RAID 5 in Windows 10

[golden_inferno]

So I just built a new media computer and instead of using a raid card (currently ARECA 1210, its about 8 years old) I planned on doing a software Raid 5 windows 10. what worries me it took all of a minute to build its 3x 4tb drives it should have taken days like when I used the controller card.
Is this normal? I was trying to go for low price but now I'm wondering if I should by a cheap raid controller and if so which one?
So my comp specs are below
16gb ram
Intel G2158
Asrock H97M mobo
3x 4tb Seagate HDD

 

[Calculagator]

For your setup, I think what you are doing is the way to go. It will be much faster than an old RAID card. It will certainly be easier and faster to rebuild/replace drives if anything goes wrong. I think Windows Storage Spaces is mature enough to be great for home use. It may use more CPU and RAM than a RAID card, but you have more than enough of both of those.

 

[popatim]

Any of the cheap raid5 cards would be software raid and no better than the motherbd raid you are using now.

 

[FireWire2]

There is nothing wrong with your existing card ARECA 1210 - it's ten time better than ANY motherboard RAID, That is why it takes minute compare to days from motherbd

Are you sure, there is software RAID5 in Windows 10? I'm not aware of that.

Here is a good thread about MB raid vs dedicate RAID card.

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2882536/intel-chipset-raid-dedicated-raid-controller.html

 

[golden_inferno]

Yep there is software in windows and they revamped it in 10 from what I have done so far its pretty nice. But like I said it took about a day to build my raid 5 with the card and it took minutes with W10 which seemed odd

 

[FireWire2]

SLOW rebuild / initialization is an expect thing in raid5 in motherboard.

If you're using IDE, that is even worst... the issue here is not much of parity calculation - can see there is not a whole lots of CPU resources being taken, but rather handing all the IRQ are sending from those HDD to the CPU, that botch down the system.

Over ten years ago we wrote a routine to check how many IRQ was send in a ODD, it was 9K time per second, and IDE HDD about 6K, SATA I is about 4K

Last time we check SATAII about 3.5 ~ 4K IRQ was send. Now quadruple that over 12K times IRQ is sent to CPU, now add up the parity calculation .. there is no time left for CPU to do ANYTHING.

Let face it, if mother board can handle raid5/6 nicely, why all the IT professional not using it...

CPU's time taken away due to IRQ IS the issue.

Now let do the right thing - use hardware RAID. 🙂

 

[Calculagator]

@FireWire2 Your info is just way out of date/irrelevant to the question. The OP isn't using "onboard" RAID. He's using the software "RAID" built into windows. It isn't the same thing. While hardware RAID is still very common, Windows Storage Spaces is used by a lot of IT Pros as is ZFS and other hardware RAID alternatives.
Here's some fun technical info:
http://sp.ts.fujitsu.com/dmsp/Publications/public/wp-windows-storage-spaces-performance-ww-en.pdf

 

[FireWire2]

@FireWire2 Your info is just way out of date/irrelevant to the question. The OP isn't using "onboard" RAID. He's using the software "RAID" built into windows. It isn't the same thing. While hardware RAID is still very common, Windows Storage Spaces is used by a lot of IT Pros as is ZFS and other hardware RAID alternatives.
Here's some fun technical info:
http://sp.ts.fujitsu.com/dmsp/Publications/public/wp-windows-storage-spaces-performance-ww-en.pdf

Certainly you need to know more about storage! my friend ;-)
My post never post an IRQ issue with SAS bus
Do you know what is the different of IRQ usage between SAS and SATA buses?! I don't think you do 🙂