Asus V6600 GeForce - Page 4

Turn on the Hyperdrive, Chewie!
Before we embark on the benchmarks, here’re my usual system specs used for testing:

  • P3 450 @ 558MHz (4.5 x 124MHz)
  • 128MB LGS RAM
  • 01 x 13GB Quantum CR Ultra-ATA66 HDD (5400 rpm); 01 x 10.1 GB Seagate Ultra-ATA66 HDD (5400rpm); 01 x 13.2 GB IBM Ultra-ATA66 HDD (7200rpm)
  • 01 x ASUS GEForce 256 (32MB SDRAM onboard) using 3.53 reference Nvidia drivers; Default settings with core/mem settings at 120/166;
  • 01 x Sony 6X DVD-ROM drive
  • SBLive!! Platinum (Liveware 3.0 drivers)
  • VirataLink 1025 ATM card
  • 17” Mitsubishi DiamondScan 70 monitor (0.28 dpi)
  • Win 98SE
  • Ambient Temperature of 27 degrees Celsius.

Do note that I opted to use the Nvidia 3.53 reference drivers over the 3.48 ASUS ones that came with the CD-ROM disc. I could then compare benchmarks with my Creative GeForce under a similar base.

Firstly, I’m glad to say that the card performed fine under an overclocked AGP bus-speed of 82.7 MHz (2/3 x 124MHz). This is similar to Creative’s card as well, which is indicative that all reference boards can accommodate higher AGP bus-speeds. 

But I guess what inevitably distinguishes one card from the next would be its overclockability and stability. With the aid of Entech’s nifty Powerstrip utility, I altered the Core / Mem clock speeds on the ASUS V6600 with the following results:

Overclocking Limits

Core Clock speed Mem Clock speed Q3Test results
120 190 Showed immediate texture breakages and interlacing effect in Q3demo1 timedemo
120 180 Showed texture breakages after 2 rounds of Q3demo benchmarking
120 175 Passed Q3Demo + all subsequent benchmarks
145 175 Hung about 1 sec into Q3Demo
140 * 175 * Passed Q3demo + all subsequent benchmarks

* Maximum stable speed attained.

In comparison with my Creative card that achieved 140/190 happily, I was a bit disappointed at ASUS’ overclocking capabilities. It is strange that despite the identical memory used, it was 8% less overclockable than Creative’s.  Notwithstanding that memory on any GeForce cards cannot practically attain its raw rated specs of 200MHz (owing perhaps to inherent design issues), it is speculative whether ASUS boards are on the whole less overclockable, as we shouldn’t base our conclusions on just one sample card. 

I have seen similar posts in newsgroups that their Creative cards achieved only 130/180 stable, so perhaps this is an inaccurate comparison. However, this still seems slightly better than the ASUS sample I have. In addition, Creative did incorporate their own overclocking utility (with max of 183MHz memory setting) afterall, that may point to increased confidence on their part to reach the memory threshold for their boards.

I’ve smelt enough smoke… Just give me the results!!

< Previous

Next >