Guys, if you really want SPEED, what you want to do is get 3 low capacity SSDs (e.g.; Intel 80 GB) and RAID 0 them. Capacity triples (so 3 x 80GB SSDs in RAID 0 is the same as running a single 240 GB SSD) but so does SPEED, as SSDs in RAID 0, unlike hard disks, scale in a linear fashion. This is what I did, and take a look at this:

Running more than 3 SSDs in RAID 0 just for speed is not worth it as three are already saturating the ICH10R bus. SSDs, having no mechanical parts, also have the advantage of being a lot more reliable and robust than hard disks in RAID 0. This said, backups are a must, but only because they are anyway.

Where do I get my degree, so I can understand all that?    

Jim, I have Windows 7 and many other programs like Photoshop CS5, Object Dock, and games like Mass Effect 2 on my 128 Gb SSD.

Here's a basic WinDirStat image of my SSD.

That's cool JcRabbit.

Yeah, I love my SSD, but dude... 3 of 'em in raid 0?  Sounds like fun.  But that's more than I need.

lol! Sorry, it sounds a lot more complicated than it really is. Once installed, the RAID 0 array of SSD drives behaves as transparently as a single SSD drive, only 3 times faster!

Trust me, you ain't lived until you've seen Photoshop open for the first time in 5 seconds flat!

I just timed Photoshop CS5 on my single SSD and it is under 5 seconds.

Now imagine if you had three of those in RAID 0. Would probably open even before you clicked the mouse button.

And I didn't mean appear on the screen, but be fully operational and responsive.

Dude, I have 15 GB of just programs in program files.

12 seconds first time...[update]....6 seconds second time....single SSD.

All my proggies are installed on the SSD [C drive] along with the OS [Win7 64bit]...but my UPS wants a Hiberfile and 12gig of ram is a big page so a 60gig drive is pretty 'full'.

Games.....they're all on a stone-age drive [I'd never afford a SSD that could fit all them...not in this lifetime]...

RAID 0 is the way to go if you don't need redundancy.

Ideally you would use a RAID 0+1 to mirror the data, which could give even higher read performance.

Honestly I would just go for either Raid 1+0 (no, its not same as 0+1), or 5. 5 is better imho.

No, not by a long shot.

Windows 7 with a typical proggy load [no games though] and 12 gig of ram fills 56 gig [169,944 files].

The root alone is 22.5gig [pagefile.sys and hiberfil.sys].

There ain't no room for another OS, not in my 60gig....  [the VMs are on another drive]

Seven and all that is installed is using 108 GB.

Vista and all that is installed (seperate drive)  using 64 GB.

The only thing to remember with a SSD is that writing to the drive will shorten the lifespan, and TRIM or garbage collection is a MUST.

I run just my OS and a few key apps and programs on my ssd the rest goes to one of my Data drives, disableing indexing, hibernate, pagefile.

IDK if I would move to a ssd unless I had windows7 or at least Vista.

RAID0 sucks when you throw a drive though, been there dont that with hdd's. I only RAID1 my Image hdd since there is to much to lose.

Anyway to the OP:

Here is a review of the 128gb Nova from HWC :

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/30146-corsair-nova-v128-solid-state-drive-review.html