I have heard that it is possible to run up to 40 camera's on single computer, but what about the possibility of 40 cameras per core?

By having multiple operating systems on the same computer I can reduce power consumption as well as produce more redundancy. The redundancy can be used in the beta testing as well. Imagine one operating system dedicated to Version 1 Bluecherry and another to Version 2 Bluecherry. Or run different versions of version 2. Each would have its own processor, but each would share data from the same DVR card. I would never have to worry about an update killing my entire surveillance. 

More cameras? Yes please. With a virtualization I can simaltanously run as many operating systems as processor cores. I could theoretically build a duel xeon hyperthreaded 6 core server. Hyperthreading doubles your availible cores. Resulting in 2 x 12 core processors in one machine. If 40 cameras can run on one processor, and there are 24 processors availible, totalling 960 cameras on a single tower!

960 camera on a single tower?!? Its not likely for the sheer bulk of cables and cards. However, 96 camera should not be out of the question. 6 DVR cards on a single motherboard. 2 DVR cards per Virtualized operating system.

Vitalization is now common practice. Companies that had 8 different boxes for 8 different services can now run all those services on a single machine with the same separated security. The problem of all your eggs in one basket was solved by running 2 machines mirrored with the same services. Its highly unlikely for 2 systems to both go down with the regular power precautions. I assume to if you spliced the video cable an fed it to two machines it would have the same redundant effect.