The main reason I've used Alphas were they are cheap and have good
floating point performance. For $4K you get the equivalent of a
$12K+ workstation, which is a pretty good discount. I don't have
a 164SX but they are only mildly crippled, compared to a 164LX.
>From what I've seen they are no worse than 25% slower than an
an equivalent 164LX at the same clock rate. I tend to think that
is more a cache size difference, not necessarily a change in the
cache hierarchy. On some things it's probably close to the same
speed as the 164LX. You can get bare bones systems from
www.dgcinc.com for pretty reasonable prices and add what you like.
www.microway.com have some systems too as well as www.minotaur.net.
Keep in mind a new processor, the 21264 is close to release if
you're interested in the high end. I hope to see it available within
60 days so I can get one. I'm curious what it's pricing will be.
I hope at the MB/CPU level it's no more than $1K more than a
21164 at the same clock rate. I see 164LX MB/CPU's at $1500 or
so now.
If you want to hear about all the things that can go wrong, check
the redhat axp list. (start at www.redhat.com and look around)
>From what I've seen of Debian, they're using RH systems to
build their SW, at least initially since they aren't really ready
to release something. Though it looks like they are getting
closer, maybe by June. When they have a release available, I
plan on seeing how they've done.
If you look at just integer performance, I'm not sure I'd
recommend Alpha over PII's. Also, if I/O is your problem,
I'd say just stick to Intel and spend your money on good
SCSI adapters/disks instead. One other thing. If you choose
PII, make sure your MB uses high performance memory. I read
Intel is going to release faster MB's soon (90 days or so).
-- Regards,Wes