Im trying to have window see my raid 0 array. Please also note that I did research on google before coming on here.

Ok so i just bought a z87-deluxe Dual and trying to set 4 x 4tb drive in a raid 0

Im running window 7.

The wierd thing now is that when im in the bios i see that each drive are 4 tb and that they are actuly set as a raid 0 so from my understanding window should see only one drive that is 14.5 tb.

But instead I see 4 drive of 1.6 tb. Here is what post is outputing


and here we can see what i see in device manager.


any one have an idea ?

  • Is the BIOS set to RAID mode? Did you build/format the array? Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 19:10
  • 1
    @DavidSchwartz Yes the bios is set in raid mode and i did buid the array in the raid utility Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 19:14
  • 1
    The BIOS will show the individual drives. Windows should see a single drive. Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 19:15
  • RAID-0 is dangerous, especially with that many drives. You may want to do a RAID-5, or even better, a RAID-10.
    – Bigbio2002
    Commented Jan 29, 2014 at 18:25
  • @Bigbio2002 Raid 5 on that large of drives is also dangerous. Should you're RAID ever become degraded, it would take forever for it to rebuild.
    – kobaltz
    Commented Jan 29, 2014 at 18:35

3 Answers 3


You need to install the raid driver in Windows. For Intel, go to their downloads website and get the latest version of the Intel Rapid Storage Technology drivers for your system

  • 1
    So this motherboard is making a fake/solf raid ?? Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 20:50
  • 1
    You bet! Most consumer boards do Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 20:51

Assuming Windows 7 64-Bit, Given the information provided, most likely you are either running into a configuration problem or a limitation of older SATA chipsets.
1. Take a look at your RAID option-rom on the BIOS. This will give the base information that is being passed into the OS. If this doesn't properly say RAID 0 4x4TB = 14.5, etc, etc, then your resolution will be in reconfiguring the drives. 2. Right-Click my computer and click manage. Go to Disk Management. This will show physical drives (your big RAID 0...I know logically physical...), then the logical partitions on them, see what shows up in there. If it shows as a big drive in there you just need to reformat from inside windows. 3. If you are running into major snags at every turn, look into buying a Sata III chipset expansion card like this one from amazon http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009LIPHNC?tag=anan06-20

Disclaimer: RAID-0 gives you ZERO redundancy and multiple times the amount of Risk failure-wise. If just one of your disks fail, you'll lose all 14.5 TB of data. If I had 14.5 TB of storage, I would use RAID 5 or something to give myself a little redundancy.

  • 1
    The chipsets is prety new i think since it is a high end new motherboard Also i can see in the raid utility 4x4tb = 14.5tb but in window i see 4 drive of 1.6 if you dont mind vote the question one up so i can get enough rep to actuly upload a picture to show you guys what im seing in a photo. Also for that setup i do not need any redurancy i need speed and storage. if the content is lost that is not that bad. Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 19:22
  • 1
    Good to know, I just remember an epic fail I had in my college days with RAID 0 and now warn others when applicable :), waiting on picture.
    – RobLaw0304
    Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 19:32
  • 1
    :"P I did not got enough rep as it need 10 reputation to upload photo, But i did put a link with the photo i took of the pc booting up. Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 19:38
  • I Will also put a picture of what i see in device manager, in a few moment, Also thanks for your help it is very appreciated. Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 19:42
  • 1
    I can confirm that option rom is from February 2013, so it's probably new enough. It also appears to be set up and healthy, which is what I was questioning. Have you tried to go online and download the latest drivers for your board off the manufacturer's webpage?, also, how does the disk management utility look?
    – RobLaw0304
    Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 19:45

As someone mentioned above, We are assuming you are running Windows 7 64bit, however you never mentioned whether it is 32bit or 64 bit. If you are running the 32 bit version of Windows 7, that is going to be a problem. If I remember correctly the 32bit version of Windows will only see up to 2TB, whereas the 64bit version does not have that limitation. Based on your screenshot it looks like you are running 32bit Windows and that is why it only sees 1.6TB of the 4TB drive. I also noticed the drive you have are designed to be inside of a NAS, so the firmware running that disk may note work as well directly inside of a PC. Try a simpler 1TB drive to boot the OS, a WD Black drive is the performance drive.

Another thing to keep in mind once you do get that all sorted out, is that on a 4TB drive your actual usable space will most likely be less. It might end being something like 3.7TB usable per drive and then a little less due to the file system overhead. That is the whole 1000=1GB or 1024=1GB school of thought and drive manufactures tend to round up for marketing purposes.

Unless you need massive amounts of power and speed for your machine you could go a simpler root and use an external NAS like a Synology NAS for storage, they work very well, very fast and you should be able to use the drives you have in your rig in the NAS. With this NAS you can even have an iSCSI drive connected to the machine and it will act just like an internal drive with an NTFS filesystem even.

Another thing you could try is make the configuration simple, start out with one physical drive in your machine, make that the OS drive perhaps a 1TB WD Black drive, then add another 4TB drive once you have Windows fully installed and up to date. Next, check to see if Windows will see the 4TB of space on the drive. If as a standalone drive the OS does not see the full space or something close to it, it looks like the OS is the problem. Like I said, it looks like you are running a 32bit OS based on the screenshot, that would be the first place to start.

Best of Luck

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .