Single Quad-core cpu vs 2 x Single Core cpus

[Vizion]

Hi, my manager wants more processing power to creating builds more quickly while doing other tasks so he needs a lot of horsepower. One thing he asked me was that if he should buy a workstation with 2x single core processors or get 1x Quad-Core Kentsfield processor. I suggested him to go with the quad-core since it's better technology, less expensive(multi-processor motherboards cost more), lower latency between processors, etc... He seems to agree but just want what everyone thinks of my suggestions :D

Thanks.

[shogo_ca]

Quad core (QX6700 or Q6600). You can also get 2 quad core (Xeon 5355) for 8 core madness but its starts to get pricey eheh.

Two single core are reallly bad idea... The only single core processor are working on the old Intel Architechture (Netburst) Hyperthreading..

Two Single core 3.6ghz Xeon Hyperthreaded pretty much equals to using a core 2 Duo running at 2.0ghz... So imagine Quad Core @ 2.4ghz or 2.67ghz

Keep in mind that dual cpu motherboard needs Pricey Ram, ECC ...FB-DIMM ... not regular DDR2.... so its even worse.

[[XC] DragonOrta]

Bar none, a quad.

[Revv23]

yup quad core...

if he still wants a server platform tell him to get two quad's :p:

[Vizion]

So my suggestion was good. :D Yeah, the budget for each workstation is $3500, because my boss is going to throw in dual 24" LCD monitors for each team member, and we have 8. We're going to buy pre-configured workstations and monitors from HP because we have contract with them and they'd give good discount.