For RAW, white balance is usually more about workflow than about permanently affecting color. The sensor data itself is not baked with white balance the way a JPEG is, so you can usually correct it later in Lightroom or another RAW editor, and many photographers simply use Auto WB.

That said, getting it close in camera can still help. It can save time in post, especially if you want previews on the camera LCD to look more natural, and makes batch editing easier when a whole set starts from a reasonable baseline.

One answer also notes that extreme white balance settings can affect how the image appears in processing, including the histogram/exposure you see when correcting later. So while WB is not “locked in” for RAW, being wildly wrong can make evaluation and editing less straightforward.

A gray card remains useful because it gives you a known neutral reference, even if you fine-tune later. And creative preference still matters: if 3200K or 3400K looks better than a measured value, that’s a valid choice.

So: for RAW, exact in-camera WB is not critical, but getting it roughly right is still useful for consistency, previews, and reducing post-processing work.