Another issue thatis hasthe surfacedquestion inof recentsoftware businesslicensing development is the controversy over whetherfor multi-core processorsCPUs. shouldbeTypically treatedenterprise asserver separatesoftware CPUsis forlicensed software"per licensing requirementsprocessor". TypicallyenterpriseIn serverthe softwarepast isa licensedCPU perwas a processor, and somethere softwarewas manufacturersno feelambiguity. thatdualNow corethere processors,is whilethe apossibility singleof CPU,counting should be treatedcores as two processors and thecharging a customer should be charged for two licenses -when onethey foruse eacha dual-core CPU. However, the trend seems to be counting dual-core chips as a single processor as Microsoft, IBM, Intel, and AMD support this view. Oracle counts AMD and Intel dual-core CPUs as a single processor but has other funny numbers for other types. IBM and Microsoft count a multi-chip-module as multiple processors. If multi-chip-modules counted as one processor then CPU makers would have an incentive to make large expensive multi-chip-modules so their customers saved on software licensing. So it seems like the industry is slowly heading towards counting each die (see [[Integrated circuit]]) as a processor, no matter how many cores each die has. Intel has released Paxville which is really a multi-chip-module but Intel is calling it a dual-core. It is not clear yet how licensing will work for Paxville. This is an unresolved and thorny issue for software companies and customers.
