• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Win7 RAID1 vs Mobo RAID1

A

antioch

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
337
I've got a pair of disks I'd like to setup in a mirrored configuration, raid1. I can easily do so in Windows or via my motherboard (P67 chipset). I'm curious what the pros and cons of each method are.

If I do set the disks up as mirrors in Win7 and then I decide to reformat Windows (my OS drive would be separate from the Raid1 array), would I be able to reconfigure the drives as a mirrored array easily or would it be a pain?

Thanks for the help.
 
both are software raid BUT, do it in the mobo... if windows craps on you, it will still work...

No, if windows breaks, your intel raid still works.
 
You can also import a Windows software RAID into a different (new) Windows install. As long as your OS isn't booting off the RAID, it won't be affected by anything that happens to the host OS. A Windows RAID is also portable to another PC if say your motherboard dies and you want to use another (Non Intel) system to get to your data. Your mirror array is pretty safe either way, I'd focus on which one offers the best performance. And to this I have no answer.

Dustin
 
Is an Intel ICH simple mirror not portable between systems, insofar as you can just take one of the disks, mount it on another system and get the data off?
 
with an Intel ICH10 Raid1 you can take one of the disks and mount it in another system and get the data off. I tried this myself when I first setup my Intel RAID1.
 
Yeah Intel to Intel seems to work regardless in my experience. Even for higher RAID levels and you don't need to get the drives connected to the right ports even.

Dustin
 
MrGuvernment said:
both are software raid BUT, do it in the mobo... if windows craps on you, it will still work...

No, if windows breaks, your intel raid still works.
Click to expand...

No, they are not both software RAID, only Windows RAID is software RAID.

The mobo uses FakeRAID.


If Windows breaks, the Windows RAID array may be lost.

But the FakeRAID array will still work as long as your mobo controller works.
 
Well if either Windows gets reformatted or the mobo controller gets fried, since the disks are mirrored and not striped I should be able to still get data off of either one of them, right? So I'd only lose the time it takes to rebuild the mirror and re-replicate the files. Yes?
 
Yes, that is correct. In fact, if your mobo gets fried, and you get another mobo with the same mobo HDD/RAID controller, it should be able to find the array again just fine.
 
Even a Windows software RAID is portable to another Windows install. Even if Windows dies, you should be able to connect the pair of drives to another Windows box and import the array. I've moved several Windows RAIDs to other systems (striped and mirrored) and never had a hitch.

Dustin
 
I wouldn't attempt a Windows RAID setup without a secondary backup.
 
stormy1 said:
Raid is not backup! no matter how it is done.
no matter what you still need a backup.
Click to expand...

I'm sick of hearing these people. RAID is not a backup, but it's a way to protect against a failing disk.

It won't protect against thieves, it won't protect against fire/flood/earthquake, it won't protect against you being a dumbass and formatting it by accident.

It will protect against a failing HDD.
 
The structure of the array itself is not (necessarily) different between a SoftRAID, a FakeRAID and a hardware RAID. A mirror is a mirror, stripe is a stripe and parity data is parity data, it doesn't matter what made it be there. As long as you have the appropriate system to read the array with, in this case a system running a version of Windows that has the ports to connect the drives to, you can reassemble the array. Some controllers require that you have the drives connected to the right physical ports, some do not, but for software RAID it almost never matters. I'm not a fan of Windows but there's no reason to distrust it's ability to make a software RAID1. If all you're after is a mirror, you use Windows and you're not trying to set any speed records, I'd almost recommend it based on it's portability if nothing else.

Dustin
 
I dont trust either. Im only running ICH raid as in my signature because I have a rediculously redundant Openfiler server that I do daily Acronis Images to.

I'd always vouch for a $300.00+ raid on chip solution. And to be honest ICH10 raid performance sucks to me on drives that spin compared to hardware raid brains. ICH10 and SSD is much better.

With one exception. Linux raid hands down is one of the fastest software and most stable software raids I have ever had the benefit to play with.
 
Both are software driven RAID. The term FakeRAID is nonsense. Its no more "fake" than the software driven RAIDs are. Motherboard RAID simply lacks a XOR processing engine but is in every other way, the same as any hardware based RAID controller. Arrays are managed in the option ROM / BIOS. Configuration data is both there and on the drives themselves giving you two points where the data exists. Software RAID is just that, software. Onboard controller RAID actually moves to other systems relatively easily. Intel controllers are cross compatible and your Marvell controllers are compatible with one another. They aren't compatible with the Intel controllers that's true, but Marvell controllers are very common. But again, both onboard controller RAIDs and software driven RAIDs are fairly portable. In that sense their advantages over one another are pretty much nil. It's really all about what you want to manage the RAID configuration. BIOS or software. Personally I prefer the BIOS to manage it as it's OS independent.

From a performance standpoint, onboard RAID is hands down better than Windows in my experience. It is for this reason that I don't run software RAID via Windows. Ever.

tangoseal said:
I dont trust either. Im only running ICH raid as in my signature because I have a rediculously redundant Openfiler server that I do daily Acronis Images to.

I'd always vouch for a $300.00+ raid on chip solution. And to be honest ICH10 raid performance sucks to me on drives that spin compared to hardware raid brains. ICH10 and SSD is much better.

With one exception. Linux raid hands down is one of the fastest software and most stable software raids I have ever had the benefit to play with.
Click to expand...

I've seen onboard RAID with regard to "failure" many, many times and I've never lost data because of it. Usually I simply replace the motherboard and set the appropriate controller to RAID mode in the BIOS, and I'm done. I'm back up and running. I've seen Linux's software RAID blow up and lead to data loss because some Linux whore at work put too much faith in it. I've seen hardware controllers fail and morons blow the drive configuration away rather than properly importing it. I've found no RAID solution to have any reliability advantage over another when all is said and done. The only thing real RAID controllers have over anything else is performance. Of course higher end controllers have features which the onboard controllers may never have, or won't have for years.

The moral of the story: RAID isn't a backup, and never trust in machines. They'll bone you every time.
 
Dan, I get that you don't like the term "FakeRAID", but Firmware/driver-based RAID is just too much to say. ;)

The only difference between it and software RAID is that software RAID is controlled by the OS and can still see all of the drives. FakeRAID requires a driver to 'trick' the OS into seeing a single drive, so it doesn't even know it is a RAID array.

The two are very different, even if they are both processed by the CPU, and each has its own strengths and weaknesses.

You are right about a few things though. Software RAID in windows is very weak-sauce, and I would take FakeRAID any day over it. Also, you are right, RAID is not a backup, but it does help for uptime.

However, stating that Linux RAID is bad is total bullshit. If you know how to use Linux-type UNIX code at all, you will be able to recover the MDADM RAID array without any issues. No, it isn't fail-safe, no RAID type or array is, but it is and has been very robust.

From what I've heard, the best software RAID is FreeBSD's GEOM, but I have never personally used it. ZFS is great, but it is not true software RAID as it is the RAID+FS+volume manager all in one.
 
Red Falcon said:
Dan, I get that you don't like the term "FakeRAID", but Firmware/driver-based RAID is just too much to say. ;)

The only difference between it and software RAID is that software RAID is controlled by the OS and can still see all of the drives. FakeRAID requires a driver to 'trick' the OS into seeing a single drive, so it doesn't even know it is a RAID array.

The two are very different, even if they are both processed by the CPU, and each has its own strengths and weaknesses.

You are right about a few things though. Software RAID in windows is very weak-sauce, and I would take FakeRAID any day over it. Also, you are right, RAID is not a backup, but it does help for uptime.

However, stating that Linux RAID is bad is total bullshit. If you know how to use Linux-type UNIX code at all, you will be able to recover the MDADM RAID array without any issues. No, it isn't fail-safe, no RAID type or array is, but it is and has been very robust.

From what I've heard, the best software RAID is FreeBSD's GEOM, but I have never personally used it. ZFS is great, but it is not true software RAID as it is the RAID+FS+volume manager all in one.
Click to expand...

I never said Linux RAID is bad. Saying that I said that is total bullshit. I've seen all forms of RAID array types and controllers, control schemes and software go tits up. I was making that point by saying that I've seen people put faith in all of these technologies and that all types of computer technology can screw you when you do so.

Having a driver show a bunch of drives as a single volume vs. Windows or another OS tying together drives in a single volume is splitting hairs at best. They are different approaches but software driven RAID and onboard RAID controllers are more or less the same thing. The only functional difference is what manages the drive configuration. Firmware / BIOS vs. a software configuration in the operating system.
 
Dan_D said:
I never said Linux RAID is bad. Saying that I said that is total bullshit.
Click to expand...

nvm, my bad. :p

I've seen all forms of RAID array types and controllers, control schemes and software go tits up. I was making that point by saying that I've seen people put faith in all of these technologies and that all types of computer technology can screw you when you do so.
Click to expand...

This is true, and this is why having a backup of any form is a logical idea.
 
I've seen so many failures of all types of RAID arrays it's hard to narrow down what brands and types of control schemes are the most reliable. I deal with failures of all types of these solutions nearly every day.
 
Red Falcon said:
No, they are not both software RAID, only Windows RAID is software RAID.

The mobo uses FakeRAID.


If Windows breaks, the Windows RAID array may be lost.

But the FakeRAID array will still work as long as your mobo controller works.
Click to expand...

How is it "fake" raid? i mean really, either one does raid 1 the same way......as Dan said, it is BS.

All raid cards, whether a built in raid., or a $1000 Adaptec card all use "software" at some level to control what happens, just happens to be if it is a specific OS or Windows doing it. I think alot of people have some bad taste from windows 2000 raid or 2003 or trying raid in XP and it failing.

All raid, needs software to tell it what to do , period., no software, no raid. What you have is hardware dedicated to just raid, how you talk about "fake" using a driver to trick the OS is often what most people think as "hardware" raid.
 
Last edited:
MrGuvernment, I get that neither of you like the term FakeRAID. I didn't coin the term, nor do I promote it. I do however use it as it works better than 'firmware/motherboard RAID'. If you don't like it, then don't use it. It's just a name, get over it.

However, I will say this, that FakeRAID /= software RAID. They are both very different and should be identified as two separate RAID types.

Seriously, not everything is software RAID, even if it uses software at some point.
 
I was speaking strictly about software RAID1, and qualified it with "if you're not trying to set any speed records". Under those conditions I think it's an acceptable solution, no parity, not even striping, just mirroring for redundancy. I've never had nor heard of one of these failing, the most likely way it would fail is by way of multiple drive failure, same as if it were being mirrored by an ICH FakeRAID or a really expensive controller. Alot of people just want a bit more security for their data without investing in expensive hardware, and not everyone has an Intel ICH equipped motherboard.

Dustin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top