> The single 1.2 GHz processor is the way to go. $750 with 2MB L3 cache. > Benchmarks on the PowerLogix site show dual 1.2 GHz not worth the extra > money nor heat. > http://www.powerlogix.com/products2/performance/s100.html This is a really bad way to evaluate the effectiveness of multiple CPUs in real world use, because the single tasks being measured have a bottleneck through one processor. In other words, It's only remotely valid if are only ever trying to do one thing on your computer at once - in other situations the OS will distribute different processes across the CPUs. You'll see some improvement on the benchmarks because some tasks will run on the second CPU, but you won't see anything close to the full utilization you're likely to experience in daily use with multiple tasks running Beware using benchmarks without fully understanding the architecture.