Pentium III overclock stability seemed better than Celeron-2 overclockability, but we did not have extra Celeron-2s around to test, so we can’t say for sure. I then overclocked the E chip to MHz, with a core voltage of 1. I tried 2 other CUV4X motherboards, and got similar results. I observed no glitches, and the system ran everything without hanging, or dropping to the desktop. This was not the case. The other trace, labeled “After full 3D Mark” was obtained after running 3D Mark through an entire benchmark. Virtually identical results were also obtained after running other programs e.
|Date Added:||6 January 2006|
|File Size:||14.28 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
When you are trying to find the correct settings for overclocking, the added boot time is very unwelcome. The system was very stable at this bus frequency.
The first thing I checked was if the system resources were declining. 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. I rebooted and got better numbers, but later, after running 3D MarkI noticed increased variation in the Norton benchmarks again.
As I’ve said in previous reviews, I’d rather not see an audio modem riser, or on-board audio. At first I thought the system wasn’t going to boot.
ASUS CUV4X-M – motherboard – micro ATX – Socket – ProA Overview – CNET
At MHz, that is probably acceptable behavior. Lack of Celeron-2 performance variability: The next thing I wanted to test was overclock stability, for which I used the newest version of 3D Mark version 1.
Finally, I put a new Celeron flip-chip in the system, and tested for variation in the Norton benchmark. System performance was substantially lower than with a comparably clocked Pentium III asu, but as I mentioned earlier, the performance variability seen with the Pentium III was not seen with the Celeron The system would not boot on the CUV4X.
Overclocking with the Celeron-2 was rather auss. The Y axis is exaggerated again. The overall boot time was also longer than normal for a clean system. The Y axis is exaggerated to show my point.
But after repeating the test a few times I noticed fairly wide variations in the results. I just wanted to do a quick check and see what kind of system rating I would get with Norton Utilities I tried that with a core voltage of 1.
At this setting, the system was running at MHz, with a memory speed of MHz. How much of a speed boost do you get at to MHz? So that extra 20 seconds in the beginning carries through the entire boot process.
The most overclockable Pentium IIIs are the E and E models, which often will run at MHz on the front ass bus, if the motherboard and memory can handle it too. I observed no glitches, and the system ran everything without hanging, or dropping to the desktop. I tried out a new Celeron-2 flip-chip. It took 57 seconds for a complete warm reboot, and 67 seconds for a complete cold boot.
The Norton scores went from an average of aboutto an average of about By simply repeating the Norton benchmark over and over, I got wide variations from one test to another. The system ran 3D Mark without a hitch.
ASUS CUV4X-E, Socket 370, Intel Motherboard
The Athlon system running on a VIA chipset motherboard showed very little variability. I canceled the benchmark, went to Windows, and ran the Norton benchmark. But I did not see any drop in performance, or variability of results, after running 3D Mark on that machine. You will also notice the dip in the dark blue line at the 4th test above. I even tried a different power supply, also without effect on the variability. The variability was still quite noticeable, as shown in the chart below.