The initial setup included: I tried that with a core voltage of 1. I tried out a new Celeron-2 flip-chip. The variability was still quite noticeable, as shown in the chart below. At first I thought the system wasn’t going to boot. The Y axis is exaggerated to show my point. At MHz, that is probably acceptable behavior.
|Date Added:||6 July 2012|
|File Size:||20.79 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
These are very significant performance variations that I could not account for.
Virtually identical results were also obtained after running other cuv4z e. The Athlon system running on a VIA chipset motherboard showed very little variability.
ASUS CUV4X-E, Socket , Intel (CUV4X-E/WOA) Motherboard | eBay
Unfortunately, even with a core voltage of 1. However, overclocking stability was very good with the CUV4X.
All-in-all, the CUV4X is a very nice board. At a bus frequency of 85MHz, the system speed rating was MHz. However, there was almost no variation in Norton benchmark numbers from run to run. 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. The first thing I checked was if the system resources were declining.
Asus CUV4X Motherboard Review –
The only normal looking duv4x up there is the one labeled ‘reboot’, which I got after a warm reboot of the system. I just wanted to do a quick check and see what kind of system rating I would get with Norton Utilities The initial setup included: The next step was to try MHz on the front side bus.
All overclock testing was done with cuvx4 core voltage setting of 1. I tried 2 other CUV4X motherboards, and got similar results. 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 Y axis is exaggerated again. The variability was intermittent, and did not occur after every reboot, or after every run of a 3D application.
I tried that with a core voltage of 1. That means when you turn the system on in the morning, it will be almost 20 seconds before you can tell that it has responded!
Overclocking with the Celeron-2 was rather disappointing. As I’ve said in previous reviews, I’d rather not see an audio modem riser, or on-board audio. 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.
I then overclocked the E chip to MHz, with a core voltage of 1.
At this setting, the system was running at MHz, with a memory speed of MHz. The overall boot time was also longer than normal for a clean system. The slow boot times and inconsistent performance results suggest to me that they need asuus work on the board design some more. The Y axis is exaggerated in the chart below, to highlight what variability there was.
ASUS CUV4X-E, Socket 370, Intel Motherboard
It took 57 seconds for a complete warm reboot, and 67 seconds for a complete cold boot. While I’m really glad that Flip-Chip-capable motherboards are finally becoming more commonplace, I hope that in the future, they have a little more polish than the original release of the Asus CUV4X.
The chart below shows some of the kinds of variability I observed. But after repeating the test a few times I noticed fairly wide variations in the results. Civ4x list below shows the results. I tried out a new Celeron-2 flip-chip.