PDA

View Full Version : How to replace existing HD with a larger one


rdseeley
Mar 20, 2009, 12:16 PM
I need to replace a 60gb HD in my HP PC with a newer larger drive.
The OS is Win XP Home edition. I believe the old drive is IDE type.
The newer Drives are EIDE or SATA types in computer stores. I would
Like to buy a SATA 500gb drive for my PC. Would this type work in my current PC
And how to replace ? Please help.
Thanks
RD

Perito
Mar 20, 2009, 12:22 PM
If your machine supports the IDE format for its hard drive, it's unlikely that it will support the SATA. EIDE is the same as IDE (Extended IDE). Your current IDE drive is probably an EIDE.

I'd suggest you buy another EIDE drive. Once in a while, you run into problems where the BIOS won't work properly with a larger drive. If you can update your BIOS to the latest version, before putting in a new drive, you are more likely not to have problems.

You can buy an SATA drive and an interface card. I did that in my computer.

chaosmaster1
Mar 28, 2009, 09:07 PM
As long as your computer would support a larger hdd I would get the biggest one you could get and find a program called norton ghost 1.0 I thin

Basically what it does it copies yourexisting hdd to a new one byte for byte and makes it fully bootable as if you were using the old one
You could use ide or sata just make sure if you use ide set the source drive to master and the destination drive to slave or use cable select which ever works and I have done this before to I went from a 80 gb ide to a 160 gb ide to a 500 gb sata no problems whatsoever

Helljack6
Mar 29, 2009, 09:58 PM
Use Ghost to create an "image" of your current set up, remove old drive and replace with new drive, use ghost to restore image to new drive.

EIDE to SATA doesn't matter.

Creating Backups - Helljack6.com (http://www.helljack6.com/ghost.html)

chaosmaster1
Mar 29, 2009, 10:00 PM
You could insert the new drive and do a disk to disk copy it's a lot faster and easier using ghost

Helljack6
Mar 29, 2009, 10:04 PM
you could insert the new drive and do a disk to disk copy it's a lot faster and easier using ghost

Yes, but having a restore image is faster to recovery from, and no, it's not any faster, it's going to be slower because you're COPYING disk to disk instead of ARCHIVING.

chaosmaster1
Mar 29, 2009, 10:05 PM
Not really man it's slower if you do hdd to disk then to hdd vs if you do hdd to hdd it actually goes much faster and apparently you've never used norton ghost 1.0

Helljack6
Mar 29, 2009, 10:10 PM
Creating Backups - Helljack6.com (http://www.helljack6.com/ghost.html)

I'm a Ghost master, I've used Ghost to ghost across the network to deploy images to over 200 systems at once using Ghostcast server. Ghost 1.0? What century are you working in?

OP if you have other issues, go to R A D I F I E D | Splash (http://www.radified.com), they specialize in the various ways of using/manipulating every version of Ghost.

chaosmaster1
Mar 29, 2009, 10:17 PM
That's real common of you to insult somebody over a version of a program they use and plus ghost 1.0 is extremely simple no bs and is extremely easy to use and plus didn't you pretty much copy my answer in one of the previous posts?