Still, MHz on the front side bus is very respectable. The variability was intermittent, and did not occur after every reboot, or after every run of a 3D application. One thing I hadn’t tried at this point was changing the CPU. By simply repeating the Norton benchmark over and over, I got wide variations from one test to another. The variability was still quite noticeable, as shown in the chart below. When you are trying to find the correct settings for overclocking, the added boot time is very unwelcome.
|Date Added:||24 May 2006|
|File Size:||59.9 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The slow boot times and inconsistent performance results suggest to me that they need to work on the board design some more.
ASUS CUV4X-E, Socket 370, Intel Motherboard
This occurred right after asks fresh, cold boot, so it is inherent in the system. One thing that irritated me about the overclock settings was that they did not go in order in the BIOS menu, but rather, jumped all around, forcing you to scroll the long list to find the speed you wanted. Lack of Celeron-2 performance variability: Virtually identical results were also obtained after running other programs e. However, there was almost no variation in Norton benchmark numbers from run to run. I tried a flash update to the BIOS from version tobut this had no effect on the benchmark variation.
The most overclockable Pentium IIIs are the E and E models, which often will run at MHz on the front side bus, if the motherboard and memory can handle it too. The first thing I checked was if the system resources were declining. I just wanted to do a quick check and see what kind of system rating I would get with Norton Utilities If you need an external COM 2, then you will need to install a back panel plate with a ribbon cable connection to the motherboard. Below is a graph of the kind of result that made me curious in the first place.
This was not the case. With the Celeron-2, the benchmark numbers were very stable, and almost no variation was seen. The motherboard correctly xsus the chip, and booted up still a noticeably long boot time. I then set the 3D Mark demo to a continuous loop, and left it running overnight.
ASUS CUV4X-E, Socket , Intel Motherboard | eBay
All-in-all, the CUV4X is a very nice board. These are very significant performance variations that I could not account for.
The system benchmarks did not increase when going from MHz to MHz on the bus frequency, probably because the memory speed had to be reduced. All overclock testing was done with a core voltage setting of 1. Unfortunately, even with a core voltage of 1.
The next available speed was 85MHz. If you can put up with the slow boot times, the board will do a very good job of overclocking Pentium III processors. With a little more work, Asus could make it a great board. The initial setup included: The next step was to try MHz on the front side bus.
The results were quite puzzling. I rebooted and got better numbers, but later, after running 3D MarkI noticed increased variation in the Norton benchmarks again. One thing I hadn’t tried at this point was changing the CPU. However, overclocking stability was very axus with the CUV4X.
ASUS CUV4X-M – motherboard – micro ATX – Socket – ProA Overview – CNET
Now it was time to go for broke, and try MHz on the front side bus. The system was very stable at this bus frequency. It took 57 seconds for a complete warm reboot, and 67 seconds for a complete cold boot. I tried that with a core voltage of 1. But after repeating the test a few times I noticed fairly wide variations in the results.
As I’ve said in previous reviews, I’d rather not see an audio modem riser, or on-board audio. Unfortunately, at the time of this review, we only had 1 Celeron-2 chip available for testing, so I’m not sure if these results are typical.