I just realised the memory in my UDOO x86 board (N3160 version) is single channel which not matches the specs "Dual Channel" in Kickstarter campaign page and product page. Hence the speed test is a typical single channel memory result. As far as I know, there are no options to control single/dual channel in BIOS or somewhere else so it is unlikely that I set something wrong. I felt so disappointed because I considered it was a feature (so as UDOO) when I decided to support. I suspect there are some changes when in bulk production since I notice in this video, the board on desk has 2 SODIMM. I post this just want to get some explaination from UDOO about making products that don't matching the specs.
Hi. I did a Udoo X86 Ultra test and the result is similar. But in the system data column : I guess a bug on the program. It puzzles me that
I tried CPU-Z but since they are SDRAM, they are not shown in CPU-Z. The memory info is empty so I didn't post it. The benchmark in AIDA is enough to prove it.
If I remember correctly, only the basic version with 2G RAM has 4 ram chips, others come with 8 chips which are located in both sides. Since the 2G version is discontinted, we cant see photos of it.
Looks like the ram are correctly placed in different channels but just the data doesn't match what it should be.
My Adv Plus (Rev H) is using Micron's 4Gb: 256Mb x 16bit wide DDR3L SDRAM, 8 pieces. This is consistent with the schematic: Dual channel - each channel has 4 RAMs totaling 64-bit width (256Mb x 64) - two channel combined: 512Mb x 64, which is 4GB BTW, chip marking is D9SHD, which is MT41K256M16TW-107 IT:P
What would you expect the difference in benchmark performance to be between single-channel and dual-channel RAM?
For Dual channel, result should be almost two times as fast as single channel. ~20K MB/s in read/write/copy
