I will be honest with you, dual channel memory you will not notice if you have never had it. Once you have it, you will wonder why you did not have it earlier.
True for the AMD XP setup on a Nforce2 board the dual channel added between 3-5% real world performance. However those processors are relatively slow and do not take full advantage of what dual channel memory can do. Also dual channel memory really shines on the P4 platform when the FSB is OC like hell.
Saying that the Intel 478 pin motherboards or 865 - 875 chipsets are short lived is just wrong, 478 platform has been around for a couple of years now and it reminds me of the old Intel 440BX chipset back in the day that would never die. Northwoods are produced from 2.4GHZ to 3.4GHZ. And the 3.4GHZ can safely be O/C to 4GHZ.
I was not cutting on AMD processors at all, I think AMD does a fine job of engineering them, I think AMD needs to take a more active role with chipset makers to set a standard. This would ensure quality control at all levels and I think you would be sitting with much better machines all the way around.
Although Synthetic benchmarks these are realistic in performance gains here is a link to
Toms review of the 939 platform with the PCMark 2004 memory benchs. Note the difference between the single channel and dual channel.
If you think it does not make a difference then you need to exp it first hand to see for yourself.
Besides if the chipset makers did not see any gains for including it I would think they would leave it out, why spend the money reserching and making it happen for no gain in performance? For marketing hype to rip there loyal fan base? I think not.