Hardware Raid Controller or Not

It is for a server. Small server. I have always been told hardware RAID too but  I am not sure if that philosophy isn't changing. The reason I always heard was that it relieves the processor of the burden but now processors are so outpacing everything else that maybe it isn't a problem any more?

Most good RAID controllers come with cache batteries as an added safety factor

I wish there was a date stamp on that article. There was no mention of PMC or Microsemi and the said RAID 6 was new. All things considered the article seems a little old. Was there a date on it?

On a side note I have been a big fan of Adaptec since Netware 2.X but no more. They go from Adaptec to PMC to Microsemi then to add insult to injury they give up Storage Manager and go to MaxView where even with the latest you can't email on any port other then 25. They have gone to the dogs......

I am kind of waiting for Rindi to weigh in. He is a big proponent of OS RAID. When you look at the cost of a server (just hardware) a good RAID Controller with batter backup is around 20-25% of the whole server.  That's a bunch.

Adaptec Article was from January 2016, so its not super old or super new.
Here are some more recent articles. (Ignore whether its MAC, Windows or Linux, its the technology that matters)

7 hours old
June 13, 2016
May 8, 2016

I hope these help. Not as thorough as whitepaper, but more recent for sure comparing the info.

Rindi I hate to say this but I have contacted manufacturers directly and they support the two statements above about RAID 5 and TRIM. I have read several articles on RAID 5 and they all say the same thing. The only draw back is the time to rebuild. Can you provide me with articles that support your case? Especially the TRIM. Samsung did a test that more or less stated that the life expectancy of a MLC drive (even without TRIM) was so long (on the magnitude of 75 years) that all the manufacturers have all but dropped TLC just because it isn't needed. Shoot me some supporting docs please. What is your definition of "not lasting long"?

Thanks for the articles Maclean. PJam says the same thing and it is what I have heard for 25 years. Nothing beats hardware raid...... the problem not is who's hardware raid. Everyone keeps getting bought out.... who is the standard?

I would tend to agree pgm554. I have heard the same. Raid 0 or 1 from the sata ports on the motherboard should enable TRIM. The problem with Hardware RAID Controller is that TRIM does not work. As soon as you interject a RAID Controller TRIM is out of the picture.

Here is a CNET article https://www.cnet.com/how-to/how-ssds-solid-state-drives-work-increase-lifespan/

States that if you write 50GB a day, every day, to a SSD is will probably last 12 years. What they don't say is if that is with TRIM enabled or not. The way the article is written would lead you to believe that is without TRIM. The computer will die long before the SSD even with TRIM disabled...

Software can have benefits, depending on your requirements as per articles.
My own experience, I ensure that my ESXI, Acropolis or HyperV Physical servers have Vendor or Adaptec HW RAID.
Adaptec has been around for many many years, and from my personal view is the standard to go with.

If my server is a physical DC, then I don't care too much, Software RAID will do if it does not have a build in RAID which is rare.

Considering you are using SSD, the benefit of a hardware RAID for performance reasons is debatable.
I mean you are going to get plenty of IOPs with SSD. Not sure if the fraction of seconds with Hardware Raid for SSD validates added cost. However security and stability wise, I would recommend hardware RAID.

Software is software and more prone to external influence/erroring.
And if using hardware RAID, use either vendor supplied and supported controller, or find an Adaptec compatible with your system.