5 minute read
ASUS Crosshair 4 Formula
Benchmarks
We ran a small array of benchmarks that demonstrated performance of all aspects of the system and allow easy comparisons in future reviews. We performed these on the industry standard 3600 MHz on an un-optimized fresh install of Windows 7.
Advertisement
superPi 8m, 3m 51.894 3DMark06, 19973 Marks SM2: 7706 SM3: 10023 CPU: 5123 Everest read: 10755 MBs Everest write: 9264 MBs Everest copy: 12282 MBs Everest latency: 43.0
Recommended Award
Test Machine
• Asus Crosshair IV Formula • 5870 stock using
Catalyst10.2 driver • Corsair GTX2 2250 • WD VelociRaptor 600GB • AMD Phenom II X6 1090T • Antec 1200 OC PSU • Windows 7 32-Bit
For the longest time, The Republic of Gamers line form ASUS has been their flagship series. Although it has “Gamers” in the title, overclockers everywhere have no doubt in their minds these products should really be called “The Republic of Overclockers”. The features and build quality of these boards are aimed at the high end and offer all the features overclockers would need to push their systems past the design limits. The newest member of the gang is the Crosshair 4 and if the last model - the Crosshair 3 - is to be an indicator, we are in for a treat in our upcoming testing. The main difference between the CH3 and CH4 is that the latter is built around the 890FX chipset and is ready for the new AMD Phenom II X6 CPUs.
AnAlysis
The benchmark results on this board looked very strong. Against last generation’s CH3 board, we could see the CH4 taking the lead in 3DMark06 and SuperPI 8M, if only by a small margin. This was to be expected though, as the new chipset was never going to mean faster or better benchmark results. It’s really meant for enabling new options and support for newer technologies, in this case, full Phenom II X6 (Thuban) CPU support. The Everest results were also decided by small margins initially. This changed when we started to increase the RAM speed on both platforms. When we got around 2000 MHz on the CH3, it crashed, yet the CH4 was happy to keep going with seemingly no end, right up to 2260 MHz. When we improved our cooling, moving onto single stage cascade at -50’C, putting our proverbial foot down a little we saw the CH4 shine. The CH3 struggled to get past 4800 MHz but the CH4 powered the CPU past 5000 MHz towards 5100MHz using 1.55VCore.
Impressive results indeed, but we were only comparing the CH4 against another ASUS board and wondered what would happen when we compared it against the competition. Comparing Pi 32M running at 3600MHz against the other top boards, we found that the CH4 had a 25 seconds advantage after the final loop. A staggering result so much so that and we had to rerun the benchmarks across all three platforms to ensure our results were not skewed in anyway. If you want to run 2D benchmarks on the AMD platform, you would be crazy to go with any other board than this. On the other hand, 3D benchmarks seemed to be similar across all three boards we had tested, with the largest difference at around 1%. Great results all around,
however there is one downside though and that’s the subzero behaviour of this motherboard. The CH3 was known to be flaky when subzero and sadly the CH4 exhibited similar behaviour. A typical scenario with a CH4 would have the board operating very smoothly, with great results then suddenly the board begins to crash. The only way to stop the problems is to cease your benching session and retry again later.
Notes oN scores by others
On XtremeSystems, Mad222 finally broke the 2400 MHz barrier on AMD, something that was only a pipe dream on the Deneb Core. He did so with a kit of GEIL One and hit a grand frequency of 1213MHz. At this stage the ASUS board is head and shoulders in front of other brands where RAM clocking is concerned. Equivalent results on other boards are around the 1950 MHz mark.
AdditioNAl iNformAtioN
The OC Station is an available attachment for this motherboard that quite a few users might want to consider. It brings a number of valuable overclocking options out of the bios and directly into the hands of the overclocker. This enables on the fly adjustments during benchmarks which is very valuable for benchmarks like 3DMark06 or Vantage that have large differences in system requirements throughout the benchmark. This could be the difference between 1st and 2nd place.
Summary
We have had the opportunity to test a large number of 890 based boards and we can tell without prejudice, there is nothing in the same league as the CH4. The number of bios options and the way this board performs is peerless. ASUS has, for some time now, been producing the best motherboards in the AMD category and we believe this tradition continues with the CH4. We would put a warning tag on this board for subzero users, it can be amazing, but it can also be frustrating.
Would you buy it?
If we were to buy any AMD 890 board this would be it. It is priced well enough to be affordable and ideal for a high end gaming system. It offers everything you could ask for except appropriate PCI-E spacing to accommodate four GPUs. It has a big brother coming later this year, the Crosshair IV Extreme; which you might consider waiting for if you need that functionality.
The Score
This is a near perfect example of how to make an AMD board. Two things have cost it 10 out of 10, the first is its inconsistent performance under subzero conditions and the second is the pending release of the Crosshair IV Extreme that has the perfect slot spacing.
