# Booting from Slave Drive

**URL:** <https://forum.kirupa.com/t/booting-from-slave-drive/186644>\
**Category:** random\
**Created:** [April 23, 2006, 5:15am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/booting-from-slave-drive/186644 "2006-04-23T05:15:52Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 6\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![hsadan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/7bcc69/32.png) [@hsadan](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/hsadan)\
**Post date:** [April 23, 2006, 5:15am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/booting-from-slave-drive/186644/1 "2006-04-23T05:15:52Z")

</div>

Quick question:

Is there any disadvantage/difference when booting off my slave drive?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![blindlizard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e47774/32.png) [@blindlizard](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/blindlizard)\
**Post date:** [April 23, 2006, 8:41am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/booting-from-slave-drive/186644/2 "2006-04-23T08:41:53Z")

</div>

There is no difference between Slave and Master except that most operating systems will assign drive letters first to Master then to Slave. Master is Drive0 and Slave is Drive1. It is just a bad naming convention that has stuck for 30 years.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![chrisclick](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/forum.kirupa.com/chrisclick/32/1991_2.png) [@chrisclick](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/chrisclick)\
**Post date:** [April 23, 2006, 11:23am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/booting-from-slave-drive/186644/3 "2006-04-23T11:23:57Z")

</div>

No, Just the fact the windows get crazy when trying to access master (i expirenced it)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![birdboy0103](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/db5fbb/32.png) [@birdboy0103](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/birdboy0103)\
**Post date:** [April 23, 2006, 3:59pm UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/booting-from-slave-drive/186644/4 "2006-04-23T15:59:03Z")

</div>

you cant boot off the slave unless the MBR on the master is pointing to it. Whichever drive is master is read 1st, and is usually the only one checked…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![hsadan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/7bcc69/32.png) [@hsadan](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/hsadan)\
**Post date:** [April 23, 2006, 4:14pm UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/booting-from-slave-drive/186644/5 "2006-04-23T16:14:26Z")

</div>

thanks for the replies.

chris.jones: apparently, my windows is handling it fine 🙂

birdboy: you can boot off the slave if you edit the bios such that it boots from the slave first.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![blindlizard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e47774/32.png) [@blindlizard](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/blindlizard)\
**Post date:** [April 24, 2006, 3:03am UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/booting-from-slave-drive/186644/6 "2006-04-24T03:03:39Z")

</div>

> [@birdboy0103](#):
>
> you cant boot off the slave unless the MBR on the master is pointing to it. Whichever drive is master is read 1st, and is usually the only one checked…

Most BIOS will let you change the Boot order of drives regardless of Master/Slave. The main server in my office boots off the slave and I just updated the BIOS to do it. The Master is an old XP drive, I popped in a slave and a SATA drive, updated BIOS and I boot. I can still change the BIOS back to the Master and boot XP.