Why the fuck would you ever do that? SATA has a bottleneck speed.

The only time raid 0 is appropriate is for PCIE or m.2 SSDs.

>>54733047
Should have said *SATA's speed is bottlenecked

>>54733036
Only if the the workload requires a ridiculous amount of IO and PCIE SSDs are too expensive.

>>54733047
Baka desu thats why you use two ssd to overcome satas limitation

Some SSDs get hampered on performance when you simultaneously read+write. As opposed to read-only on one SSD and write-only on the other SSD.

Imagine unzipping a folder these two scenarios:
#1 [(source) [SSD 1] (destination) [SSD 2]
vs
#2 (source) [RAID 0] (destination) [RAID 0]

>>54733036

Honestly, it wouldn't be that much of an improvement you're better off just merging them together to form one large drive, rather than raid them.

>>54733036
It seems you have never searched YouTube for SSD raid tests. It will blow your mind.

>>54733036
>Are running 2 SSDs in RAID 0 actually worth it over 1 SSD
Do you need double the throughput of a single drive? What the fuck do all these "is it worth it" questions even mean? How the fuck can I know what's "worth it" to you?

>>54736831
Why are you so angry?

>>54733036
I think at that price point you're better off dropping SATA altogether

m.2 is the future