M.2 vs raid 0 ssd

[Againstgraphics]

whats faster a raid 0 array of ssds (2 if you want to know) or a M.2 ssd??

 

[Outlander_04]

A x4 or x8 pci-e data drive
Speeds in the 2000 MB/sec range

Here are the x4's
http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/internal-hard-drive/#i=37
The x8's are way more expensive

To answer your question is a little harder . Theoretically the RAID can be faster , but not by much And RAID tends to be inconsistent compared to a fast single drive so it might work out roughly the same over all .
In the end the issue might be about pci-e lanes available on the mb . If you do use M.2 its easy to wind up with a mb with no spare lanes for add in cards

And the wild card is that some boards have two M.2 sockets [ which presumably can be RAIDed] . Very limited options there though

 

[USAFRet]

M.2
SSD + RAID 0 is no faster than a single larger SSD.

But you probably wouldn't notice either way.

 

[cirdecus]

depends, an array of SSD's is probably the fastest if you want to pay for it. You can put a massive amount of SSD's in an x16 RAID card and blow 2000 MB/Sec out of the water. I used to have a setup like this.

 

[Outlander_04]

You do have to be aware that some M.2 drives have a single 600 Mb/s controller chip . That makes them run at exactly the same speed as a SATA 3 drive

But more recent models run to higher speeds , and one would be my choice rather than RAIDed ssd's