RAID Level Comparison Guide

Updated:

Choosing the right RAID level is a balance between capacity efficiency, fault tolerance, performance, and cost. This guide walks through the practical differences between the most common RAID levels and ZFS equivalents, so you can pick the right configuration for your workload before committing to hardware. Pair this guide with our RAID Calculator to model exact usable capacity and parity overhead for the disk count you have on hand.

What RAID actually solves

RAID (Redundant Array of Independent Disks) combines multiple physical disks into a single logical volume to improve performance, fault tolerance, or both. It is not a backup strategy — RAID protects against hardware failure of individual disks but does not protect against accidental deletion, ransomware, file corruption, or site-level disasters. Always pair RAID with a 3-2-1 backup plan.

Quick selection cheat sheet

  • Maximum speed, zero fault tolerance: RAID 0 (striping only, any disk failure destroys the array).
  • Simple redundancy for 2 disks: RAID 1 (mirror, 50% capacity efficiency).
  • Balanced capacity and redundancy: RAID 5 or RAIDZ1 (single parity, lose one disk worth of capacity).
  • Stronger redundancy for large arrays: RAID 6 or RAIDZ2 (double parity, survives two simultaneous disk failures).
  • High IOPS plus redundancy: RAID 10 (mirror of stripes, half raw capacity).
  • Very large parity pools: RAID 50 or RAID 60 (stripe of RAID 5/6 groups).

RAID 0 — Striping

RAID 0 splits data evenly across all member disks. Sequential read and write throughput scales nearly linearly with disk count, making it attractive for scratch space, video editing caches, or temporary build artifacts. However, if any disk fails, the entire array is lost. RAID 0 should never hold data you cannot afford to recreate.

RAID 1 — Mirroring

RAID 1 writes identical data to two (or more) disks. Read performance can improve since requests can be served from either disk, but write performance is limited to the slowest member. Capacity efficiency is 50% — half of your raw storage is consumed by the mirror. It is a common choice for boot drives and small but critical datasets.

RAID 5 / RAIDZ1 — Single parity

Both RAID 5 and ZFS RAIDZ1 distribute parity across all disks. You lose one disk worth of usable capacity in exchange for the ability to survive a single disk failure. They were the workhorse for medium arrays for many years, but with modern multi-terabyte drives, rebuild times can stretch into days, during which a second failure would be catastrophic. For arrays with disks larger than 4 TB, consider RAID 6 or RAIDZ2 instead.

RAID 6 / RAIDZ2 — Double parity

RAID 6 and RAIDZ2 use two parity blocks per stripe, so the array can survive two simultaneous disk failures. This is the recommended baseline for arrays of 6 or more disks, or any pool using disks 4 TB or larger. The trade-off is slightly slower writes (two parity calculations) and two disks worth of capacity lost to parity.

RAID 10 — Mirrored stripes

RAID 10 (also written as RAID 1+0) creates a stripe of mirrored pairs. It offers excellent random read and write IOPS, predictable rebuild times (one disk copied from its mirror), and tolerates multiple disk failures as long as no mirror pair fails entirely. The cost is 50% capacity efficiency. It is the preferred layout for transactional databases and high-IOPS workloads.

RAID 50 and RAID 60 — Striped parity groups

RAID 50 and RAID 60 stripe data across multiple RAID 5 or RAID 6 sub-groups. They are designed for very large arrays where a single parity group would have impractical rebuild times. The exact capacity and fault tolerance depend on how the groups are configured, so always verify the topology with your storage vendor or model it before purchase.

RAIDZ1, RAIDZ2, RAIDZ3 — ZFS parity

ZFS uses its own parity levels: RAIDZ1 (single parity, like RAID 5), RAIDZ2 (double parity, like RAID 6), and RAIDZ3 (triple parity, no direct hardware RAID equivalent). RAIDZ benefits from ZFS features like end-to-end checksums, copy-on-write, and snapshots, which provide stronger data integrity guarantees than traditional hardware RAID.

Rebuild risk and modern drive sizes

As individual drive capacity has grown to 18 TB and beyond, the time required to rebuild a failed drive in a parity-based array has grown with it. During a rebuild, every remaining drive is read end-to-end, increasing the chance of an unrecoverable read error (URE). This is why double-parity layouts (RAID 6, RAIDZ2) are now the recommended baseline for arrays larger than 4 disks, regardless of drive size.

FAQ

Is RAID a substitute for backups?
No. RAID protects against single-drive hardware failure, but it cannot recover from accidental deletion, ransomware, filesystem corruption, controller failure, or site-level disasters. Always maintain offline or off-site backups in addition to any RAID configuration.
Which RAID level is best for a home NAS with four 8 TB drives?
RAID 6 or RAIDZ2 is generally the safest choice. You sacrifice two drives of usable capacity but gain double-parity protection, which is important during the lengthy rebuild of an 8 TB drive.
Can I mix drive sizes in a RAID array?
Most implementations will work, but the usable capacity of each drive is limited to the smallest drive in the array. Mixing drive ages or models also reduces reliability because the array is more likely to lose multiple drives in a short window.
What is a hot spare and do I need one?
A hot spare is an additional drive that the controller automatically uses to start a rebuild when another drive fails. It reduces the window during which the array is degraded. For arrays with more than 6 disks or critical data, a hot spare is recommended.

In summary

Match the RAID level to your tolerance for downtime, rebuild risk, and capacity cost. For most modern arrays of four or more disks, RAID 6 or RAIDZ2 is the safe default. Reserve RAID 0 for scratch workloads only, use RAID 10 when IOPS matter, and always keep an independent backup.

Outils associés