Incredibly slow XP Pro install.

[imported_zeddex]

Hello,

I have just upgraded my system from an XP 3000 to the following

Asus A8N SLI Deluxe Mobo (939) - new
X2 4400 Toledo core - new
XFX 7900 GT - new
2 x 512 400 DDR Kingston value modules (I have more but can't match pairs right now, this is taken from the old setup)
Seagate 7200.8 160 Gb Sata drive (from the old setup too, 18 months old)
Seasonic S12 500w (new model, new purchase, old one used to be Enermax 465VE but it made too much noise for my taste)
Chieftec mesh server full tower E-ATX case
Zalman 9500
Audigy 2
Pioneer DVD/RW, 104 I believe (can't check it out since I'm waiting for XP to copy files for the last....2 hours)

Well, post sees everything ok, recognizes the CPU correctly, the RAM too, the HD, everything seems just fine. The temperatures at boot are 30ºC for CPU and 27ºC for MOBO (case on my desk open right now).

The issue is the following one:

Background: I start installing Win XP Pro from an original CD bought last week. I installed this on my old setup and it went like a breeze. It is a boxed version and the CD itself is immaculate.

Option 1:

I connect the SATA disk to the nvidia non-raid controller. It takes ages in the "copying files" part. It stops for long chunks of time at specific files. I am writing this on my laptop and I check the size of these files on the laptop and they are basically *.sys and *.dll files that are no more than 20Kb in size (if at all).

I format the partition for install from the installation disk and the exact same thing happens.

Option 2:

I put the SATA disk on the Silicon Image SATA Raid controller but it asks me to mount the raid array (it's a single disk). I pass cause I don't want to lose the files on my secondary partition.

Option 3:

I dig out an old 40Gb regular ATA seagate, 5.4k model, but I know it works well and it's the drive I always have in my boxes, without being connected to power or mobo, but with my clean copy of windows and all drivers installed, just in case I need to boot from there.

I try to install on this HD, and even after formatting, it stops at the EXACT same positions as the other drive.

So now I am at 53% of the copying files part on my desktop. I know my Pioneer DVD/RW is 4 months old and has hardly been used, and 2 days ago I used it to backup my old stuff, in order to make this upgrade and be safe, and everything went like a dream, fast, clean, and readable on several of my office PCs.

It has been 2 hours since I started this install.

Any suggestions, remarks or ideas about this would be very welcome. Thanks!

Oh and sorry for the long post. :S

 

[MrChad]

Run Memtest and try changing your HD and DVD-ROM cables.

 

[Bozo Galora]

yeah, my first guess would be "value ram", these boards are so picky on RAM
and dont apologize for long post - thats the way all prob threads should start
I ASSUME your newly bought XP CD Retail has SP2 already on it.
The fact your IDE drive also stops at exact same point rules out a lot of possibilities.
Your "new" mobo has more advanced possibilities than your "old" mobo, and your prob is rooted there.

At the least, you can clear the cmos with PSU unplugged for at least 30 min, go back into bios, set failsafe defaults, reboot, then manually set multiplier and fsb for cpu, increase DDR voltage by .2, reboot.

First, there is the now more common "large vs LBA" bios setting issue (will freeze both IDE and SATA installs)
http://whocares.de/archive/000682.php
http://www.shacknews.com/ja.zz?id=11113579

You might want to check to see that your current mobo bios supports the toledo - I would update to latest bios whatever the case

The CD laser rides on a carraige on round rod rails driven by plastic gears. By seeing if you can read to the END (outer) of another CD in your Pioneer, perhaps in another PC, you can test to see if does not stick at a certain point. (kind of remote possibility, but I like to eliminate the obvious). Or you can try a dif CD player - they are only $30.

In cases like this, for some reason, I have noticed lately that for some strange reason, the seagate disk wizard to partition and format NTFS (not quick) works better than the XP CD. Latest version from website - not the one with drive.

These are my first impressions.

 

[imported_zeddex]

Update:

When I posted this message on the forums I left Windows installing and went to sleep. I woke up this morning at 7.30 (8 and a half hours after starting the install), and had the message "1 minute left" on the install. So I got me my coffee and waited for....20 minutes, and it finished. OK it is important to say here that I get absolutely no error messages whatsoever.

Well, Windows installed and all, it takes a couple of years to boot now (15-20 minutes). The only thing I had time to try before running off to work was the LBA/Large thing, but there was absolutely no change with that.

So you reckon I should go for some better memory then? That was on my "to buy" list anyway, not as a first priority, but I can do that if it's gonna fix the problem. I suppose the raptor can wait for a month or so.

 

[Bozo Galora]

um, the large vs LBA thing only solves "XP no install prob" by enabling it before you format partitions
its not "slow" ram that makes your system so slow, ram either works with no errors or not
you gonna have to test HDD with HDTach (free) to see if its running in DMA 5
and get SiSoftSandra Pro (free version) to benchmark CPU to see if it is functioning correctly, and not throttling
and use CPUID or CPU-Z to see what the CPU and RAM are actually running at

 

[imported_zeddex]

Problem solved. First thing I did after coming back from work is make a bootable floppy with the BIOS, flashed it, and that's it. I feel so silly now cause I actually did make a BIOS floppy before starting with the installation but I forgot to make it bootable.

Thanks a lot for you suggestions though. I've also benchmarked everything as suggested, just in case, and everything seems OK.

 

[Bozo Galora]

I assume you mean "flashed it" as into the motherboard bios - correct? To support your CPU.

 

[imported_zeddex]

Yeah, exactly. What puzzled me before doing it is that it recognized the CPU correctly. Just when I saw that the current BIOS version was older than the release date of the Toledo it came to me that would probably be the problem.

 

[Bozo Galora]

thnx for coming back with reply (most here dont)
I did mention this factor in my post, but I guess it came to you independently
Whats interesting is the question of what the hell is windows doing to install XP with a CPU it cant even understand. One would think it wouldnt even start.
But thats something probably we will never know.