Hello Karl, In my opinion, It will depend on the hardware architecture also. For instance, HP enterprise systems consist of cells(usually). Each cell contain some size of memory and a number of CPUs. Thus, if an operation uses CPU which requires more than a number of CPU which a cell contains, it will use the CPU on the other cell board. This means performance degradation due to the interconnection overhead between cell boards. Thus, a system having 8 CPUs which is multi-threaded may be better than 4+4 CPU in two cells or boards. Derya. On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Karl Arao <karlarao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > With the release of Intel (Nehalem) 5500 series, which is 45nm and I believe > also supports multicore and hyperthreading. There are some things going on > my mind..So from a single socket (Nehalem), quad core and HT enabled. You > could see 8 processors when you do cat /proc/cpuinfo > > But, from the performance perspective. Which is better? > > Having 8 physical CPUs? Or Having 1 Physical CPU with quad core and HT > enabled? > > (Well, we know the license implications of 8 physical CPUs).. :) > > But for the performance engineers and capacity planners. I'd like to hear > your opinion. > > - Karl Arao > > karlarao.wordpress.com > -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l