[SOLVED] Asus Z590 E-Gaming doesn't support RAID on slots 1 and 2

[MunsterTH]

Hello,

I have an Asus Z590 E-Gaming, Intel processor i9 11900K and 2 x Samsung 980 PRO + DDR4-3600 G.Skill Trident Z F4-3600C16D-64GTZR (2x32GB) - but I don't think that matters. The graphic card used is the on the motherboard. No overclocking involved.

Being on slots 1 and 2 (M.2_1 & M.2_2):

• The both Samsung 980 PRO are visible in EzMenu, I also could install Windows on one of them and see the second one in windows.
• But when it comes to RAID the IRST menu says ”No disks connected to system”.
• The HDD/SSD Smart Information doesn't see any device.
• Sata mode selection is IRST Premium with Intel Optane System Acceleration(RAID).
• I've updated the bios to latest version 0704, Date: 03/29/2021.
• Still nothing. The RAID option doesn't appear.

Being on slots 3 and 4 (M.2_3 & M.2_4):
- If I connect them on slot 3 and 4 I'm able to create the RAID 0/1 and install W10 x64 with the F6flpy-x64 (Non-Intel® VMD) drivers.

So, if anyone have any suggestion...

Thank you!

 

[MunsterTH]

Hello,

I have an Asus Z590 E-Gaming, Intel processor i9 11900K and 2 x Samsung 980 PRO + DDR4-3600 G.Skill Trident Z F4-3600C16D-64GTZR (2x32GB) - but I don't think that matters. The graphic card used is the on the motherboard. No overclocking involved.

Being on slots 1 and 2 (M.2_1 & M.2_2):

• The both Samsung 980 PRO are visible in EzMenu, I also could install Windows on one of them and see the second one in windows.
• But when it comes to RAID the IRST menu says ”No disks connected to system”.
• The HDD/SSD Smart Information doesn't see any device.
• Sata mode selection is IRST Premium with Intel Optane System Acceleration(RAID).
• I've updated the bios to latest version 0704, Date: 03/29/2021.
• Still nothing. The RAID option doesn't appear.

Being on slots 3 and 4 (M.2_3 & M.2_4):

• If I connect them on slot 3 and 4 I'm able to create the RAID 0/1 and install W10 x64 with the F6flpy-x64 (Non-Intel® VMD) drivers.

So, if anyone have any suggestion...

Thank you!

 

[geofelt]

First of all, what kind of raid are you looking for, and what do you wish to accomplish?
Generally, raid of any kind is a losing proposition on anything except a high availability server.

I think the reason why you can't use m1 and m2 is that the speeds will be different.
m1 can hndle pcie4 where others are pcie 3.

 

[MunsterTH]

First of all, what kind of raid are you looking for, and what do you wish to accomplish?
Generally, raid of any kind is a losing proposition on anything except a high availability server.

I think the reason why you can't use m1 and m2 is that the speeds will be different.
m1 can hndle pcie4 where others are pcie 3.

RAID 0
I did made the RAID 0 using slots 3 and 4. Any other combination of slots do not allow me to make a RAID configuration.
with 11th generations of processors slot 1 and 2 should work on PCIe 4.0 (64Gb/s).
watch the video below (on minute 06:08 you can see how should work).

 

[USAFRet]

I'll also ask...why the RAID array, either 0 or 1?

 

[MunsterTH]

I'll also ask...why the RAID array, either 0 or 1?

RAID 0 for better speeds

 

[geofelt]

Here are the specs for your motherboard:
https://rog.asus.com/us/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-z590-e-gaming-wifi-model/spec

In particular:
Raid function in Intel® Rapid Storage Technology is available with either 1. Intel® SSDs installed in both CPU-attached and PCH-attached slots, or 2. any other 3rd party SSDs installed in PCH-attached slots.

First time I have seen where intel ssd devices are the only ones supported.

 

[USAFRet]

RAID 0 for better speeds

While you may see some magical number in artificial benchmarks...outside of a very very few use cases, you will not see any actual user facing performance benefit.

Of course, if you have any published data showing otherwise, we'd all be more than happy to review.

 

[geofelt]

Raid-0 has been over hyped as a performance enhancer.
Sequential benchmarks do look wonderful, but the real world does not seem to deliver the indicated performance benefits for most
desktop users. The reason is, that sequential benchmarks are coded for maximum overlapped I/O rates.
It depends on reading a stripe of data simultaneously from each raid-0 member, and that is rarely what we do.
The OS does mostly small random reads and writes, so raid-0 is of little use there.
In fact, if your block of data were to be spanned on two drives, random times would be greater.
There are some apps that will benefit. They are characterized by reading large files in a sequential overlapped manner.

Here is a older study using ssd devices in raid-0.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-raid-benchmark,3485.html

And a newer report:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-950-pro-256gb-raid-report,4449-4.html

Spoiler... no benefit at all.

 

[Darkbreeze]

Spoiler... no benefit at all.

This.

 

[MunsterTH]

Thank you for your prompt responses.
I understand know, I don't like, but that's life.
Thank you once again!