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. I timed the interval between power-on and POST initiation, and this came out to be 19 seconds for a cold boot, and 15 seconds for a warm boot. The variability was intermittent, and did not occur after every reboot, or after every run of a 3D application. However, overclocking stability was very good with the CUV4X. The next thing I wanted to test was overclock stability, for which I used the newest version of 3D Mark version 1.
|Date Added:||16 September 2007|
|File Size:||52.30 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
A typical score after a clean reboot was Norton units. I tried a flash update to the BIOS from version tobut this had no effect on the benchmark variation. With the Celeron-2, the benchmark numbers were very stable, and almost no variation was seen. The overall boot time was also longer than normal for a clean system. The list below shows the results. When you are trying to find the correct settings for overclocking, the added boot time is very unwelcome.
ASUS CUV4X-DLS – Value Dual Socket Motherboard Roundup – August
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.
I then set the 3D Mark demo to a continuous loop, and left it running overnight. 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. The fuv4x below shows the Norton Benchmark variability at this speed. At MHz, that is probably acceptable behavior.
All-in-all, the CUV4X is a very nice board. I rebooted and got chv4x numbers, but later, after running 3D MarkI noticed increased variation in the Norton benchmarks again.
ASUS CUV4X, Socket 370, Intel Motherboard
The next step was to try MHz on the front side bus. The slow boot times and inconsistent performance results suggest to me that they need to work on the board design some more.
This occurred right after a fresh, cold boot, so it is inherent in the system. The chart below shows some of the kinds of variability I observed.
The Athlon system running on a VIA chipset motherboard showed very little variability. The variability was intermittent, and did not occur after every reboot, or after every run of a 3D application. The Y axis is exaggerated again.
ASUS CUV4X, Socket , Intel Motherboard | eBay
The first thing I checked was if the system resources were declining. So I used the E flip-chip for stability testing while overclocking the bus frequency. But I did not see any drop in performance, or variability of results, after running 3D Mark on that machine. As I’ve said in previous reviews, I’d rather not see an audio modem riser, or on-board audio. System performance was substantially lower than with a comparably clocked Pentium III system, but as I mentioned earlier, the performance variability seen with the Pentium III was not seen with the Celeron 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.
Virtually identical results were also obtained after running other programs e. The Norton scores went from an average of aboutto an average of about I timed the interval between power-on and POST initiation, and this came out to be 19 seconds for a cold boot, and 15 seconds for a warm boot. The system was very stable at this bus frequency.
One thing I hadn’t tried at this point was changing the CPU. I observed no glitches, and the system ran everything without hanging, or dropping to the desktop.
The results were quite puzzling. The Y axis is exaggerated in the chart below, to highlight what variability there was.
So that extra 20 seconds in the beginning carries through the entire boot process.