> > > For workstation I would say add a Mac, for server a sparc64.
> >
> > because of what (i mean sparc64)?
>
> My thoughts:
> 	o  Current / actively sold CPU architecture.
> 	o  64-bit, which is what all the x86 guys are trying for.

why it's so important?

most cases i see 64-bit architecture just as needing much more memory
bandwidth.

> 	o  Sun systems have a "real machine" image in the market.

have or had?

> > is it fast in given price (the answer is no AFAIK)?
>
> Nothing beats the x86 at pure price / performance, when performance is
> measured in cpu speed and sequential disk transfers.

i mean real performance which is generally much better in high-end PC's
than high end SUN's except SUN's with more than 4 CPUs (just because PC's
can't scale above)

> I think the sparc64 boxes can be reasonable when you're thinking about
> a headless server with many disks and concurrent i/o operations.

not being able to start headless is a big problem in PC (biosboot_com0* is
partial solve, but not if you have to run BIOS setup).

> Still probably not cheaper than x86 with a 3ware or something, but since

or just good SCSI.

does 3ware allow REALLY concurrent access to all drives as they advertise
it?

> Admittedly the sparc64 port is less robust than i386, but the hardware
> is (hopefully) designed to be more reliable, IMHO.

with reliability - that's true.

but good PC-style machines are not as bad as you say.

PS. will be very happy to be able to buy non-intel architecture machine
with reasonable price.

any known way to expand RAM in PSX2? :)