Gigabyte Raid or Intel Raid?

Lavans · **Memory**: 4GB DDR3 1500Hz 6-6-6-16

So my board allows me to have 6 SATA-II HDD's in raid via Intel drivers, and above that are two Gigabyte branded SATA-II plugs which allow for Gigabyte Raid. My question is, would there be a noticeable difference between the two?

I've already tested the Intel Raid drivers and it pretty much gives me 100mb/s average, but I can't get the Gigabyte Raid to work because Vista sees them as corrupt upon installation ( tried numerous versions here ).

EAK · 08-17-2009, 08:49 | posts: 426 | Location: Omaha, NE | User is Offline

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lavans

So my board allows me to have 6 SATA-II HDD's in raid via Intel drivers, and above that are two Gigabyte branded SATA-II plugs which allow for Gigabyte Raid. My question is, would there be a noticeable difference between the two?

I've already tested the Intel Raid drivers and it pretty much gives me 100mb/s average, but I can't get the Gigabyte Raid to work because Vista sees them as corrupt upon installation ( tried numerous versions here ).

I have a gigabyte board in rma right now. The gigabyte raid controller(Jmicron) burned up and was causing my mobo to lockup at boot. Short answer....use the intel. My gigabyte raid controller worked for about 3 months before it started screwing around. Performance wise, I didnt notice a difference between the 2.

acebmxer · 08-17-2009, 09:40 | posts: 152 | Location: New Jersey | User is Offline

i have used the gigabyte controller before the only problem i found where drivers had alot of issues from the drives being read only to the drives not showing up. Moved to intel raid controll and never looked back. Im not sure if you have to reinstall windows to move from the gigabyte to intel or vise versa but I had to for other reasons. I think it has to do if windows is installed on the raid drives vers a stand alone drive. speed wise im getting 150mbs on the intel with my drives dont remember what speed i was getting on the gigabyte but someone said on another forum that the intel is faster.

Lavans · **Memory**: 4GB DDR3 1500Hz 6-6-6-16

@acebmxer

Are you using all three of your hard drives in raid, or just two? I'm only getting about 98Mb/s average with a max of about 103Mb/s and a min of about 85Mb/s with just two.

lmimmfn · 08-17-2009, 16:18 | posts: 7,008 | Location: Ireland | User is Offline

gigabyte sata connectors on my x58 are crap, keep disconnecting drives and not being able to remount them without a reboot( also they'd get corrupted for not being disconnected properly ), i changed them to the intel ones yesterday and the drives work perfect now.

EAK · 08-17-2009, 19:22 | posts: 426 | Location: Omaha, NE | User is Offline

It seems that all of us who have responded agree on one thing: The gigabyte raid controller design and performance sucks!!

Lavans · **Memory**: 4GB DDR3 1500Hz 6-6-6-16

Quote:

Originally Posted by EAK

It seems that all of us who have responded agree on one thing: The gigabyte raid controller design and performance sucks!!

Lol, yeah. I said "eff this" after nearly 2 hours of trying to get Vista installed with the drivers.

acebmxer · 08-18-2009, 07:19 | posts: 152 | Location: New Jersey | User is Offline

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lavans

@acebmxer

Are you using all three of your hard drives in raid, or just two? I'm only getting about 98Mb/s average with a max of about 103Mb/s and a min of about 85Mb/s with just two.

I have 2 seagate 1tb drives raided and 1 300gb hdd as os drive all connected to yellow intel ports