We wanted to have one server system representing each CPU platform, but because of some outside circumstances (see "How We Tested NT Platforms," on page 54) we were able to acquire only two systems--one Intel box and one Alpha-based server. Furthermore, we charged each vendor with picking the system that represented the best price/performance value. We got Compaq Computer Corp.'s latest Proliant 5000 with four 200-MHz/512-KB cache Pentium Pro processors and Digital's latest Alpha 5/300 processor. We ran our tests with the single CPU Digital AlphaServer and with one and four CPUs on the Compaq Proliant.

Which server is best for an enterprise running on NT? Based on the systems we tested, Intel machines offer the best price/performance, as well as the best long-term outlook--hardly a revelation. In addition, the AlphaServer 1000A, though it uses Digital's newest 5/300 processor, is really a low-end server, most suitable for workgroup or departmental applications, and we think a 2000 series AlphaServer would compete better with the Proliant 5000.

Where value is defined as price/performance, the Compaq Proliant, with either one or four CPUs, performed better than the Digital AlphaServer on our Microsoft Exchange messaging test. The Proliant 5000 with four CPUs was able to process a whopping 257,000 messages in a three-hour period--more than twice the Alpha's 110,000. For network file throughput--the ability for multiple clients to move files back and forth to the server via a shared network drive--the Proliant 5000 again was a better overall performer for the money.

One consistent result was that the single-processor Proliant 5000 was always behind in performance and value compared with the four-CPU Proliant. We expected this since Compaq has designed and priced the Proliant 5000 as a multiprocessor system, and our tests indicate that a single CPU is not the sweet spot for these servers.

On a dollar-per-message transaction basis using Microsoft Exchange 4.0, the Compaq Proliant performed better than the Digital AlphaServer, and it was consistently better on network file throughput, with one or four processors.

Furthermore, the Intel processor was supported across the board on our sample application listing, while Digital's Alpha garnered around 85 percent coverage. These statistics were solidified during our discussions with a variety of independent software vendors (ISVs), all of whom indicated that the Intel platform was their de facto platform of choice on which to compile applications--ostensibly because of the higher demand for Intel-compatible systems. This is not to say that the Digital Alpha is not a contender in the NT market. With its higher floating-point performance, Alpha-based systems are definitive players in the engineering workstation market. And when (or if) a 64-bit version of NT arrives, the AlphaServer is ready to support it, unlike the current 32-bit Pentium Pros.