I realize that you are shooting for the best performance but when you run raid 0, you triple your chance of a system failure. As I'm sure you know, if you loose a drive in raid 0, you loose everything.
If I were you, I'd run raid 5 with 3 drives. You get that same read speed as raid 0 and you have some data security to boot.
You don't get exactly the same, because the way RAID 5 is setup, it can cause a little slower access times, but people talking about RAID 0 being "exponentially increased chance of failure" is getting annoying, and anybody with years of experience in RAID's (such as myself) won't read a website that says "RAID 0 increases system failure" because all drives are the same, if you have 5 independent drives being accessed at once vs. a RAID 0 of 5 HDD's, there's the same chance of losing data, though you won't lose everything with the former, the chance is the same, not increased with the RAID.
I'm sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree with you. The more points of failure in a system, the higher the chance that the system will fail. The chances of failure with 1 out of 3 hard drives are greater than the chances of a single drive. Lets say that "Joe's Hard Drive Company" has a failure ration of 1 our of 1,000 produced drives. If you purchase 1 of Joes drives your chance of failure is 1 in a thousand. If you purchase 3 hard drives from Joe, it goes from 1/1000 to 3/1000 or 1/333. Every manufacturing company on earth has a ratio of product failure to product produced. The work hard to keep the ratio low but it's impossible to eliminate it as long as humans are involved in the process. Therefore, if you purchase 3 hard drives from a company, the odds are better that you'll have one that fails prematurely than if you had only purchased one. I'm not trying to talk down to you or anyone, I'm just trying to show you the flaw in your logic.
As far as your statement goes with raid 0 vs. raid 5 read speed, the differences are negligible at best. Where you loose on performance with raid 5 over raid 0 is in the write performance because it has to write to the disks and it has to write the parody bits also.
I also hapen to be a huge subscriber and victim of Murphy's law. I've lost 3 raid 0 partitions of my own when the ones I built identical to my own for friends still work to this day. Go figure. If it were me, I'd run raid 5 with a hot spare or even raid 6. I hate reloading my system.