The slow boot times and inconsistent performance results suggest to me that they need to work on the board design some more. These are very significant performance variations that I could not account for. With a little more work, Asus could make it a great board. Still, MHz on the front side bus is very respectable. The initial setup included: The Y axis is exaggerated to show my point.

Uploader: Fenrizshura
Date Added: 1 April 2013
File Size: 41.21 Mb
Operating Systems: Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X
Downloads: 29892
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

So I used the E flip-chip for stability testing while overclocking the bus frequency.

When I returned the next morning, the demo had dropped out to the desktop, but the system had not hung. All overclock testing was done with a core voltage setting of 1. At this setting, the system was running at MHz, with a memory speed of MHz. Pentium III overclock stability seemed better than Celeron-2 overclockability, but we did not have extra Celeron-2s around to asis, so we can’t say for sure.

ASUS CUV4X, Socket 370, Intel Motherboard

The next thing I wanted to test was overclock stability, for which I used the newest version of 3D Mark version 1. The variability was still quite noticeable, as shown in the chart below. This was not the case. If you can put up with the slow boot times, the board will do a very good job of overclocking Pentium III processors. Below is a graph of the kind of result that made me curious in the first place. I even tried a different power supply, also without effect on the variability.


System performance was substantially lower than with a comparably clocked Pentium III cuv4c, but as I mentioned earlier, the performance variability seen with the Pentium III was not seen with the Celeron The Y axis is exaggerated in the chart below, to highlight what variability there was.

However, there was almost no variation in Norton benchmark numbers from run to run.

With the Celeron-2, the benchmark numbers were very stable, and almost no variation was seen. Virtually identical results were also obtained after running other programs e.

ASUS CUV4X – motherboard – ATX – Socket – ProA Overview – CNET

I tried higher and lower core voltages, but the system refused to boot. The only normal looking trace cyv4x there is the one labeled ‘reboot’, which I got after a warm reboot of the system. The variability was intermittent, and did not occur after cuvx4 reboot, or after every run of a 3D application. In fact, the system showed normal, low variability most of the time, but on occasion, would show increased variability in benchmark results.

Lack of Celeron-2 performance variability: I tried a flash update to the BIOS from version tobut this had no effect on the benchmark variation.

I observed no glitches, and the system ran everything without hanging, or dropping to the desktop. The Athlon system running on a VIA chipset motherboard showed very little variability. I just wanted to do a quick check and see what kind of system rating I would get with Norton Utilities It took 57 seconds for a complete warm reboot, and 67 seconds for a complete cold boot. 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.


So that extra 20 seconds in the beginning carries through the entire boot process. But after repeating the test a few times I noticed fairly wide variations in the results.

ASUS CUV4X-DLS – Value Dual Socket Motherboard Roundup – August

The slow boot times and inconsistent performance results suggest to me that they need to work on the board design some more. However, overclocking stability was very good with the CUV4X. I tried that with a core voltage of 1. 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.

But I did not xuv4x any drop in performance, or variability asud results, after running 3D Mark on that machine. Now it was time to go for broke, and try MHz on the front side bus.

At MHz, that is probably acceptable behavior.