Windows 7 does not support 4TB on RAID-0

pilsburypie

pilsburypie

pilsburypie

Associate
Joined
30 Jun 2011
Posts
335
Location
Birmingham UK
I have 2 x 2TB drives tried to set up on RAID-0 but apparently Windows 7 does not recognise 4TB in RAID-0.

Anyone have any opinions or advice on this? Or am I limited to 2 x 1TB discs?
 
Apparently your really wrong.... whats up with your config? I have 6TB running in my computer with no issues.

Stelly
 
pilsburypie said:
I have 2 x 2TB drives tried to set up on RAID-0 but apparently Windows 7 does not recognise 4TB in RAID-0.

Anyone have any opinions or advice on this? Or am I limited to 2 x 1TB discs?
Click to expand...
What do you mean by "doesn't recognise"? Have you created the array ok? Does it show in disk management? Remember you'll need to set the array as GPT rather than MBR in disk management.
 
I hear what you say but this is from a pre built OCUK system. I spoke on the phone today and they told me this was the issue with my brand new specced machine (windows 7 issue). I had to take the drives out and send them back to order replacement 1TB drives. In disk management the drives showed up on the same "disk 0 bar" but as 2 saparate blocks each approx 2TB. I could create new simple volume on the one, but not on the other, that option was greyed out.....

How would I have set GPT? Had a 20 minute conversation with them today trying to sort it but no luck.

So to cut to the chase, there is no reason the 2 x 2TB drives shouldn't be seen as a single 4TB drive? Can some kind soul provide an idiot guide on how to set the RAID 0 as GPT?

Much appreciated
 
Last edited:
If the disks are showing as 2 x 2TB in Disk Management then I'd suggest they haven't been set up in RAID 0.

If they were set up as RAID 0 then they should show as a single 4TB drive.

The RAID array needs setting up in the BIOS.

I believe (correct me if I'm wrong someone) that you only need to worry about GPT if you want to boot from a drive larger than 2TB.

May I ask why 4TB in RAID 0?

How do you plan on backing up that data in case of a disk or array failure?
 
Surveyor said:
If the disks are showing as 2 x 2TB in Disk Management then I'd suggest they haven't been set up in RAID 0.

If they were set up as RAID 0 then they should show as a single 4TB drive.

The RAID array needs setting up in the BIOS.

I believe (correct me if I'm wrong someone) that you only need to worry about GPT if you want to boot from a drive larger than 2TB.

May I ask why 4TB in RAID 0?

How do you plan on backing up that data in case of a disk or array failure?
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply - I'm interested in your thoughts on my 4TB in RAID-0. The reason for this is that the PCs main use is photo and HD video editing. The idea was that the read/write speeds would be faster which my research suggested would be beneficial for this. So far I only have 700GB of HD video footage but I thought that in a couple of years this would be more like 3TB, hence the need for a large amount of space for future proofing.

Backup wise would be external drives - 1-2TB added as I needed....
 
I'll begin by assuming you have an Intel system.

Start by installing Intel RST.

Version 10.8.0.1003 here (the 6.89MB file)

Version: 11.2.0.1006 here (the 12.35MB file)

The newer version 11 is designed specifically for Intel motherboards.

It may install on non-Intel boards or it may not.

When you have Intel RST installed then open the program and tell us what it says about your disks and if they're in an array.
 
Thanks for your info. I would do if I had the drives still in. I was advised to return for a refund and get 2 x 1TB drives. Although returned, I haven't ordered the replacements yet.

What are your views on the RAID 0 for my usage? Will there be extra performance for the added risk of data spread over 2 drives?
 
Ah, sorry I missed the bit that you'd already returned them.

In theory 2 drives in RAID 0 would double the performance but it's not necessarily that good in practice.

You're also probably more than doubling the chance of something going wrong.

If one disk fails all the data is gone (so double the chance with 2 disks) but there's also possibility of the RAID setup just throwing a wobbly possibly leading to the same result.

Perhaps you'd be better with a fast 3TB disk (if you need that much storage): Seagate Barracuda 3TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s 64MB Cache - OEM £129.98

Cheaper than two 1TB disks and you could perhaps get another one to use as a backup.

Seems to have pretty decent performance: Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 3TB Benchmark (ST3000DM001) & SATA2 vs SATA3

How much differene the read/write speeds compared to a RAID 0 array would make to your uses I don't know.

What has your research told you?
 
Well, the feedback I got from asking questions was very similar to your thoughts. Pretty much doubling the risk of failure. But that's what backups are for.

It seemed to be if the opinion that the editing and rendering could benefit from the faster RAID 0 setup. Seeing as I have spent a fair whack creating a highly specced video editing machine I thought this seemed logical to maximise performance. But for me the only real test would be to have the same machine render out a video clip with a single drive and then a RAID 0 array to compare.

As I said my knowledge is based on others opinions - right or wrong as they may be!
 
It depends what the space is used for. 4TB of video footage MIGHT not be that important as an ongoing concern. I roll with the array in my sig but it's still not bullet proof. I don't backup everything on it, only the important/irreplacable bits.
 
btw guys, just to let you all know that you can't install Windows 7 on the latest Intel RST. The drivers that are supplied within the Windows wim do not support them, I have to remove the drivers manuall from the windows wim and then add them myself.

Stelly
 
Unless you have a very highly spec'd machine and are using a lot of graphics card acceleration for rendering, streaming I/O off the disk is unlikely to be an issue for you. If it is because you're using raw HD video, I'd suggest doing all your rendering to and from a 256G SSD on a SATA3 interface. That's going to be 2x as fast as your 4TB RAID 0 of mechanical drives in streaming data rates and 100x as fast in access times if you're doing random reads/writes. It will also benefit photo editing which can do a lot of random reads on your data if you're browsing quickly back and fore through your catalogue. The significantly higher access times of the HDD are going to hit you badly there.

In fact, I haven't used RAID 0 for a number of years after a 500G drive died in one and it was a pain to get everything back (my backup strategy changed after that incident ;)) and the 1TB drives arrived with 100+MB/s I/O.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom