RAID 0 on Intel ICH10R Vs Marvell 88SE9128

I've recently setup a RAID0 of two SATA 3 (6Gb/s) HDD, on a Asus P6X58D-E.
HDD can not reach theorical efficiencies of SATA 3 because of mechanical limits, but in RAID0 configuration,
such limit can be overriden.
So there was 2 choices:
 - 2 HDD in SATA 3 mode on Marvell 88SE9128 controller
 - 2 HDD in SATA 2 mode on Intel ICH10R controller (2011 specifications update)

For the greatest efficiencies, the reflex is to use the Marvell 88SE9128 controller to benefit from SATA 3 mode.
Despite 2 installation attempts, the system was instable, and performances were drastically variable (easily seen with various Benchmarks).
In addition, it was impossible to get SMART information on any of the HDD.
Because all I've then read on Web was against Marvell, BIOS (1.0.0.1019), and drivers (1.0.0.1036) were up to date, I try Intel ICH10R.

It's as quick and easy as to setup RAID0 on Intel ICH10R controller than on Marvell 88SE9128 controller; but that's where the comparison ends.

The read/write efficiencies are greater with Intel ICH10R controller (despite in SATA 2 mode, instead of SATA 3) and very constant. System is as stable as it can be.
The Intel Rapid Storage is interesting to get quick Health information, and there is no problem to get SMART information for each HDD of the RAID.

This is an interesting article comparing these 2 controllers.

For HDD, I think there is no hesitation to have, Intel ICH10R controller is far more better.
Maybe for SSD, for which it is possible to reach SATA 3 theorical limit, Marvell 88SE9128 controller can be better ?
It is another story ...