This is a fair question, but with no good answer. In the benchmark wars the individual manufacturers will will throw as many cores/processors/CPUs at the problem as they can be effective with. But there's always (except in some very weird circumstances) a "law of diminishing return" -- the second core will only add 60-80%, the third core less than that, etc. (And this assumes a problem that is sufficiently multi-threaded to actually make use of the added cores.)
So you can't look at a given benchmark and assume that twice as many cores will provide twice the performance. In fact, in some cases you could double the number of cores and actually reduce performance. Achieving good performance in a highly multi-threaded application is somewhere between an art and black magic.
(I'll add that this is one reason why manufacturers like to increase clock speed rather than add more cores/CPUs -- performance tends to scale better/more predictably with increased clock speed than it does with added cores/CPUs.)