RE: Opinons?

> From: Jones, John (US)
> 
> I'd still say the extra money for 3.4+GHz isn't worth it in your
> situation.  You may do better to get an extra GB of RAM instead.  BTW,
> Kingston & other 3rd parties have compatable RAM that's a fair bit
> cheaper than IBM-brand:
>
http://www.ec.kingston.com/ecom/configurator/modelsinfo.asp?SysID=19842&;
>
mfr=IBM&model=eServer+xSeries+226+%288648&Sys=19842-IBM-eServer+xSeries+
> 226+%288648-xxx%29&distributor=0&submit1=Search

I'll look into that after I have the machine up.  I can always add
another GB, right?  A GB for $300 is a good deal.  With the discount,
though, the IBM memory is down to about $240/GB, which is tough to beat.


> Hey, my comments were made as someone who uses a 15K boot disk on his
> home PC.  Yeah, it is a ton faster (my wife's PC had a 10K SCSI disk).
> The question, though, is how important is disk performance after
things
> load up?  WDSC, WAS, Java, etc. are RAM pigs; more RAM may be a better
> choice than the more expensive disk.

With WDSC, there are noticeable lags as you swap from one perspective to
another, and I'm certain that's due to class loading issues.  It's my
theory that Java classloading will be greatly improved with faster
drives.  Also, no matter how much memory you get, there comes a point
where things swap.  It's my contention that the JVM is not very good at
optimizing swapping, and that faster disks will help that.  We'll see if
my theories hold water, eh?

Joe