>What is the ideal hardware configuration for SQL Server 2000? We have about 2 dozen databases - ranging in size from 500 MB up to 90 GB. All databases have very heavy traffic from multiple users on the same app. There are about 8 reads for every write, averaging about 8 million writes per 24-hour period.
>
>Currently we have these databases split across 2 servers with 4 2.4 Ghz hyperthreaded processors and have 8 GB of RAM. The disks are 10,000 RPM SCSI, and are all in one very large physical disk array split into 2 logical drives per server. Logs and data for multiple databases are all sharing the same array.
>
>Performance is becoming a pressing issue. Our Network administrator is 100% that the hardware configuration is not an issue, and I am 100% convinced it is at least a major part of the issue. Does anyone here feel that it may be the issue?

Its depend on the applications which you run on the server side. Its depend on how many users hit the server.
Your network administrator is partialy right. Usually when we start to develop some SQLserver application - part of the envisioning is defining of hardware and number of users, simultaneous connections to server(hits per second), etc.
According them we develop application in different way.
If all this is taken into accound your NetAdmin is right - the hardware configuration is not an issue. Some times well done software application can overtake lack of powerful hardware.
When you have server, which should serve 100000 users with 100 hits per second it realy need strong database server.

According described - you should reduce your traffic using advantages of SQLserver - SP, UDF, triggers, etc.
HTH