Upgrade Liteon lvw-5045 to 400G - Part I

[totoro168]

Upgrade Liteon lvw-5045 to 400G -- Part I
Hi,

I've been reading this forum since I have my RCA RD2780 jukebox. Yes, I have upgraded it to 100Gbs by following Normando's step-by-step instruction. I am still using it everyday for my one hour train ride. Normando,Thank you. Here is my contribution back to this forum. Sorry, it will be a little bit long. Please be patient..

If you are looking for step-by-step instruction, please jump to part II: http://www.techolio.com/forums/phpBB2/v ... php?t=2285

I have followed Normando's another step-by-step instruction to upgrade my Liteon lvw-5045 to 400Gbs couple months ago and works fine except the slowness when cut/merge video and copy/burn movie from hd to dvd visa versa(whoever has done the upgrade should experience it and I will explain why later). As long as it can record, I can live with it. But, until two weeks ago, my lvw-5045 has hanged when it was burning a movie from hard drive to DVD. I must un-plug the power cord to restart the machine while it was still on. After the lvw-5045 run the hard drive scan when boot up again, then here come the DIASTER: all the movies(recorded using SP mode) in the hard drive stop playing at 35Mins except those movies that copy from DVD directly.Record again, it can play the whole movie without stopping. Un-plug, Scan Disk, it stop at 35Mins again. (will explain the cause of this problem later)

My first reaction was maybe the hardware doesn't support more than 160Gbs hd(have around 200G data), or it is the protection that Liteon has built-in to the box to prevent users to use bigger hard drive. When I access it through my computer, found out all files are there and all of them still can play on the computer except all stop around 30~45 minutes. However there is one thing catches my attention: all video files have 1Gbs or less in size even the default files in LiveTimeShift.vob folder(should have two 2G files). I compared those files on my 160Gbs hd and all of the video files should have 2Gbs in size (about 2G per hour in SP mode).

I follow the instruction to prepare the hd and put it back to 5045 again. It recognized full size of hd and can record again. This time, I recorded a movie in HQ mode about 1 hour(about 4G /hour). Before I un-plug the power, can play the movie from begin to end without stopping. However, after I un-plug it while it was still on and it scan hd when boot up,
the movie only play about 15min and it stop. Check again in computer, yeap, the file size was down to 1Gbs again. This has rule out it only support 160G because it should only corrupt the movies that have recorded recently and the files within 160G should be fine. Then I format the 400G using Liteon's 'Erase All' to partition and format it to 160G. Repeat same steps and it work fine..

Then I think there must be some difference between the Liteon Format and use h2format as somebody has mentioned that in this forum before. I use PartionInfo to compare the boot record between the 400G and 160G. Most of the information are the same except two major difference: number of head and Sectors per Cluster.

400G format using h2format is 254 heads and 64 Sector per Cluster(32k cluster) versus 16 heads and 128 Sectors per Cluster(64k cluster) for Liteon Format.

(someone must say Ahhh).. Yes, the cause of my problem is Sectors per Cluster(number of head usually be used to calculate the size of hd). Since a 2G video files

will need 64000 32k cluster to store versus 32000 64k cluster, when Liteon perform scan disk(another version of chkdsk), it treats it as 64k cluster and only recognize first 32000 clusters and truncate the rest. That's why all video files that over 1G will truncate to 1G..(since DVD vob file all within 1G in size. That's the reason all DVD movies are ok)

The reason that Liteon is using the biggest Sectors per cluster is performance. The bigger cluster, the faster for data reading/writing but will 'waste' space according to M$. However, since all video files are huge single file, then the 'waste' is meaningless. Since the hd was format into 32K cluster, Liteone will take twice amount of time to read/write data from/to hd. This will explain the slowness issue when cut/merge video file and copy/burn movie from hd to dvd visa versa..(It proved it is true after I format the 400G into 64k cluster successfully later).

Ok...Found out the cause of the problem. How to format 64K cluster?:

As other people in the forum has already discovered Liteon's partition is 'FAT32x'. Since M$ only 'support' 32k cluster FAT32x and I cannot find other formatter at that time, I decided to find a way to 'expand' the 160G Liteon partition manually..(You can use the same method to expand other brand's hd base DVD recorder. Thoerically, you can expand any hd base
devices as long as it is FAT32x partition.) Here come the fun part:

First, I use Liteon's 'Erase all' to format two 9G and 12G notebook hard drives then use PartionInfo to compare the boot record against 160G and found out only three parameters are different: Big Total Sectors, Big(FAT32) Sectors Per FAT, and Serial number. The rest parameters are identical for all three hard drive.

Here are the screen shoot of the boot record of both hard drive:



Then I use WinHex 1.7 to compare the first 100 sectors between them.(it make me feel like going back to the old day to study bit-n-bite..) The Master Boot Record(MBR) is at sector 0,Patition Boot Record(PBR)is at sector 63(0x7E00 offset), and 1st copy of File Allocation Table(FAT) is at sector (95)==Reserved Sectors(32) + PBR(63) (0xBE00 offset).

The following are the different that I found:

Offset: 9G 12G
0x1CA - 0x1CD : 20044079 23579135 Total Sectors at MBR
0x7E20 - 0x7E23 : 20044079 23579135 Total Sectors at PBR.(identical MBR)
0x7E24 - 0x7E25 : 1224 1440 Big(FAT32) Sectors Per FAT (This one is the key)
0x7E43 - 0x7E46 : 0x4498734E 0x4499B4F3 Serial number (won't matter)
0x81E8 - 0x81EB : 156594 184121 Free Clusters (won't matter. Liteone will correct it)
0x8DE8 - 0x8DEB: 156594 184121 2nd copy of Free Clusters (identical to 1st))

Next, I use WinHex to copy 9G to 12G sectors by sectors to make 9G partition on the 12G hard drive and connect 12G to 5045. It recognize it as a 9G. No problem found for record/playback and even the un-plug test..YES!!!(you can use the same method to duplicate Liteon's HD.)

However, after modify those locations using 12G's information, I did get a full 12G partition according to PartionInfo but drive is inaccessible by computer or 5045(it will give a warning message and don't recognize it) (

Mmm.. Something is still missing... Then I search the Internet for the FAT32x description and download the FAT32x specification from M$. Finally, figure it out the problem is the Big(FAT32) Sectors Per FAT..

Big(FAT32) Sectors Per FAT is the key to determine the location of the 2nd copy of the FAT and also determine the location for the second cluster where the data first to read/write(usually refer as 'Root' of the partition. It is based on the total sectors of the partition, Sectors per Cluster, number of FAT...and other stuffs. (It seems complicated. If you are interesting to the actual formula, please find it in M$ FAT32x specification) Here is the simplify version since it won't
require a exact number according to M$:

Big(FAT) Sectors Per FAT = (Total Sectors - 64 + 16385) /16385
(Big(FAT) Sectors Per FAT = 23579135 - 64 + 16385 / 16385 = 1440)

Where the magic number, 16385 = (256 * Sectors Per Cluster(128) + number of FAT(2) ) / 2

The location of the 2nd FAT at Big(FAT) Sectors Per FAT + Location of 1st FAT, 95 in this case. The location of the Root is at Location of 2nd FAT * 2 - 32. Basically to build the 2nd FAT manually and empty the 'Root' location

(Location of 2nd FAT = 1440 + 95 = Sector 1535)
(Location of the Root = 1535 * 2 - 32 = Sector 3038)

Since the FAT, 2nd FAT, and Root should be empty for a new partition, I use a simple way to clean it by fill in 00 from 0xBE0C to 0x3BFFFF first then add the 2nd FAT(aprrox. 62Mbs. If you want, you can fill in 00 from 0xBE0C to the rest of the hard drive. That is what format does.)

Use Position ==> Goto Sectors in WinHex to reach the location of the 2nd FAT, Sector 1535 in this case and update the first 12byte with the following: F8 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF 0F (the indication of the beginning of 2nd FAT, 1st FAT has same thing at sector 95)

After I rebuild the 2nd FAT, the hd is empty with 12G partition and accessible by computer right away. Then I put it back to 5045(don't worry about those default folders and files, 5045 will create them when boot up if the hd is empty ) 5045 recognize it as a 12G partition and can record/playback without any problem. Try to un-plug test, video still can playback to the end. Try Cut/Merge, WOW.. same speed as the original..

After expand the 9G partition to 12G partition successfully, I try the same method on the 400G. It works perfectly. Then I transfer all video file from my old 160G hd to 400G. All video playback no problem, cut/merge works, copy/burn DVD no problem.. The last and most important test: un-plug the power while it still on. After a long 5 mins wait to scan the hd,
all video files playback no problem. I still have 60 hours available to record in HQ mode after I transfer 160G of video from the old one... I have been recording 2006 World Soccer Round 16 in HQ mode since this weekend. All newly recorded video playback no problem!!!!...

Here is screen shot of the boot record of my 400G using PartitionInfo:



Notes: Liteon only partition 140G on the original 160G hard drive. If anyone is interesting to try, you can use the same method to expand the old partition to fully use the 160G capacity. Just remember that, when you expanding a partition, all old data will be gone!!!. Please try it on
your own risk...Have Fun..*^_^*

Continue on Part II -- Step-by-Step Instruction....
http://www.techolio.com/forums/phpBB2/v ... php?t=2285

[Normando]

totoro...

Amazing post. Excellent bit of troubleshooting on your part. That is some pretty hardcore number crunching.

Now I need to find some extra cash and get one of those Seagate 750GB drives that use the new perpendicular recording technology for $420.

[EvilWizardGlick]

Aren't those SATA drives?
Wait for the terabyte drives and those 750 gig ones will drop significantly.
Now that the large drive door is opened expect more significant size increases quickly.
This is interesting as well.
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=5811

BM researchers have pushed a silicon-based microprocessor to speeds of 500GHz, more than 250 times faster than a typical commercial chip in a cell phone.

First, the researchers built a prototype silicon-germanium (SiGe) chip that ran at 350GHz at room temperature.

Then they used liquid helium to freeze their microprocessor to 451 degrees below zero Fahrenheit. Nature’s coldest temperature, known as absolute zero, is just a few degrees lower, at minus 459.67 degrees Fahrenheit. With no risk of melting the chip, they pushed it to 500GHz.

[totoro168]

Those drives are PATA or standard IDE drives.

Basically, it doesn't matter what kind of hard drive interface will be because the partition and format are done on the logical level which mean the physical interface can be any kind. This instruction will apply to any hard drive with FAT32x partition and format including both PATA and SATA hd.

It is my believe that as long as the hd's partition is FAT32x (can be accessed by M$ Win), you can use this method to upgrade any hd base devices including other brand's DVD recorders, DVRs, video jukebox, MP3 players...etc. If the partition is FAT32x, most of the manufactor will manipulate the parameters in the boot record to create their own 'proprietary' version of FAT32x. I doubt they will want to spend extra resource to re-invent a wheel to create their own true proprietary format..

Here is the FAT32x specification from M$:
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/pl ... atgen.mspx

The benefit of this method is the change on the partition and boot record is very minimum. Basically, you will use most the original parameters.. Hopefully, other people can test it on other devices to confirm that.

Keep Upgrading....*^_^*...
Ps.. According to M$, FAT32x will support up to 2 TBs which you can use any biggest size hd is available in the market right now and even in the next 2 years at least..

[EvilWizardGlick]

Ilo doesn't take SATA,
I thought the 750 gigs were SATA only. I skimmed over one at NEWEGG the other day, but it was a quick glance.

[totoro168]

Here is a smaill SATA==>IDE convertor that will convert any SATA or SATA II hd to IDE hd for $24:

http://www.cooldrives.com/satoidecofor.html

[EvilWizardGlick]

Have you tried it with the previous drive swapping case mod?
I would appreciate your experiences with the combination and any advice you gained in the process.

[totoro168]

You meant the original 160G? Yes, my 400G was upgraded base on the original 160G hd. Actually, I have tried it in two ways:

first way is I use WinHex to duplicate the 160G partition on 400G using sector-by-sector copy. Then upgrade from there.

second way is to use 5045 to partitiona and format a 160G partition on the 400G(Erase all function). It is totally identicaly to the original 160G partition(except the serial # is different which won't matter). then upgrade from there.

Either way, 5045 will report the same amount of record time in HQ mode.

Here are some tests that I have done before I upgrade my 400G for your reference:
1. from 9G to 12G
2. from 9G to 20G
3. from 12G to 20G
4. from 20G to 140G on my 400G
5. from 140G to 160G on my 400G

Here is the information if you want to try it on your 160G:
total sector for 160G: 320146939 (original is 312499999)
Big(FAT32) Sectors per cluster: 19540 (original is 19073)

The worest case I have experienced was 5045 just display an error message to instruct me to contact Liteon tech support for data recovery. And all I have to do is to use h2format to format it first on the computer then use 5045 to format it again. Then everything is back to normal..

[EvilWizardGlick]

Thank you.
I meant the SATA to IDE connector. I know that sometimes there are SATA issues requireing the use of jumpers to reduce the data transfer rates.
http://www.wdc.com/en/library/eide/2579-001037.pdf

[totoro168]

Personally, I haven't tested the converter before. If I take a guess and please correct me if I am wrong, the converter should take care of any compatibility issue between SATA and IDE in order the IDE controller treat it as an IDE hd.

Ps.. Just came back from local eletronic store, they have 750G EIDE on sales for $399.

[EvilWizardGlick]

I'm not sure. I know some people have problems and have to change the transfer rate. Usually it is SATA2 and SATA compatibility.
On the positive side if there is a problem a simple jumper change could fix it.

Also time is a major problem with larger drives. The more stuff you put on a large drive the longer it takes to transfer to dvd.
I tend to fill up both my 250 gig pc drives and occasionally my 60 gig drive. It tends to take me two or more days to transfer all that to 16x dvd.
How much longer would that be at 4x?
Time issues are a recent development of faster net access and larger drives. Sure stuff comes down quicker, but it still takes more time to archive it from hdd to dvd.
The benefit is you could just keep buying and filling hdd's.

[betatester]

Before you go grazy with disk size remeber that the units have only 256 Mb of RAM. Fat 32 is very RAM hungry.

If it cannot fit both copies or the fat in memory it's going to make a mess of the file system in short order.

Have a look here

http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/file/partFAT32-c.html

[EvilWizardGlick]

(A 60 GB partition, if formatted with 4 kiB clusters, would result in a FAT that is 64 MiB in size, which is about as much as the entire system memory in many newer PCs.)

So there is a reason you don't see massive hdds in either recorders or game machines. They facilitate the need for much more ram.
Which makes the pc pvr the smart route.
Also could be the cause of some of the problems, maybe even cluster size issues.

[totoro168]

Hi [EvilwizardGlick] and [betatester],

That's why lvw-5045 is using 128 Sectors per cluster(64K) instead of 64 Sectors per cluster(32k). The bigger size of cluster, the smaller size of the FAT will be needed because the total number of cluster is smaller. For example, the 60G, the FAT's size will be 8Mbs fro 32k cluster and 4Mbs for 64k cluster. The following is a table for the comparassion for bigger hd:

Size --------- 32k clusters-----------------------------64k clusters
160G-------- 20Mbs(38143 Sectors)----------------10Mbs(19073 Sectors)
400G---------49Mbs(95377 Sectors)----------------25Mbs(47692 Sectors)
750G*-------92Mbs(178793 Sectors)---------------46Mbs(89402 Sectors)
1TB*---------125Mbs(244111 Sectors)--------------62Mbs(122063Sectors)

*I don't have the exact number of those hd. Just use 750,000,000,000 and 1,024,000,000,000 for calculation.

The formula is Big(FAT32) Sectors per FAT * 512 byte or (Total Sectors / Sectors per cluster) * 4byte(32bit per FAT entry). Either formula will give you the similar result..Please correct me if I am wrong.

According to the table, my 400G's FAT was 49Mbs in size when I was using h2format and it has been reduced to 25Mbs after I 'expand' it. Since even 49Mbs FAT was working before, which meant 750G will work theorically or even 1TB with 64k cluster. Maybe it will be slower due to insufficient system memory. Just need someone to test out this one..

The drawback for large size of cluster is it will 'waste' space when store allot of small files. That's why it doesn't make sense to use the 64k cluster in M$ Win or other operating system. However, for DVD recorder will be a total different story. Since the video files are usaully huge per record(between 1G to 4G each), the large size of cluster will improve both read/write performance. It did show the differnce when cut/merge video file or copy/burn from hd to dvd after upgrade it.. It is my believe that other brand's hd based DVD recorder will use 64K cluster as well. *^_^*

[betatester]

Even so you are still eating into the limited memory in a big way. Assuming they cheat and work with only 1 copy of the fat you are still taking what they have allowed 10 mb of ram for out to 25Mb at 400 Gb. If they load both copies it gets a lot worse.

Both copies of the fat have to be the same or your pc will trash it. Which is probably where those of us with xp have come unstuck.

The cluster size is not going to matter with video as the files will still be a lot larger than the cluster.

[EvilWizardGlick]

Found this. I'm not sure how correct it is but seems to fit the topic.
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:BB ... =clnk&cd=3

# What is the largest capacity I can use in RTV30xx series?
You can use up to 137GB drives on RTV20xx, RTV30xx and ShowStoppers. With 2 of these drives in your system you could get up to 274 hours of storage. The sector address limitation on the EIDE standard means that the addressable limit is 131,072 MB (literally 255 * 2^20), so using 160GB or larger drives requires some IDE interface and/or BIOS changes, and this won't happen in the older units. The RTVPatch program (use version 2.4 or later) automatically limits the used space to 137GB, so it is possible to use 137GB of a 160GB drive.
There was a message posted by someone with a friend who had a relative who worked for ReplayTV, stating that ReplayTV software will run out of memory at 150 hours. Granted, this is 4th-hand information, but people with 160 hour upgrades have reported occasional out-of-memory errors, so there probably is some truth to it. The out-of-memory errors typically appear during the network dial-up because that is the most memory intensive operation the unit does. The errors also were reported to depend on the number of replay channels you had.
(Nov2002 update: using the large cluster option in RTVPatch 2.2.4 and 2.4 you can get beyond the 150 hour memory problem and get up to 280 hours)
# What is the 'large cluster option' and how do I use it?
The default cluster size in a ReplayTV unit is 256kB. The ReplayTV's apparently keep a cluster map in memory, so increasing the drive size increases the number of clusters on the drive, which in turn decreases the available memory. The reported limit is 150 hours, above which you will start to get out-of-memory errors.
A solution to this problem is to increase the cluster size beyond the default of 256kB. With RTVPatch 2.2.4 (and later), if you answer 'yes' to the prompt 'Do you want to reset the MPEG partition?', you will get a second prompt asking 'Do you want to completely reformat the MPEG partition using a LARGER cluster size?' If you answer 'yes' to this second prompt, then the MPEG partition will be formatted using a larger cluster size than the default.
The large cluster size option is recommended for RTV3xxx and earlier units with 80GB or larger hard drives (or a pair of hard drives with a combined size of 80GB or larger). It is not recommended for RTV4xxx or later units as these units do not suffer from the same memory constraint issues the earlier units had.

[totoro168]

Siice we don't know how Liteon handles the FAT by either read directly from hd or cache the entire FAT into memory, we can only test it by keep using it to confirm that..

After I recorded all World Cup Soccer in HQ mode since last week,(12G each time for 4 hours), my 400G is down to 52G(13 hours in HQ) right now. So far, my 5045 is funtioning normally. No problem for playing back those recorded programs as well as those movies and DVD that recorded/copy before. I will post any problems to this forum if I run into.

If anyone who has upgraded using this method got any problems, please share it with others.

*^_^*

[LCSHG]

I don’t have a 5045 but have the ilo RHD04 with 80g HDD. I should think the principal would be the same
An explanation First

The computer being used has Win 98SE as an OS and uses FAT 32 .
It has a 10g and 2 - 80g HDD it has had a 160g HDD and 250gb
I have programs that will tweak the cluster size [Smaller for a given size HDD] I don’t do this because a lot of programs I use will not function on any thing but a MS partition. A reason for the 10G HDD
At 10g a 2k file would result in a 6k loss In the 80g a 2kfile would result in a 30k loss

[ totoro168 ]

to DVD. I must un-plug the power cord to restart the machine while it was still on. After the lvw-
But, until two weeks ago, my lvw-5045 has hanged when it was burning a movie from hard drive 5045 run the hard drive scan when boot up again, then here come the DIASTER: all the movies(recorded using SP mode) in the hard drive stop playing at 35Mins except those movies that copy from DVD directly.Record again, it can play the whole movie without stopping. Un-plug, Scan Disk, it stop at 35Mins again. (will explain the cause of this problem later)

The reason that Liteon is using the biggest Sectors per cluster is performance. The bigger cluster, the faster for data reading/writing but will 'waste' space according to M$. However, since all video files are huge single file, then the 'waste' is meaningless. Since the hd was format into 32K cluster, Liteone will take twice amount of time to read/write data from/to hd. This will explain the slowness issue when cut/merge video file and copy/burn movie from hd to dvd visa versa..(It proved it is true after I format the 400G into 64k cluster successfully later).

First, I use Liteon's 'Erase all' to format two 9G and 12G notebook hard drives then use PartionInfo to compare the boot record against 160G and found out only three parameters are different: Big Total Sectors, Big(FAT32) Sectors Per FAT, and Serial number. The rest parameters are identical for all three hard drive.

Next, I use WinHex to copy 9G to 12G sectors by sectors to make 9G partition on the 12G hard drive and connect 12G to 5045. It recognize it as a 9G. No problem found for record/playback and even the un-plug test..YES!!!(you can use the same method to duplicate Liteon's HD.)

It seems when the machine is unplugged, while on, it will run scandisk when reconnected, as it should. But the 400g HDD will return to the 160 format and lose info. I understood that only the erase [format] would do this
It also seems felt that a larger cluster size is the answer to speed??? I read into this and the other post that the cluster size is being tweaked to a larger size 64k [for video] If scandisk screwed the HDD when 32k why not at 64k.


[ batatester ]

Before you go grazy with disk size remeber that the units have only 256 Mb of RAM. Fat 32 is very RAM hungry.

If it cannot fit both copies or the fat in memory it's going to make a mess of the file system in short order.

Have a look here

http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/file/partFAT32-c.html


Even so you are still eating into the limited memory in a big way. Assuming they cheat and work with only 1 copy of the fat you are still taking what they have allowed 10 mb of ram for out to 25Mb at 400 Gb. If they load both copies it gets a lot worse.

Both copies of the fat have to be the same or your pc will trash it. Which is probably where those of us with xp have come unstuck.

The cluster size is not going to matter with video as the files will still be a lot larger than the cluster.

The comments seem very sound
The site given is very good and should be read by anyone seeking info on FAT 32
It would indicate that the larger clusters, will most likely slow the machine down as said elseware
NTFS has built in blocks for FAT32 and its use with FAT32 could cause problems [just in general]

The last comment says it all.
Would it make any difference, in video, if the HDD had 32k or 64K.

Using MS Programs
The Original 80gb drive in the ilo will read 0 bytes on the disk, 0 available and 0 in the allocation table. This if the driv is full or empty. It would appear that Liteon is using a max partition size and an unconventional setup. If so do they know something.

Just info
The orig. drive will not format or partition in a PC, If I use a 80gb drive that is in and for a PC the drive will format correctly in the ilo and can go back to the PC and be formatted and partioned. I can see no difference in performance. Is it firmware restriction? If so why?

[totoro168]

Hi,

The more I read into how fat32 works, the more I agree to what[betatester] said about the relationship between the cluster size,size of the hd and the memory requirement. Although the bigger cluster size will use a smaller size of FAT, but the size of the hd is another factor to determine the memory requirement. The question what is maximum size of hd that lvw-5045 can support? The will rely on the test result from everybody.

My 400G is down to 11hours in HQ mode(44G) after I recorded the semi-final game of World Cup Soccer today. (I am playing back the game while I am typing this reply.)

Have any one give it a try yet and what is the result if you have?

[LCSHG]

But the 400g HDD will return to the 160 format and lose info. I understood that only the erase [format] would do this
It also seems felt that a larger cluster size is the answer to speed??? I read into this and the other post that the cluster size is being tweaked to a larger size 64k [for video] If scandisk screwed the HDD when 32k why not at 64k.

The scandisk didn't put the 400G back to 160G format. Otherwise, I should have only 160G in total and cannot record anymore after the scan. If you check file size in the hd using your computer, you will find the maximum size for a single file is 2G. If the recorded video is 1 hour in HQ, you will find 2 2G files at that directory. As I explain in my first email:

Since a 2G video files will need 64000 32k cluster to store versus 32000 64k cluster, when Liteon perform scan disk(another version of chkdsk), it treats it as 64k cluster and only recognize first 32000 clusters and truncate the rest. That's why all video files that over 1G will truncate to 1G

I guess the firmware somewhere has hard code the maximum clusters per file. In this case it will 32,000 clusters.

[LCSHG]

Would it make any difference, in video, if the HDD had 32k or 64K.

Theorically, yes, because the system will only need to read half of the number of clusters per file for 64k cluster than 32k cluster. However, after I have done a simple file transfer test, the differece that i saw isn't so big that I will feel the different for transfering a 2G file.

[betatester], thank you for corrected my mistake. I agree with you that the insufficient memory might be the cause of the slowness due to the 32k clusters when I was using h2format to format, ~50Mbs FAT..

[EvilWizardGlick], thank you for providing the reference information on this topic.

LCSHG

It would appear that Liteon is using a max partition size and an unconventional setup.

That's no doubt Liteon is using the unconverntional setup by manipulate the parameters in the MBR and PBR. If you compare the same hd that format in M$ Win and in Liteon, you will find not only the sectors per clusters is different but other parameters as well. For that reason, I was using the Liteon format hd as a base to expand. If you are interesting in those parameters, I can share what I found...

Since you have ILO RHD04 which is identical to lvw-5045, you can give it a try and to see it will work for it or not. Regarding to format the orginal hd, you can use Winhex or other hex editor to empty both sector 0 and sector 63 first then try to partition and format.

Have fun... *^_^*..

[Normando]

Evil... The Seagate 750GB drive comes in both flavors... SATA & IDE Ultra ATA100.

Here is a LINKto the IDE OEM drive for $419.