Internal vs External Raid0 and 5 cards


Recommended Posts

Never setup a RAID system before, and what I want to do is a little on the unorthadox side. I am planning to setup the OS drive as RAID0 with SSDs and the storage to be RAID5 HDDs. The RAID5 isn't really going to be a problem, but I have a lot of questions about the RAID0.

First of all, the whole point of the RAID0 is read/write performance above all else, and the RAID5 for redundancy and fault tolerance. Would I then be better off getting a seperate card for the RAID0 array rather than use the motherboard's built-in RAID0? And if so, I would like to avoid if possible having two seperate RAID cards, are there any good cards that can handle both a seperate RAID0 and RAID5 array at the same time? And if so, would the performance of the RAID0 suffer?

I also know that Intel only a few months ago released an update to support TRIM over RAID0 on some of their motherboards, do any of the 3rd party RAID cards suppot TRIM over RAID0 yet? And is TRIM only used to increase the efficency and lifespan of the SSD, or does it improve performance as well?

Come to think of it, what are even some good brands of RAID cards that don't cost something ridiculous? All I get when searching Newegg are brands that I know are total junk like Rosewill or SYBA.

(P.S. Would I need PCI-E for the 0 or 5? Or would plain PCI be fast enough?)

For a RAID0, you need two drives. For RAID5, you need three drives.

A RAID card can do multiple RAIDs at a time.

What motherboard do you have? Most of them have just 2 or 3 RAID ports.

TRIM is only used by SSD's.

Get this: http://www.newegg.co...N82E16816124043

With RAID0 (2 drives) and RAID5 (3 drives)

PCI or PCI-e works about the same.

RAID0 (or "Suicide RAID") isn't really meant for your OS. It's more for a scratch drive, temp files, cache, etc. Stuff you 100% can do without. RAID0 increases your risk of data loss. Why would you want to run your OS on that???

For maximum uptime, multiple controllers are recommended. I'm guessing this isn't for a business system, just personal. A single card handling two RAID configurations is fine. Just remember that your CPU will be doing extra work (unless you get a "true", hardware, dedicated RAID card), so watch out if you have an older CPU.

PCI will limit you to way less than SATA II speeds. You want PCI-E or onboard (which should be PCI-E).

If you want the best (since you didn't mention OS), go with ZFS! RAID1 (2 drives) for your OS, and a RAID1 (2 drives), RAIDZ setup (3 drives) or RAID10 or RAIDZ2 setup (four drives) for your data.

Way more reliable and quicker than traditional RAID.

"RAID0 increases your risk of data loss. Why would you want to run your OS on that???"

Because its an OS - and there is no "DATA" to be lost with an OS. I would just reinstall or restore my last bare metal image image of my last backup. Time lost maybe what 30 minutes.

Unless this is a mission critical OS that can not go down on a drive failure, then raid 0 is fine for an OS. Since again there is nothing loss with a OS drive loss.

Sorry, I could have sworn I mentioned it in my initial post, guess I forgot.

I am planning to make the RAID0 array out of two SSDs and load my os, apps, and games on there.

And the RAID5 will be for storage and large files, which will be made up of four HDDs. Mostly disk images, video, etc. Typically non-executable data that doesn't need fast access times.

Practically nothing important that can't easily be re-installed/re-downloaded will be on the 0, plus its SSD, so any risks of data loss on it would be minimal, I want it purely for the performance gains.

And yes, its for a personal gaming/all-purpose rig, so performance for 0 and redundancy/fault-tolerance for 5 is the main importance, not uptime.

RAID0 doesn't double speed but it does increase it. You could just get a OCZ Revodrive which has a SSD RAID0 setup anyway.

In terms of RAID5 and the 'pci, pci-express does not make a difference' !? WHAT!? PCI has a theoretical maximum of 133MB/s transfer rate compared to up to 16GB/s with PCI-Express. For RAID, THAT DIFFERENCE IS HUGE!

DO NOT get a PCI raid card unless you are SURE the drives you are using are slow and old and you do not care about transferring taking a long time.

Looked up the RevoDrives, they are full of 1 out of 5 reviews on Newegg about them constantly failing after a few months, as well as costing more than just setting up a RAID0 would cost.

Never trust Newegg reviews. Get professional reviews.

Are some people posting on drugs or something?

First, if you are getting a RAID card, PCI-E. Don't even think about PCI. I don't even think there are new PCI RAID cards.

New and good (see below) RAID cards all support TRIM.

About above, if you can afford it, buy a hardware RAID card. Software RAID cards, although cheaper, will make you lose performance. I personally got a software RAID card for a (storage only) RAID5 and for now, it is more than enough for me.

And you are correct on putting non essential data (OS, apps, etc) on a RAID0. You WILL see a huge increase with SDD+Dedicated hardware RAID0 card+PCI-E. I think this cannot be stressed enough.

If I were you, Id use two seperete RAID controllers: One for your RAID5 another for your RAID0. Which on which is sketchy and depends what your hardware/software supports. Id put the RAID0 on the crappiest, featureless, slowest, etc controller you have since it is "not important". Also remember that most people do NOT consider RAID5 as a backup solution so yes, you will have a huge RAID5 but backing it up is a bitch...

I was talking to a few people and was told that no RAID cards support TRIM over 0, only the internal RAIDs on Intel 7 series motherboards, and that there would be very little performance difference between motherboard RAID 0 on SSD and a RAID card for RAID0 on SSD. So I guess I will have to look for a mobo with the 7-series chipset and use the card just for RAID5.

RAID0 (or "Suicide RAID") isn't really meant for your OS. It's more for a scratch drive, temp files, cache, etc. Stuff you 100% can do without. RAID0 increases your risk of data loss. Why would you want to run your OS on that???

180 degrees out of whack. I can easliy reinstall my OS. I use RAID 0 for performance which is why I install the OS and programs on it. DATA is stored on a RAID 5 for integrity.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      579
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!