you do need to get it installed before you try to use the large partition in windows

5. I presume this will be a modified IDE controller driver patch? If so, which one exactly? But again, if my HDD is going to be connected to my RAID controller only, will it be necessary still to patch the standard IDE controllers?

What I’m talking about here is if you install athird party driver for your ide controller, don’t use a driver dated earlier than 2003. We don’t want to get this far and then regressback to an old storage driver.

Hmm. Okay, this clears some confusion, though I have yet more questions. :p I'm sure I've seen mention somewhere of INT 13h. Maybe in SYSTEM.INI...? But regarding Ontrack, I'm still not clear on the drive overlay. I have Ontrack kept in a folder with all my drivers and utilities to install, but I'm not sure if it's ever been installed in the traditional sense? I also have it on my Gotek USB. It's always had to boot via the boot disks though and creates a RAM disk. I don't recall it saying anything about it being installed or not. Or giving me an option to remove it.

When exactly does Windows 98 go into protected mode? Once it loads up the desktop? And is there a specific third party driver for my IDE controller? I take it there isn't one for any and all? I would have to boot it up to find out exactly what it's called, though my motherboard does list a load of different drivers here:

https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/abit-ab-be6-ii

douglar wrote on 2026-03-21, 15:58:

4. So do I install 98 and then after the first restart, install the LBA48 patch via a boot disk? Though you mentioned a Win98 patch? What’s that exactly?

https://vogonsdrivers.com/getfile.php?fileid=1814

With that collection of patches, which one(s) do I need exactly? Is it PatchATA again? Or is there something else I need too, or instead?

You want PatchATA

You can also find it here: http://lonecrusader.x10host.com/rloew/patchata.html

INT13h is the 19th Bios function. 13 hex is 19 decimal. Bios calls are called by number, not by name. Call 13h is the one that does hard drive access.

Under normal operating conditions, Win98 replaces Int13h with a 32 bit windows device driver durring bootup. This is going to make things faster because it doesn’t have to drop back to single threaded real mode every time it does disk IO.

However win98 will use MS-DOS Compatibility Mode when Windows cannot load native 32-bit drivers for disk controllers. It’s slow and clunky. This happens when you have an unsupported controller, unknown dos driver, or a virus. Dos viruses and drive overlay software reroute int 13h.

Mor on that here https://support.dynabook.com/support/viewCont … ontentId=108303

douglar wrote on 2026-03-21, 21:32:

You want PatchATA […]
Show full quote

You want PatchATA

You can also find it here: http://lonecrusader.x10host.com/rloew/patchata.html

INT13h is the 19th Bios function. 13 hex is 19 decimal. Bios calls are called by number, not by name. Call 13h is the one that does hard drive access.

Under normal operating conditions, Win98 replaces Int13h with a 32 bit windows device driver durring bootup. This is going to make things faster because it doesn’t have to drop back to single threaded real mode every time it does disk IO.

However win98 will use MS-DOS Compatibility Mode when Windows cannot load native 32-bit drivers for disk controllers. It’s slow and clunky. This happens when you have an unsupported controller, unknown dos driver, or a virus. Dos viruses and drive overlay software reroute int 13h.

Ahh, so it's the same patch I used before. So, I reformat and reinstall Windows, install PatchATA, connect up the RAID controller, install the drivers for that, load up the other FDISK and create a partition with that and reformat?

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-03-21, 21:43:

douglar wrote on 2026-03-21, 21:32:

You want PatchATA […]
Show full quote

You want PatchATA

You can also find it here: http://lonecrusader.x10host.com/rloew/patchata.html

INT13h is the 19th Bios function. 13 hex is 19 decimal. Bios calls are called by number, not by name. Call 13h is the one that does hard drive access.

Under normal operating conditions, Win98 replaces Int13h with a 32 bit windows device driver durring bootup. This is going to make things faster because it doesn’t have to drop back to single threaded real mode every time it does disk IO.

However win98 will use MS-DOS Compatibility Mode when Windows cannot load native 32-bit drivers for disk controllers. It’s slow and clunky. This happens when you have an unsupported controller, unknown dos driver, or a virus. Dos viruses and drive overlay software reroute int 13h.

Ahh, so it's the same patch I used before. So, I reformat and reinstall Windows, install PatchATA, connect up the RAID controller, install the drivers for that, load up the other FDISK and create a partition with that and reformat?

Maybe not. Could you review what drives are in your system and which is your boot drive?

douglar wrote on 2026-03-21, 23:43:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-03-21, 21:43:

douglar wrote on 2026-03-21, 21:32:

You want PatchATA […]
Show full quote

You want PatchATA

You can also find it here: http://lonecrusader.x10host.com/rloew/patchata.html

INT13h is the 19th Bios function. 13 hex is 19 decimal. Bios calls are called by number, not by name. Call 13h is the one that does hard drive access.

Under normal operating conditions, Win98 replaces Int13h with a 32 bit windows device driver durring bootup. This is going to make things faster because it doesn’t have to drop back to single threaded real mode every time it does disk IO.

However win98 will use MS-DOS Compatibility Mode when Windows cannot load native 32-bit drivers for disk controllers. It’s slow and clunky. This happens when you have an unsupported controller, unknown dos driver, or a virus. Dos viruses and drive overlay software reroute int 13h.

Ahh, so it's the same patch I used before. So, I reformat and reinstall Windows, install PatchATA, connect up the RAID controller, install the drivers for that, load up the other FDISK and create a partition with that and reformat?

Maybe not. Could you review what drives are in your system and which is your boot drive?

How do you mean exactly? I only have my C and D drives - 30 and 40GB, respectively.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-03-22, 00:03:

douglar wrote on 2026-03-21, 23:43:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-03-21, 21:43:

Ahh, so it's the same patch I used before. So, I reformat and reinstall Windows, install PatchATA, connect up the RAID controller, install the drivers for that, load up the other FDISK and create a partition with that and reformat?

Maybe not. Could you review what drives are in your system and which is your boot drive?

How do you mean exactly? I only have my C and D drives - 30 and 40GB, respectively.

Where is the large drive?

douglar wrote on 2026-03-22, 00:32:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-03-22, 00:03:

douglar wrote on 2026-03-21, 23:43:

Maybe not. Could you review what drives are in your system and which is your boot drive?

How do you mean exactly? I only have my C and D drives - 30 and 40GB, respectively.

Where is the large drive?

That's out of the case at the moment. Sat in front of me. And the RAID controller has been taken out.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-03-20, 01:19:

Progress! Thanks to some advice on Reddit, I just needed to use a utility like Ontrack again, delete the partition and re-create it. Now it's recognising 298GB. 😁 ScanDisk still crashes with a BSOD, but it looks as though that's expected behaviour. Someone did suggest I try and replace it with Windows ME's version.

Ontrack or *any* disk drive overlay are only meant for built in motherboard ide controllers.
You cannot expect scandisk to read 300gb.
I took a disk drive off a motherboard IDE controller with an overlay bootloader and put it into an PCI controller it crashed soon after. They are designed to use system memory and BIOS in a certain way with certain specific checks.
I think scandisk can read up to 120gb but I use 80gb partitions now.
I don't use drive overlays they provide the slowest speeds.
fat32 support was limited across a range of defragmenters and disk checking/repair utilities even in windows xp so I wouldn't do more than 120gb partition's because there's just not enough RAM to check them. NTFS is more efficient and with recent support.
I did use a whole 400gb fat32 disk partition for benchmarking purposes but I need app support so I don't need to plug in the disk into a modern pc to check repair etc.
I don't recommend windows 95 for these disks even with overlays or patches.