Sorry, but that’s simply not true.
The Exynos 5422 on these ODROIDs has 4 fast ARM cores and 4 slow ones. The fast ones are Cortex-A15 clocked at 2 GHz. The slow ones are Cortex-A7 clocked at 1.4 GHz. The Tinkerboard has 4 fast cores (A17 at 2 GHz).
The S905 has 4 slow cores and S912 has 8 slow cores (A53 is in a line with A7 – the fast families are A15, A17, A72, A73 and so on. A53 is slow but energy efficient).
People love to only look at clockspeeds but that’s useless. An A15 or A17 running at 2 GHz is a lot faster than an A53 running at the same clockspeed (no matter of 64-bit vs. 32-bit). There’s a reason those boards with fast ARM cores consume a lot more energy than those with slow cores like A53.
Then Blender is a lot about memory performance: My new video about the Rock64 with Armbian - Rockchip - Armbian Community Forums
Then something strange happened at the end of the Kdenlive test so the usual reaction to something like this should be throwing away the results and re-testing in active benchmarking mode. No one is doing this since all SBC users are happy to only generate meaningless numbers in ‘passive benchmarking’ mode.
If something strange happens it needs to be diagnosed. Most basic measure when benchmarking anything is switching to performance governor prior to executing any tests and then running iostat 10 in another shell in parallel to the benchmark (to see whether strange things happen). Also it’s important to have an eye on real CPU clockspeeds (affected by throttling or vendor cheating – we should not forget we’re dealing here with an Amlogic SoC and those things cheat on us: http://forum.khadas.com/t/s912-limited-to-1200-mhz-with-multithreaded-loads/)
Also it should be noted that users for whatever bizarre reasons trust in DDR4 memory being faster than DDR3 (why? Since 4 is a higher numbers than 3?!) instead of doing the only reasonable thing: testing (just to realize that Vim2 performs not that great here as @g4b42 discovered.)