Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
HD4850 will likely still be much faster, assuming the drivers exist or are supported. 512MB be damned, the lower Pentiums use the slowest version of the Intel IGP.
That being said, is it worth while? The 4850 drew less power than its Nvidia competition at the time, but its still significantly more than your IGP can ever draw.
intel iris pro graphics are comparable to nvidia gtx 750s.
Why bother with such an old card? You can get a GTX 1050 for $120.
HD4850 series is not fully supported in Windows 10. I found out the hard way as I was building an X99 system for my father and was planning on reusing his old 4850 series GPU while I was looking for a deal on something newer.
Iris pro graphics are clearly not on that Pentium chip.
$120 is $120. If the OP had that kind of money sitting around, he probably would have opted for an i5 over a G4560. Actually, the G4600 would be a better bet as it has a faster IGP.
Yep, the reason is I want to build my dad a cheap as possible PC for mostly web browsing, youtube, MS office. I will be reusing some parts from the old system (ie. psu, ssd, gpu). So since the old system had my old HD 4850, I was wondering if it would be worth it to stick it in the new system or if the integrated graphics had cought up in performance.
However now that you mention the G4600, since its only about $8 difference with the G4560, is the integrated graphics on the G4600 that much better?
The G4600 has roughly twice the graphics computational power of the G4560.
As for the driver support, I also have a tale to regale. A friend and I had to run Vista 32bit for an old piece of software. The underlying hardware was going out, and a new Kaby Lake system was assembled to replace the old HW. Not one piece of HW (GPU, chipset, ethernet, SATA controller, USB, audio) has drivers that will even work in Vista 32. Some still had XP support, but still failed to work in Vista 32. Some still had 7 support, but only 64 bit. In the cross chart of Old HW, Old SW, New HW, and New SW, I have learned to never mix and match when I can.
The proper solution was to run the whole thing a VM.
Official support that ended almost a year after Kaby Lake was launched? Who cares about MS support at this point? The whole purpose of the story was the individual device manufacturers have all long since stopped supporting their HW on specific older OSes (XP still supported). Both Vistas just had odd transitional driver models that are largely incompatible with everything else. Vista 64 can at least leach off of a few 7 64 bit drivers. XP, Win2k can still somewhat share drivers. Vista 32 is just an odd dead end.And that's an OS that's been out of official MS support since April.
Why are you so surprised at this? People running ancient OSes deal with this shit on a daily basis.
This is why the VM was invented.