Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Windows 7 is becoming ubiquitous and offers a simple software RAID solution within the OS. Modern desktop Linux distros have good software RAID capability as well.
But mid to high end motherboards still ship with fake RAID chipsets.

Responses to an old post mostly recommend the Windows RAID over the fake RAID, and this post mostly says there is no advantage to fake RAID.

So why are these multi-billion dollar hardware companies wasting money developing and building fake RAID chipsets?

Do situations exist where the fake RAID is useful or even desired? When would you ever want to use the motherboard's on-board RAID?

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Keltari, Linker3000, Nifle, Diogo, 8088 Oct 9 '11 at 14:17

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

    
My best reason for my psudo hardware raid, With Split Raid (0) is it Stays together, today tomorrow , in linux in xp in win7 , and even in win98 :-) I would not care if the windows version of it was 10% faster, it would not help if it does not Stay together from the bios foreward. I am 99.9% using windows, but the integrity of my data exists for that last .1% For Mirror raid only , I would want to analise how often people were getting the rebuild. everytime I hear the word rebuild I can imagine how painfull that must be. Comparing or Copying 1T at todays speeds, uggggg. – Psycogeek Oct 9 '11 at 13:28
1  
Your right, and I am making the comments messy. The faux raid chip is working, doing a job, for raid0 there is minimal processing required. A "Real raid" advantage is processor and ram, with raid0 it isnt used much, the Controller is where the work is. The faux raid highpoint (pos) is 2 controllers , it has some advantage, even IF the OS is the one using them. Does the OS become a controller? So it is hardware raid :-) even if the OS is going to do the parity? If it is Raid0 where is the parity? Where is most of the work being done, either way? Unless data is to be processed. – Psycogeek Oct 9 '11 at 14:21
1  
I do not know how much of the Splitting is done in them, but a "fake raid" card, has tiny bits of memory, and seems to be capable of the raid0 Redirections. But When it comes to Parity and comparing and rebuilding , only the "real" raid card is going to "do most of the work" , So indeed with what your talking about any thing without its own processor is fake, and only $$$ is going to fix that. As much as a full processor & ram raid card costs, I suspect that the motherboards would costs a lot more? – Psycogeek Oct 9 '11 at 14:46
1  
Lulz. Fail question. Hardware raid, software raid. They both use hardware and software. – surfasb Oct 10 '11 at 2:36
1  
Fail question? Nobody is giving me a straight answer. I can't believe the multi-billion dollar hardware makers are wasting money on a feature which is worthless. There must be times when this feature is advantageous. – steampowered Oct 10 '11 at 2:46

It looks good on a bullet list of features, it works across operating systems, and it makes operating system installation to a RAID array simpler.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.