Before I could conclude about these boards there was one more
test that needed to be done. The onboard graphics on the AX3S. Because this
used shared memory - I wondered how it actually affected memory performance,
and how good a performer it was. So I tested it.
Memory performance dropped from 266/297 right down to 183/199!!
That brings the memory performance right down near the performance of the
AX34 at 66mhz! In Quake 3 fastest it produced 40.8fps which is not bad - but
that is a deceiving benchmark as when you get into the higher resolutions
memory bandwidth becomes a huge bottleneck (which is why anything about around
800x600 was unplayable). If the question is which chipset is the best, I would
personally say the Via chipset is better for Celeron users, because of the
ability to access faster RAM speeds. If you are using a PIII the i815E chipset
is superior because a) more stable at high bus speeds (from what I have seen)
b) when overclocked above 100mhz will give you the memory performance needed.
If the question is which board is better, to all users the AX3S is pretty
much the best. The cost difference between these two boards is around £2.
On Dabs the AX34 was £77+vat and the AX3S was £79+vat. For someone building
workstations, the Aopen AX3s is the perfect solution, it's cheap, has onboard
graphics/sound and performs well. The voltage bug on the AX34 is very bad
for overclockers and I would not want to recommend it because of this. The
FSB selections on the AX3S are also much better. To an overclocker, just ignore
the onboard graphics (and possibly the sound) and underneath you have a solid
performer. One problem that overclockers may have with the AX3S was that the
Thermaltake Super Orb would not fit (just) due to the close capacitors.
Note: I didn't include much in the way of pictures of benchmarks,
becuase the amount there where would have made this thing far too long.
