Intel X520 and X540 for Windows XP

[secpar]

Windows XP 32-bit and Windows XP-64-bit.

A driver solution for Intel Ethernet adapters that are based on Intel X520 and Intel X540.

Maybe you're an XP holdout and you're looking to use a 10 gigabit Ethernet adapter, but have exhausted all options? That was me. I've got some good news, I've found some solutions. Observe/expand the 'Comments.txt' quote.

(It appears I cannot upload the RAR file that contains both 32 and 64)... so, you may have to piece things together. Or, if the ZIP files attached to this thread persist.

Comments.txt

[DATE]
1:42 PM 3/6/2021

[AUTHOR]
SECPAR of the XPforums.

[WARNING]
*HIGHLY EXPERIMENTAL!* No guarantees implied.

[SUMMARY]
Contained herein are the ATTO Fast Frame Drivers
as found on the website https://www.atto.com/downloads/128/1

See DEVICE area to see a list of possible devices these drivers may serve to allow for operation in Windows XP.


[DESCRIPTION]
This RAR archive is basically the same drivers as found published on the website. The driver files are ALL included in this RAR archive, as a means of going back to this in case the ATTO website as referenced dissapears from existence or changes from it's current form according to the notated date.

There are TWO modified files, both in INF format. One is for 10 Gig Ethernet drivers for Windows XP 64-bit and the other for Windows XP (standard 32-bit). Further distinctions are not made here with regards to architecture.

These two INF files were modified from a later version of drivers that appear to have removed Windows XP from the list of supported operating systems. These were gatherd from Lenovo, file "tq1etn12sr17.exe" as found on website https://support.lenovo.com/us/en/do...r-2003-r2-thinkserver-rd330-rd430-rd530-rd630

The above mentioned Lenovo website and file may be useful in that it can, perhaps without any manipulation, unlock additional features for the network adapters. Functionality is nothing that this author can guarantee, unfortunately. I can say that it does look promising from additional tabs observed in the Device Manager.

At any rate, a perfectly viable option for any untrusting user may simply use the ATTO drivers, per their website, in Windows XP without manipulation. One caveat, perhaps more, follows: Device will appear to be ATTO FastFrame Network adapter in name.

Secondly, for the little-more-than less trusting individuals, you could simply use the drivers found on the ATTO website and use the INF files ('ixn51x64.inf' and/or 'ixn5132.inf') from this RAR archive to at least have the network adapter display a more appropriate name, especially if the adapter itself is not one of ATTO's FastFrame Network adapters.


[DETAILS FROM ATTO WEBSITE]
Windows - x64 (64-bit)
15.8.1
Released: 04/26/2011 | File Size: 18.04MB
Windows 2003, 2008, Vista, XP & 7 for FastFrame Network Interface Cards on x64 platforms. Download this file to your PC and double click it to launch the driver installation program.
Note: Microsoft no longer certifies drivers for the XP Operating System.

-AND-

Windows - x86 (32-bit)
15.8.1
Released: 04/26/2011 | File Size: 16.95MB
Windows 2003, 2008, Vista, XP & 7 for FastFrame Network Interface Cards on x86 platforms. Download this file to your PC and double click it to launch the driver installation program.
Note: Microsoft no longer certifies drivers for the XP Operating System.


[DEVICES]
Names of devices (and perhaps manufacturers) that can be used in conjunction with the drivers and INF files included in this archive on the Windows XP platform.

"Intel(R) 82599 Multi-Function Network Device"
"Intel(R) 10 Gigabit BR KX4 Dual Port Network Connection"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Backplane Connection"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Backplane Connection with FCoE"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Mezzanine Adapter X520-KX4-2"
"Intel(R) Ethernet X520 10GbE Dual Port KX4 Mezz"
"Intel(R) Ethernet X520 10GbE Dual Port KX4-KR Mezz"
"Intel(R) Ethernet 10G 2P X520-k bNDC"
"Intel(R) Ethernet ExpressModule X520-P2"
"Sun Dual 10GbE PCIe 2.0 FEM"
"Cisco UCS CNA M61KR-I Intel Converged Network Adapter"
"Intel(R) Ethernet 10G 2P X520 Adapter"
"HP Ethernet 10Gb 2-port 560FLB Adapter"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit CX4 Dual Port Network Connection"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Server Adapter X520-1"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Server Adapter X520-2"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Server Adapter X520-DA2"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Network Connection"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Network Connection"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Network Connection with FCoE"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Network Connection"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Server Adapter X520-T2"
"Sun Dual 10GBASE-T LP"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit TN Network Connection"


[FINAL WORD]
Use at your own risk. The author doesn't intend for harm, but this is purely experimental. I wish you the best of luck as an XP holdout.

Gather the pieces yourself, or you may use what is provided/attached here.

Windows XP 64-bit INF File
Rename from ixn51x64.txt to ixn51x64.inf

Windows XP 32-bit INF File
Rename from ixn5132.txt to ixn5132.inf



Only 1.4 gig connection:
The Windows XP 32-bit drivers, when I last tried them, showed the adapter coming in with a 1.4 gig connection. If this is your experience too, then it's the same as mine and have not developed a solution as of the time of this posting. Perhaps if you have discovered a fix, you can share it here.

 

[secpar]

Intel v17.4 PROXGB driver pack for 10G Network Adapters
https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/835632

v17.4 software CD release for 49Y7980 option for EP systems - IBM System x
Download

File detals
Version: 17.4 signed

Release Date: 18 January 2013


File link File size File description
intc_dd_nic_v17.4-cd_anyos_32-64.chg

8,623 CHANGE HISTORY for the v17.4 sw CD release for 49Y7980 option for EP systems
intc_dd_nic_v17.4-cd_anyos_32-64.txt

8,623 README for the v17.4 sw CD release for 49Y7980 option for EP systems
intc_dd_nic_v17.4-cd_anyos_32-64.iso

190,072,832 v17.4 sw CD release for 49Y7980 option for EP systems
Abstract

I have successfully merged the INF files from the ATTO drivers to version 17.4 Intel driver pack.

ALL you need to do, after downloading the ISO file from the page above:
1. Extract ALL of the "IXN" files (including ixnmsg.dll, nicco2.dll, NicInIXN.dll, PROUnstl.exe) from the NDIS5x folder.

(This picture shows you all the files you will need, example is XP64)

2. Delete the INF file, or rename it by changing its extension something other than *.inf.
3. Download and Copy the TXT files attached to THIS post, and move them into the NDIS5x folder you extracted from the ISO.
4. Rename the TXT files you got from this post, and change to INF file.
5. Install the driver at your leisure.


This later version of the PROXGB driver may not actually yield anything new over the last incarnation released... but maybe it will function better. This is totally beyond my scope.

Also, this later iteration may yield fruitful results for more network adapters over the previous or the base ATTO drivers.

Possible Network Adapters this will work with...

"Intel(R) 82599 Multi-Function Network Device"
"Intel(R) 10 Gigabit BR KX4 Dual Port Network Connection"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Backplane Connection"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Backplane Connection with FCoE"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Mezzanine Adapter X520-KX4-2"
"Intel(R) Ethernet X520 10GbE Dual Port KX4 Mezz"
"Intel(R) Ethernet X520 10GbE Dual Port KX4-KR Mezz"
"Intel(R) Ethernet 10G 2P X520-k bNDC"
"Intel(R) Ethernet ExpressModule X520-P2"
"Sun Dual 10GbE PCIe 2.0 FEM"
"Cisco UCS CNA M61KR-I Intel Converged Network Adapter"
"Intel(R) Ethernet 10G 2P X520 Adapter"
"HP Ethernet 10Gb 2-port 560FLB Adapter"
"HP Ethernet 10Gb 2-port 560M Adapter"
"HP Ethernet 10Gb 2-port 560FLR-SFP+ Adapter"
"HP Ethernet 10Gb 2-port 560SFP+ Adapter"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit CX4 Dual Port Network Connection"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Server Adapter X520-1"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Server Adapter X520-2"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Server Adapter X520-DA2"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Network Connection"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Network Connection"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Dual Port Network Connection with FCoE"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit Network Connection"
"Intel(R) Ethernet Server Adapter X520-T2"
"Sun Dual 10GBASE-T LP"
"Intel(R) 82599 10 Gigabit TN Network Connection"

Remember, I'm using an Intel X540 network card, and it's working just fine when selecting X520.

Again, no guarantees that this will work (for you), but it worked for me in Windows XP64.

 

[secpar]

Here's the view from a Windows XP 32-bit machine. Drivers working. However, the connection appears to be limited to 1.4 Gbps. However, the expanded Adapter tab "Link Speed" shows 10 Gbps/Full Duplex.

So, is it really 10 Gbps or 1.4 Gbps? I don't know (XP32 is my alternate boot). Could be either, or could be the lowest one reported.

 

[secpar]

While on Windows XP 32-bit, I checked the connection from my computer on the 10G ethernet card and the switch. The switch reports the link as being 10G.

As far as I'm concerned, the 1.4 Gbps may be an erroneous report on the adapter details.

 

[Kithylin]

The only issue with this is XP it's self and the hardware it's on. I have run XP on very nice computers (Intel P67 board with I5-3570K @ 5.1 Ghz overclocked + DDR3 @ 2500 Mhz on two Samsung Pro 850 SATA SSD's in RAID-0 that do 1100 MB/s reads and 750 MB/s writes in benchmark programs, in XP-32) but even with hardware like this I can't get XP to sustain full speed 1 Gigabit connections over my network (which is 100~120 MB/s) over the LAN copying to the XP rig. It maxes out around 50~65 MB/s on the XP machine and makes the entire machine nearly freeze and be unresponsive just trying to copy at that speed. And no it's not my network or my hardware. My modern Ryzen 5800X computer can pull full 115~120 MB/s sustained out of my NAS on the same switch. It's some sort of limitation with XP-32 and it's TCP/IP stack. I've tried nearly everything. Onboard RealTek gigabit NIC's, Intel Pro series PCIE NIC's with TCP offloading support enabled + buffering, etc. It's not the system's CPU being overloaded either, none of the CPU cores are maxed out. It's some sort of limitation with XP.

It's very unlikely you would ever get any machine running XP to actually sustain full 10 Gigabit speeds (1250 MB/s) even if you get the adapter running.

 

[Samir]

The only issue with this is XP it's self and the hardware it's on. I have run XP on very nice computers (Intel P67 board with I5-3570K @ 5.1 Ghz overclocked + DDR3 @ 2500 Mhz on two Samsung Pro 850 SATA SSD's in RAID-0 that do 1100 MB/s reads and 750 MB/s writes in benchmark programs, in XP-32) but even with hardware like this I can't get XP to sustain full speed 1 Gigabit connections over my network (which is 100~120 MB/s) over the LAN copying to the XP rig. It maxes out around 50~65 MB/s on the XP machine and makes the entire machine nearly freeze and be unresponsive just trying to copy at that speed. And no it's not my network or my hardware. My modern Ryzen 5800X computer can pull full 115~120 MB/s sustained out of my NAS on the same switch. It's some sort of limitation with XP-32 and it's TCP/IP stack. I've tried nearly everything. Onboard RealTek gigabit NIC's, Intel Pro series PCIE NIC's with TCP offloading support enabled + buffering, etc. It's not the system's CPU being overloaded either, none of the CPU cores are maxed out. It's some sort of limitation with XP.

It's very unlikely you would ever get any machine running XP to actually sustain full 10 Gigabit speeds (1250 MB/s) even if you get the adapter running.

The reason for this is because xp32 is using smb1, which maxes out at under 100MB/s ime. I have nas units that will saturate gigabit to win7 machines, but the same on xp maxes out just as you've experienced.

 

[Kithylin]

The reason for this is because xp32 is using smb1, which maxes out at under 100MB/s ime. I have nas units that will saturate gigabit to win7 machines, but the same on xp maxes out just as you've experienced.

Aha okay. Thank you for at least confirming that I'm not crazy. Well.. I mean, it's super awesome that they figured out how to get 10-Gigabit working in XP but I guess there's not much real point to having it working? It won't work any better than a normal Gigabit network adapter in XP I think.

 

[Samir]

Aha okay. Thank you for at least confirming that I'm not crazy. Well.. I mean, it's super awesome that they figured out how to get 10-Gigabit working in XP but I guess there's not much real point to having it working? It won't work any better than a normal Gigabit network adapter in XP I think.

A single stream won't work faster, but you can have a lot more single streams to your aggregate can be faster. Ie, if I was copying to 10x nas units at 50MB/s, that's 500MB/s.

And actually, I just thought of this--if you're using something like ftp, you should be able to hit max speeds since it doesn't use smb.

 

[Kithylin]

A single stream won't work faster, but you can have a lot more single streams to your aggregate can be faster. Ie, if I was copying to 10x nas units at 50MB/s, that's 500MB/s.

And actually, I just thought of this--if you're using something like ftp, you should be able to hit max speeds since it doesn't use smb.

I didn't think about that! That's a valid point. So the limitation in XP isn't total 50 MB/s, just 50 MB/s per stream? Interesting!

 

[Samir]

I didn't think about that! That's a valid point. So the limitation in XP isn't total 50 MB/s, just 50 MB/s per stream? Interesting!

I believe so. Because I think I have ran 2x speed tests (lan_speedtest.exe) to two different nas units simultaneously and the sum was full gigabit.

 

[Kithylin]

I believe so. Because I think I have ran 2x speed tests (lan_speedtest.exe) to two different nas units simultaneously and the sum was full gigabit.

I think I'll have to try that later with my XP system and see how it does.

 

[Samir]

I think I'll have to try that later with my XP system and see how it does.

Just for curiosity, I just ran 3x lan_speedtest tests of 500MB to 3 different nas units that I know hit 50MB+ in xp32. When looking at taskmanager, it was close to 80% gigabit and each of the tests when combined, approached 80MB/sec. This is on a xp32 system with an x3360 xeon (q95xx equivalent).

 

[Kithylin]

Well I guess it *MIGHT* be possible to get an XP-32 system to saturate a 10-Gigabit link then, so I would retract my earlier comment. However that would be nearly 30 x streams at the same time..........................

 

[Samir]

Well I guess it *MIGHT* be possible to get an XP-32 system to saturate a 10-Gigabit link then, so I would retract my earlier comment. However that would be nearly 30 x streams at the same time..........................

Yep--there's always hoops to jump through when trying to do what has previously been deamed 'impossible' Please do let us know how it turns out! Also, I would look into testing using iperf as that will definitely show if the adapter is running at full 10GB. You may need to use the -P parameter to increase the number of streams though.

 

[secpar]

So, it turns out that despite even having a 10Gigabit link, I have discovered that the bottleneck on speed isn't directly related to hardware. No, not at all.

Under a linux operating system, I was using Clonezilla Live. Under clonezilla, for saving/loading of disk images, it will support up to SMB v3. The computer under this live operating system sends/receives data to my NAS at speeds that would match a direct disk-to-disk speed.

The PROBLEM with Windows XP in using a 10gigabit NIC is that SMB v1 is limited compared to later versions of windows that use SMB 2 or 3, or higher.

So, while these drivers can give one a 10gigabit connection, you may never see the full potential.

 

[Samir]

SMB might have this issue, but you should still be able to get full speeds when using something like ftp which is native tcp/ip.