Well the advantage seems to have been that he was more interventionist and socially liberal than many in the establishment so might have prompted pressure for earlier social and economic reforms. His interference was often opposed so may not make a massive difference, at least during his lifetime, but it could help.
Also of course without Victoria descending into decades of morning - at least until he does die - the monarchy might not have been as isolated and to a degree unpopular as it did OTL. While there was initial sympathy for her after a few years many saw her continued absence from many formal roles as her neglecting the duties of the monarchy.
Of course the big uncertainty would be how relations with the children, especially the later Edward VIII develop. He was already clashing with his parents over his lifestyle and possibly simply seeking to demonstrate some independence but Victoria seems to have blamed him for his father's death as Albert was busy trying to sort out a scandal when he fell ill.
It should be noted that there is some doubt over what actually killed him. Wiki mentions
The contemporary diagnosis was typhoid fever, but modern writers have pointed out that Albert's ongoing stomach pain, leaving him ill for at least two years before his death, may indicate that a chronic disease, such as Crohn's disease, kidney failure, or abdominal cancer, was the cause of death.
If it was either kidney failure or cancer he might not have lasted much longer anyway. Not sure how well Crohn's could have been treated at that period so that could have lead to his fairly early death anyway.