discussion ASUS Maximus III Formula LGA1156 Motherboard Review‏

[MAC]

Test Setup & Methodology

Test Setup & Methodology

Click on image to enlarge​

Test Setup​

Testing will occur on a Highspeed PC Standard Top Deck Tech Station and not in a traditional case. This allows easier access to the motherboard for the constant poking and prodding that is required during the reviewing process. The setup remained as pictured during the duration of the benchmarking and stability overclocking process.

Overclocking Methodology

As part of the Republic of Gamers series, the ASUS Maximus III Formula is obviously a high-end enthusiast-oriented motherboard, and as such we expect it to have some superior overclocking capabilities. The overclocking section is definitely the part of our reviews that we take the most pride in, and we spend an excruciating numbers of hours testing, tweaking, failing, and succeeding in order to give you the best possible insight into each motherboard’s overclocking capabilities. After all, if you are anything like us, the overclocking section is the first (and often last!) part that you read when checking out a motherboard review.

For the purposes of this review, our overclocking efforts will primarily focus on three main areas: highest stable BCLK overclock, highest stable CPU overclock, and highest stable memory overclock. However, given the increasing prevalence of automatic overclocking solutions, we have also included an "auto overclocking results" section, in which we will see how good these manufacture-provided technologies really are.

In these overclocking tests we put an emphasis on stability. While the question “What is stable?” could be debated endlessly, we have devised a methodology that combines a wide range of programs that test the stability of the entire system.

Here are some of the applications that will be run in order to validate each of the overclocks:

• Four/Eight 32MB instances of SuperPi Mod 1.5 (ran at the same time)
• 3+ hours of Prime 95 v25.9 using the Stress Testing Blend
• 1 hour of OCCT Auto 1H Medium Data Set OCCT v3.1.0
• LinX 0.5.9 - 25 runs - use all memory
• Multiple loops of 3DMark 06 (30 minutes of looping the full tests each)
• 1 hour of game play in Left 4 Dead & Crysis @ 1680x1050

Altogether, the above suite should provide enough stress testing to ensure a completely stable overclock, however we are always up for new suggestions. As always, no two systems are ever alike, so your results may vary. Also, overclock at your own risk! The Lynnfield/P55 platform is brand new, and although we are somewhat conservative with our voltage estimates, there is always the possibility that you could damage any and all of your components. If you aren’t fully confident in what you are doing, feel free to stop by our forums and our helpful community will be glad to offer some assistance.

Benchmark Methodology

For this review, we have compared the Maximus III Formula to the ASUS P7P55D Deluxe, MSI P55-GD80, and Intel DP55KG "Kingsberg" motherboards, all in stock configuration and using the Core i7-870 processor with Turbo Boost enabled.

We have outlined the four setups in the sample graph above. The purple results are from ASUS Maximus III Formula, the green results are from the P55-GD80, the blue results are from the P7P55D Deluxe, and the red results are from the Intel DP55KG.

For all of the benchmarks, appropriate lengths are taken to ensure an equal comparison through methodical setup, installation, and testing. The following outlines our testing methodology:

A) Windows is installed using a full format.

B) Intel Chipset drivers and accessory hardware drivers (audio, network, GPU) are installed followed by a defragment and a reboot.

C) Programs and games are then installed followed by another defragment.

D) Windows updates are then completed installing all available updates followed by a defragment.

E) Benchmarks are each ran three times after a clean reboot for every iteration of the benchmark unless otherwise stated, the results are then averaged.

We have listed the benchmark versions above each graph as results can vary between updates. That should about cover everything so let's see what kind of numbers this motherboard puts up in the overclocking section and in our chosen suite of benchmarks.

 

[MAC]

Overclocking Results

Overclocking Results

If you are buying or building a Lynnfield/P55 system chances are that you don't already own a Core i7/X58 system. Many of you will likely be transitioning over from Intel Core 2-based systems and you have to realize that overclocking Core i5/i7 processors is quite different than with the previous Core 2 architecture. There are now four important clock speeds (CPU/BCLK/MEM/QPI) and three multipliers (CPU/MEM/QPI) to tweak, as well as five different voltages. Put simply, there are lot of new variables and potential limitations that an overclocker must now take into consideration. At the moment, no one is an expert when it comes to Lynnfield overclocking, and we are all learning new tricks and tweaks on a weekly basis. At this point in time, for our overclocking tests we have a imposed a few relatively conservative voltage limits, namely vCore up to 1.40 vCore, VTT/IMC up to 1.35V, and vDIMM up to 1.70V. It is our estimation that these voltages can be safely used 24/7 without seriously shortening the lifespan of any components...with proper cooling of course.

Highest Stable BCLK Overclock

Click on images to enlarge​

By now we are very familiar with the limits of our two Lynnfield samples on air cooling. As a result, we know not to expect one P55 motherboard to greatly distinguish itself from the others. Therefore, as long as we can reach those limits, we can consider a particular model a solid overclocker.

On the Maximus III Formula, we were able to push our i5-750 chip to 214.6Mhz BLCK with 1.21V VTT/IMC. This is very much equal to the 215.5Mhz we achieved with the MSI P55-GD80, and a fair bit better than the 212.6Mhz that the ASUS P7P55D Deluxe was capable of.

Our voltage-hungry i7-870 was able to hit 203.6Mhz at 1.35V VTT/IMC, which is a new high. This is slightly better than the 201.5Mhz achieved with the P55-GD80 and 202.7Mhz that was done with the P7P55D. Chances are that your i7-800 series will be a better BCLK overclockers than our engineering samples, since we seen several retail chips that are stable in the 210-215Mhz BCLK range.

Highest Stable CPU Overclock

Click on images to enlarge​

CPU core overclocking is one area where the Maximus III Formula was able to pull away from the pack a little bit. Specifically, we were able to achieve two personal records on our chips, 4106.5Mhz at 1.40 vCore on the i5-750, and 4067.2Mhz at 1.35 vCore on the i7-870. Respectively, these results are 18Mhz and 22Mhz better than on the P7P55D Deluxe, and a full 42Mhz and 45Mhz better than what we achieved with the P55-GD80. Not too shabby at all, even though it's really only a 1-2Mhz BLCK difference.

Highest Stable Memory Overclock

Click on image to enlarge​

While searching for the highest stable memory overclock, we pushed aside our i5-750 due to its weak IMC and focused on the i7-870. In doing so, we were able to achieve a impressive DDR3-2200/PC3-17600 9-9-9-24-1T with 1.65Vdimm and our self-imposed 1.35V VTT/IMC voltage limit. This is exactly the same as we were able to achieve with the P7P55D Deluxe, and a little better than the DDR3-2167 that we hit with the MSI P55-GD80.

Auto Overclocking Results

Now automatic overclocking solutions are nothing new, most of us have encountered them in one way or another for quite a few years now. However, they have historically been shockingly ineffective. They either a) didn't work as advertised and locked up your system, or b) worked as advertised and locked up your system. Either way, they were not a joy to use and the results were inevitably disappointing. Is ASUS's implementation truly better? Let's find out!

Click on image to enlarge​

While the above results are what were able to manually achieve with this motherboard, the Maximus III Formula is outfitted with the Auto Tuning automatic overclocking feature is a software-based solution that can be found within the new & improved TurboV EVO utility.

Once you enlarge the above TurboV image, you can see that Auto Tuning has two modes, Performance and Extreme. At this point in time, ASUS advises that people use the performance preset since that is where the most work has been done in optimizing the algorithm and stability testing. Let's see what it can do:

Core i5-750 Right, Core i7-870 Left - Click on images to enlarge​

Overall, Auto Tuning is quite good. Keep in mind, that is the same auto-overclocking utility that we saw on the P7P55D Deluxe, and yet the results here are quite a bit better, at least on the i5-750.

Now this isn't quite rocket science yet. This feature can taken up to 20-30 minutes and it's not always going to give the same results. Sometimes the it would stop at 3.1Ghz, sometimes at 3.3Ghz. However, we just kept looping it until it achieved what we believed was the highest possible overclock. We aren't too sure why ASUS engineers have decided to undervolt the memory in Auto Tuning, but given the the very mild memory frequencies and timings it selects this is not big deal. We do wish that the program was better at reading the memory SPD to better utilize memory modules truly capabilities. Thankfully, ASUS is constantly working on making this feature better, so we can expect it to get better with future BIOS updates.

Frankly, our main complaint is that ASUS did not include the BIOS-based OC Tuner Utility, which proved to achieve much higher results than Auto Tuning when we tested it on the P7P55D Deluxe. However, given the fact that this is an enthusiast-oriented motheboard, it could be argued that auto-overclocking features are pointless since they go against the very reason for such a model.

 

[MAC]

Synthetic Benchmarks

Synthetic Benchmarks

Lavalys Everest Ultimate v5.02

Everest Ultimate is the most useful tool for any and all benchmarkers or overclockers. With the ability to pick up most voltage, temperature, and fan sensors on almost every motherboard available, Everest provides the ability to customize the outputs in a number of forms on your desktop. We selected two of Everest's seven CPU benchmarks: CPU Queen and FPU Mandel. According to Lavalys, CPU Queen simple integer benchmark focuses on the branch prediction capabilities and the misprediction penalties of the CPU. It finds the solutions for the classic "Queens problem" on a 10 by 10 sized chessboard. At the same clock speed theoretically the processor with the shorter pipeline and smaller misprediction penalties will attain higher benchmark scores. The FPU Mandel benchmark measures the double precision (also known as 64-bit) floating-point performance through the computation of several frames of the popular "Mandelbrot" fractal. Both tests consume less than 1 MB system memory, and are HyperThreading, multi-processor (SMP) and multi-core (CMP) aware.

In stock form, all four motherboards are roughly equivalent in the CPU Queen benchmark, with a slight edge going towards both ASUS models. The Intel motherboard falls behind in the FPU Mandel test because both the ASUS and MSI models utilize a 1X higher Turbo Mode multiplier throughout the benchmark.


Lavalys Everest Ultimate v5.02

As part of its enthusiast favourite Cache & Memory Benchmark, Everest provides very useful and in-depth cache performance figures. For this chart, we have combined the read, write, and copy bandwidth figures to achieve an aggregate bandwidth figure for each cache stage.

Again, all four motherboards perform nearly identically across all three processor cache levels.


Lavalys Everest Ultimate v5.02

Everest Ultimate is the most useful tool for any and all benchmarkers or overclockers. With the ability to pick up most voltage, temperature, and fan sensors on almost every motherboard available, Everest provides the ability to customize the outputs in a number of forms on your desktop. In addition to this, the memory benchmarking utility provides a useful tool of measuring the changes to your memory sub-system.

At DDR3-1333 7-7-7, the Maximus III Formula performs inline with the other models that have tested.

As expected, the MIIIF achieved very similar latency figures to the P7P55D Deluxe, slightly surpassed the MSI P55-GD80. The DP55KG keeps its crown as latency champion at the moment, largely due to its more aggressive default secondary memory timings.


Now let's see if ScienceMark echoes these results.

ScienceMark v2.0

Although last updated almost 3 years ago, and despite its rudimentary interface, ScienceMark v2.0 remains a favorite for accurately calculating bandwidth on even the newest chipsets.

ScienceMark reveals the MIIIF to have the highest memory bandwidth of all four motherboards, but even then the difference between the models is only 2%.

ScienceMark does support Everest's results, with the MIIIF tying with the P7P55D and the Intel board having the lowest memory latency.

There's really not much to report here as all four motherboards are performing within less than 1-2% of each other in these popular synthetic benchmarks. Will the results be any different in real-life applications? Let's find out.

 

[MAC]

System Benchmarks

System Benchmarks

SuperPi Mod v1.5

When running the SuperPI 32MB benchmark, we are calculating Pi to 32 million digits and timing the process. Obviously more CPU power helps in this intense calculation, but the memory sub-system also plays an important role, as does the operating system. We are running one instance of SuperPi via the HyperPi 0.99b interface. This is therefore a single-thread workload.

Flexing its enthusiast muscles, the Maximus III Formula took the crown in this ever popular benchmark, just squeaking by the P7P55D Deluxe.

Cinebench R10

Cinebench R10 64-bit
Test1: Single CPU Image Render
Test2: Multi CPU Image Render
Comparison: Generated Score

Developed by MAXON, creators of Cinema 4D, Cinebench 10 is designed using the popular Cinema software and created to compare system performance in 3D Animation and Photo applications. There are two parts to the test; the first stresses only the primary CPU or Core, the second, makes use of up to 16 CPUs/Cores. Both are done rendering a realistic photo while utilizing various CPU-intensive features such as reflection, ambient occlusion, area lights and procedural shaders

The performance differences in Cinebench are truly minimal, with the MIIIF coming in second in both tests.

PCMark Vantage x64

PCMark Vantage Advanced 64-bit Edition (1.0.0.0)
PCMark Suite / Default Settings
Comparison: Generated Score

The main focus of our General Tasks category lies with the most recent installment of the PCMark series, Vantage. While still classified under the description of a Synthetic benchmark, PCMark Vantage uses many of Vista's (Note - Vantage is Vista-only) built-in programs and features along with its own tests, so it is "real-world" applicable in regards to CPU performance. The following is a general list of the tests in the PCMark suite, very much in line with tasks of an average user: Data encryption, Data compression, CPU image manipulation (compression/decompression/resize), Audio transcoding,Video transcoding,Text editing,Web page rendering, Windows Mail, Windows Contacts, and CPU game test.

Although a bit behind the P7P55D Deluxe, the MIIF definitely proves its superiority over the Intel and MSI boards.


Photoshop CS4

For the image editing portion of this review, we will use Photoshop CS4 in coordination with Driver Heaven’s Photoshop Benchmark V3, which is an excellent test of CPU power and memory bandwidth. This is a scripted benchmark that individually applies 15 different filters to a 109MB JPEG, and uses Photoshop’s built-in timing feature to provide a result at each test stage. Then it’s simply a matter of adding up the 15 results to reach the final figure.

While the MIIIF comes in third, the difference between fastest and slowest board is only 1.5%.


Lame Front End

Lame Front End v1.0 is a single-threaded application, which means that it only utilizes a single processor core. This will obviously limit performance but it will allow us to see the benefits of Lynnfield aggressive Turbo Boost with single-threaded loads. We will be encoding a WAV rip of Santana’s Supernatural album and converting it to MP3 using the highest fidelity VBR 0 quality preset.

In LFE, the tables are turned with the Maximus III Formula coming in last, and the Intel board claiming its first minor victory.

x264 HD Benchmark

x264 HD Benchmark v1.0
Test: MPEG-2 HD 720P Video Clip Conversion to x264
DVD Video Length: 30 Seconds
Comparison: FPS of Second Pass

x264 is quickly becoming the new codec of choice for encoding a growing number of H.264/MPEG-4 AVC videos. Think of it as the new Divx of HD and you can understand why we felt it critical to include. Tech Arp's recent development of the x264 HD Benchmark takes a 30 second HD video clip and encodes it into the x264 codec with the intention of little to no quality loss. The test is measured using the average frames per second achieved during encoding, which scales with processor speed and efficiency. The benchmark also allows the use of multi-core processors so it gives a very accurate depiction of what to expect when using encoding application on a typical full length video.

The MIIIF comes in first in this benchmark with the P7P55D right on its heels. Aside from the laggard DP55KG, all models are once again very equal performance-wise.

WinRAR

WinRAR 3.8.0
Test: Compression of 1GB of Assorted Files
Comparison: Time to Finish

One of the most popular file compression/decompresion tools, we use WinRAR to compress a 1GB batch of files and archive them, timing the task until completion.

The MIIIF ties for the last with the DP55KG in WinRAR, but again we are talking about a 2 second/1% spread between all four models.


Overall, the Maximus III Formula proved to be a very solid performance, often swapping the lead with the P7P55D Deluxe. Truthfully though, you'll never notice the performance difference between these four motherboards.

 

[MAC]

I/O Benchmarks

I/O Benchmarks

A first here at Hardware Canucks, we have finally included some basic I/O benchmarks. We love to hear your thoughts and ideas about what to implement and whether we should expand to include LAN and audio tests, so let us know on the forums.

HD Tach 3.0.4 - SATA

For this benchmark, HDTach was used. It shows the potential read speed which you are likely to experience with an Intel X25-M 80GB G1 solid state drive (SSD) on this motherboard. The long test was run to give a slightly more accurate picture. The test was run three times with the results averaged out.

We don’t put much stock in Burst speed readings and this goes double for SSDs; the more important number is the Average Speed number. This number will tell you what to expect from a given drive in normal, day to day operations. The higher the average the faster your entire system will seem.

We also test CPU utilization in order to make sure that there isn't a problem needlessly wasting CPU cycles. Lastly, we have also included the random access time, just as another barometer of overall storage sub-system performance. In both cases, the lower the better.

Although the MSI board exhibited the highest burst speed (and read the description for our thoughts on burst speed), the Maximus III Formula tied with the P7P55D Deluxe for the best average read speed.

All four motherboards pretty much had identical CPU utilization and random access times, however the MIIIF did consistently achieve a slightly lower random access time.

HD Tach 3.0.4 - USB

For this benchmark, HDTach was used. It shows the potential read speed which you are likely to experience from this motherboard's USB 2.0 ports. In this test, we connected an external 2.5" 5400RPM hard drive to a USB port, ran the test three times and averaged the results. The long test was run to give a slightly more accurate picture.

We don’t put much stock in Burst speed readings; the more important number is the Average Speed number. This number will tell you what to expect from a given drive in normal, day to day operations. The higher the average the faster your entire system will seem.

We also test CPU utilization in order to make sure that there isn't a problem needlessly wasting CPU cycles. Lastly, we have also included the random access time, just as another barometer of overall storage sub-system performance. In both cases, the lower the better.

The Maximus III Formula came third in our USB 2.0 performance test, but the difference between all four motherboards is minimal.

Once again, the results are pretty much identical, and the slight variances can be attributed to the benchmark itself.

HD Tach 3.0.4 - eSATA

For this benchmark, HDTach was used. It shows the potential read speed which you are likely to experience from this motherboard's eSATA port with an Intel X25-M G1 80GB solid state drive. with these hard drives. The long test was run to give a slightly more accurate picture. The test was run three times with the results averaged out.

We don’t put much stock in Burst speed readings and this goes double for SSDs; the more important number is the Average Speed number. This number will tell you what to expect from a given drive in normal, day to day operations. The higher the average the faster your entire system will seem.

We also test CPU utilization in order to make sure that there isn't a problem needlessly wasting CPU cycles. Lastly, we have also included the random access time, just as another barometer of overall storage sub-system performance. In both cases, the lower the better.

The Maximus III Formula, P7P55D Deluxe, and P55-GD80 all utilize the same JMicron JMB363 controller for eSATA support, and as such they achieved nearly performance levels. All three were a good deal faster than the Intel DP55KG, which uses by a Marvell 88E6145 controller.

Once again, the ASUS and MSI models are equal, but Intel board has slightly lower CPU utilization.

 

[MAC]

Gaming Benchmarks

Gaming Benchmarks

Futuremark 3DMark06

3DMark06 v1.1.0
Graphic Settings: Default
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

The Futuremark 3DMark series has been a part of the backbone in computer and hardware reviews since its conception. The trend continues today as 3DMark06 provides consumers with a solid synthetic benchmark geared for performance and comparison in the 3D gaming realm. This remains one of the most sought after statistics, as well as an excellent tool for accurate CPU comparison, and it will undoubtedly be used for years to come.

In 3DMark06, the Maximus III Formula was second only to the P7P55D Deluxe, and even then the difference is minimal.

Futuremark 3DMark Vantage

3DMark Vantage v1.0.1
Graphic Settings: Performance Preset
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

3DMark Vantage is the follow-up to the highly successful 3DMark06. It uses DirectX 10 exclusively so if you are running Windows XP, you can forget about this benchmark. Along with being a very capable graphics card testing application, it also has very heavily multi-threaded CPU tests, such Physics Simulation and Artificial Intelligence (AI), which makes it a good all-around gaming benchmark.

On the other hand, in Vantage, the MIIIF took the lead from the P7P55D.

Crysis

Crysis v1.21
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: High
Global Settings: DX10 / 64-Bit

Test 1: Ice benchmark_CPU2 demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Still one of the most hardware intensive game on the market today, Crysis has been chosen for its obvious ability to be able to showcase the differences between platforms and to showcase just how far one will need to go in the quest for maximum performance. The game also features the renowned CryEngine, the power behind the incredible graphics, which is expected to be foundation of future titles.

This is as reliable a benchmark as they come, and as you can see, the difference between all four motherboards is infinitesimal.

Far Cry 2

Far Cry 2 1.02
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: Very High
Global Settings: DX10 Enabled

Test 1: Ranch Long Demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Far Cry 2 is the hot new new first-person shooter from Ubisoft's Montreal studio, and the first game to utilize the new visually stunning Dunia Engine, which will undoubtedly be used by numerous future games. Using the included Benchmarking Tool, we ran the Long Ranch demo in DX10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings set to very high.

As in Crysis, the frame rate difference between all the different models is really not worth mentioning.

Left 4 Dead

Left 4 Dead (Latest Update)
Resolution: 1680x1050
Filtering: 4X MSAA / Anisotropic 8X
Graphic Settings: High
Shader Detail: Very High
Test 1: HWC Custom Timedemo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Left 4 Dead is the latest disorienting, fast-paced zombie apocalypse mega-hit from Valve. L4D uses the latest version of the Source engine with enhancements such as multi-core processor support and physics-based animation. We test here at 1680x1050 with in-game details set to their highest levels, with MSAA 4X and AA 8X. For benching, we used a pre-recorded 20 minute timedemo taken on the No Mercy campaign during The Apartments mission.

Both ASUS models put up some strong numbers in L4D, with the MIIIF coming in second behind the P7P55D Deluxe.

Street Fighter 4

Street Fighter 4 Demo
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 0X
Graphic Settings: High
Test 1: Built-in Timedemo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Street Fighter IV is a 2008 arcade game produced by famous developer Capcom, that has finally been released on the PC platform. This game has not been 'ported' since the Street Fighter IV arcade machines actually have PC internals, with circa 2005 components. As a result, the version of the game released on the PC is considered the definitive version. With a fully multi-threaded engine and an astounding hybrid 2D/3D graphics style, this game is sure to please all fans of the Street Fighter series.

The Maximus III Formula came in third here, but again, we are talking less than one FPS difference between the four boards.

World in Conflict

World in Conflict v1.010
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 4X
Anisotropic Filtering: 4X
Graphic Settings: Very High
Test 1: Built-in Benchmark
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

One of the most visually stunning real-time strategy games in recent history, World in Conflict can really push systems to the brink, which is what we attempt by running the game in DirectX 10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings maxed out. For this test we used the in-game benchmarking tool.

The MIIIF arguably took the lead in WiC, but it's performance lead is minimal.


Overall, when it comes to single graphics card gaming, none of the motherboards are really faster than the others, since the performance differences are less than 1% in most case.

 

[MAC]

SLI Gaming Benchmarks

SLI Gaming Benchmarks

As most of you know, there was a huge amount of excitement surrounding X58 motherboards being the first Intel chipset-based motherboards to officially support NVIDIA's SLI multi-GPU technology. The SLI support is not native to the X58 chipset though, motherboard manufacturers have to pay NVIDIA to obtain a 'bios key' to unlock SLI on whichever motherboard they decide the implement the feature on. The situation is identical this time around on P55 motherboards, and we are glad to report that the Maximus III Formula does support SLI. With this in mind, we decided test out how well it scales from one to two graphics cards, and how it performs compared to the similarly SLI-enabled ASUS P7P55D Deluxe and MSI P55-GD80.

For this test, we are using two EVGA GeForce GTX 280 1GB (01G-P3-1280-AR) graphics cards, which are referenced clocked parts.

Futuremark 3DMark Vantage

3DMark Vantage v1.0.1
Graphic Settings: Performance Preset
Resolution: 1280X1024

Test: Specific CPU Score and Full Run 3Dmarks
Comparison: Generated Score

3DMark Vantage is the follow-up to the highly successful 3DMark06. It uses DirectX 10 exclusively so if you are running Windows XP, you can forget about this benchmark. Along with being a very capable graphics card testing application, it also has very heavily multi-threaded CPU tests, such Physics Simulation and Artificial Intelligence (AI), which makes it a good all-around gaming benchmark.

All three motherboards exhibited similar scaling from 1 to 2 cards, with a 61-64% performance increase from SLI. The MSI model had the best performance scaling though, with both ASUS models stuck in the 61% range.

Crysis

Crysis v1.21
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: High
Global Settings: DX10 / 64-Bit

Test 1: Ice benchmark_CPU2 demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Still one of the most hardware intensive game on the market today, Crysis has been chosen for its obvious ability to be able to showcase the differences between platforms and to showcase just how far one will need to go in the quest for maximum performance. The game also features the renowned CryEngine, the power behind the incredible graphics, which is expected to be foundation of future titles.

The Maximus III Formula displays slightly better SLI scaling in Crysis, with a 43% gain compared to 40% and 41% for the P7P55D and P55-GD80, respectively.

Far Cry 2

Far Cry 2 1.02
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti Aliasing: 0
Quality Settings: Ultra High
Global Settings: DX10 Enabled

Test 1: Ranch Long Demo
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

Far Cry 2 is the hot new new first-person shooter from Ubisoft's Montreal studio, and the first game to utilize the new visually stunning Dunia Engine, which will undoubtedly be used by numerous future games. Using the included Benchmarking Tool, we ran the Long Ranch demo in DX10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings set to very high.

All three boards performed equally in FC2, achieving 50-51% performance scaling when going from one graphics card to two.

World in Conflict

World in Conflict v1.010
Resolution: 1680x1050
Anti-Aliasing: 4X
Anisotropic Filtering: 4X
Graphic Settings: Very High
Test 1: Built-in Benchmark
Comparison: FPS (Frames per Second)

One of the most visually stunning real-time strategy games in recent history, World in Conflict can really push systems to the brink, which is what we attempt by running the game in DirectX 10 mode at 1680x1050 with all settings maxed out. For this test we used the in-game benchmarking tool.

All three motherboards performed about the same, with MIIIF (39%) placing between the MSI (38%) and the other ASUS (42%).

 

[MAC]

Voltage Regulation / Power Consumption

Voltage Regulation / Power Consumption

Our voltage regulation testing will focus on the various voltages and the differences encountered between what is selected in the BIOS and what is measured by a digital multi-meter (DMM). Thanks to the ProbeIt feature we didn't have to go poking & prodding everywhere, since all the voltage read points are located in one convenient spot. The concept is pretty simple, the left dot is the ground point, the right point is the voltage read point. Touch your DMM leads to whichever voltage you want to check and voila! As mentioned previously though, we would have preferred a design where you could attach the DMM leads to the read points, since it's a pain in the backside to be standing over the motherboard gently keeping the leads on the small dots for any length of time.

Voltage Regulation

These measurements were taken at stock system speeds and with C1E, SpeedStep, Turbo Boost, and Thermal Monitor disabled in the BIOS. Just to clarify, the vCore (LLC) section is the vCore results with Load-Line Calibration enabled. Here are our findings:

These results are very, very impressive. The Maximus III Formula has some of the best voltage output and regulation that we have seen on any motherboard. What you select in the BIOS is exactly what the motherboards outputs and there is effectively no variance between idle and load states. Having said that, the VTT/IMC voltage outputs a little higher than selected and even boosts a bit higher under load. However, given how important this voltage is, we're more than happy to see this little divergence.

The most noteworthy voltage is obviously the vCore, and not only is accurate but exceptionally stable as well. As you can see from our results, the MIIIF clearly has Load-Line Calibration (LLC) enabled by default, so you can simply leave the setting on AUTO and LLC will be engaged. The exception to this is when the vCore is set to auto and Load-Line Calibration (LLC) is also set to auto, where you get a roughly 5% voltage droop, as per Intel's specifications. Given how critical it is, let's take a closer look at the vCore's characteristics under full load with a one-hour OCCT run, while our Core i7-870 is overclocked to 4.0Ghz at 1.35Vcore with LLC on AUTO:

Usually, we would have two vCore charts above, one with Load-Line Calibration enabled and one with it disabled. However, as mentioned above, as soon as you manually select the CPU core voltage LLC gets enabled automatically. Therefore, unless a user manually disables it (and there's no reason to), this is what the vCore line will look like. As you can see, for some reason LLC takes a little while to kick into gear, but once it does the vCore line is absolutely perfect, showing no spikes or ripples. Clearly, the Maximus III Formula's 16+3 phase PWM design is a good one.

Power Consumption

All motherboard manufacturers boast that their products have the lowest power consumption and feature the latest new development in energy efficiency. Well that is what we are here to find out.

For this test, every BIOS option was reset to its default setting and the Windows Vista power plan was changed from High Performance to Balanced. Lastly, we set the ASUS EPU-6 Engine to AUTO mode to allow it to fully manage system power consumption. We also tan this test without EPU being installed on the system, to see what the difference would be.

For our idle test, we let the system idle for 15 minutes and measured the peak wattage through our UPM EM100 power meter.

For our CPU load test, we ran Prime 95 In-place large FFTs on all available threads for 15 minutes, measuring the peak wattage via the UPM EM100 power meter.

For our overall system load test, we ran Prime 95 In-place large FFTs on all available threads for 15 minutes, while simultaneously loading the GPU with OCCT v3.1.0 GPU:OCCT stress test at 1680x1050@60Hz in fullscreen mode.

In bone stock form, the Maximus III Formula power efficiency was middle of the road. While it matched the impressive MSI P55-GD80 when it came to idle, it had the same high (within context) CPU load power consumption as the P7P55D Deluxe. Thankfully, it proved to have slightly lower full load power consumption than its ASUS brethren. Frankly though, this is an enthusiast product, power consumption be damned!

 

[MAC]

Conclusion

Conclusion

ASUS' Republic of Gamers motherboards have built a strong reputation over the years, and although the enthusiast product market is getting more competitive by the day, everyone knows that when a new RoG model arrives it means business.

The Maximus III Formula is no exception. It is a comprehensive, well-rounded package for enthusiasts to work with. It comes with just about every option and setting imaginable to keep serious overclockers happy, and its stable and mature enough to ensure that it will never be the component that holds you back in your endeavours. Having said that, the voltage read points were clearly not designed with benchmarkers in mind. They are a great feature to have, and frankly a must-have on a RoG model, but no one wants to be forced to hold voltage leads to a tiny read points for any extended period of time. This is a step back compared to what was implemented on the ASUS Rampage II Extreme and even MSI's P55-GD80.

On the completely other end of the scale, with MemPerfect, CPU Level Up, MemOK!, Voltiminder LEDs, and COP EX, novices have the tools and safeguards to allow them to experiment with overclocking and tweaking without experiencing any show stopping disasters. And if they do experience issues, this motherboard's excellent overclocking recovery makes it very easy to get back to where you left off.

A new feature that will enthrall everyone (if only briefly) is ROG Connect. By running a USB cable from the Maximus III Formula to a notebook, you can use the RC TweakIt software to make real-time frequency and voltage adjustments remotely. World-class overclockers will this feature useful in order to make on-the-fly changes while a benchmark is actually running. Currently, many of them have been doing this manually on motherboard's like the Rampage II Extreme, that have physical controls that allow the tweaking of system settings. Basically, ROG Connect is almost like the technology that Formula One teams use to tune their cars even while they speeding around a race track.

From a physical standpoint, the Maximus III Formula is built using the same Xtreme Design concept as the P7P55D Deluxe. It has the same Xtreme Phase 16 + 3 phase power design, Stack Cool3+ PCB with two 2oz copper PCB layers, Anti-EMI & Anti-Surge Protection features, and obviously solid state capacitors throughout the board. This is to say that it's a very well-built and designed motherboard. Speaking of design, the usual Republic of Gamers black & red theme is a winner as always, but we wish the PCH cooler was a little more eye-pleasing. The overall layout is excellent, but as demonstrated in the Installation Section, you will want to be wary of CPU coolers larger than the Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme, otherwise you will encounter some issues with memory modules with tall heatspreaders.

Once you do have the motherboard installed, you will experience what we discovered is one of the fastest and best overclocking P55 motherboards that we've come across so far. It's not a great deal better than the P7P55D Deluxe in those two areas, but every little bit helps. This is especially true given the fact that the Maximus III Formula really isn't that much more expensive than other high-end P55 motherboards, especially for a Republic of Gamers model. Compared to the P7P55D Deluxe for example, the MIIIF carries a mere $20-30 price premium. That's pretty good in our eyes, especially since you are getting the SupremeFX X-Fi audio module and the intangible pride of RoG ownership.



Pros

- Solid performance.
- Republic of Gamers theme looks good (aside from the slightly bland PCH cooler).
- Excellent layout.
- Nice spacing between the PCI-E slots.
- 2-Way CrossFireX & 2-Way SLI capability.
- Superior manual overclocking capabilities.
- Good failed OC recovery.
- Auto Tuning automatic overclocking works well.
- Perfect voltage regulation & output.
- Good SATA II & USB 2.0 connectivity.
- Eight 4-pin PWM fan headers.
- SupremeFX X-Fi audo card.
- Superb, user-friendly BIOS.
- Comprehensive software suite.
- ROG Connect is like nothing we have seen before.
- Socketed BIOS chip.


Cons

- Voltage read points are too simplistic, need a way to attach voltmeter leads directly to the motherboard.
- Only one BIOS chip, no backup or fail-safe.
- Large CPU coolers + tall memory heatspreaders can cause installation annoyances.
- No IDE or Floppy connectors (a non-issue for many nowadays).
- Thermal sensor headers, but no thermal sensor cables.
- A dual-slot graphics card in the 3rd PCI-E x16 slot will overhang the motherboard (unlikely configuration).

Our thanks to ASUS for making this review possible!​

ASUS Maximus III Formula Motherboard Review Comment Thread​