Any benefit in upgrading to the GeForce GT 1030 card?

[Harry_Wild]

My work laptop has a HD 4600 and there's a very noticeable lag in comparison to discrete GPU system. Just dragging Windows 10 calculator around lacks. On top if it it doesn't decode any modern video codecs. Just h264. VP9 would offer better quality on YouTube. Also I don't really like how Intel does video processing. Not as good as Nvidia or AMD.

My desktop PC has a top of the Intel i7 4th gen. 4790 @3.60 with 32GB RAM! After that, the 4790K got released an over clocked version. It was the top of the line P300 in 2014-2015? not quite sure of the year it got release, however. Purchase it in January 2015. That might be the reason for it being faster.

 

[Harry_Wild]

Re thinking on all your comments, I order another low profile Gigabyte 1050 TI 4GB model to test out the fact that I did not load in the Nvidia drivers and if I did, the performance would have been faster! It will be coming in a weeks time! Let the test begin after the new years?

 

[Harry_Wild]

Re thinking on all your comments, I order another low profile Gigabyte 1050 TI 4GB model to test out the fact that I did not load in the Nvidia drivers and if I did, the performance would have been faster! It will be coming in a weeks time! Let the test begin after the new years?

Found out through another thread in this subforum(What is the right way to upgrade a video card) that Windows 10 automatically loads the Nvidia drivers for the new discrete card! So I thinking of canceling the new purchase because of this new info!

Help
Does anyone still feel that the 1050 TI 4GB with Nvidia drivers load graphics card running Windows 10 will be faster then the IGP Intel HD4600 for rendering webpages faster, smoother video streaming and for general boot up, overall more video/display accleration, etc...?

 

[Harry_Wild]

Found the answer:

An Nvidia graphics card only improves performance in

1. Intensive 3D applications like games, AutoCAD etc.
2. Playing high resolution media
3. Video editing
4. Data processing
5. Deep Learning and AI algorithm thread rate.

Other than these there is no effect on booting time, loading time in other applications, or data transfer rate from ssd or hdd.

A GPU is just basically a powerful accelerator for certain programs.

https://www.quora.com/Does-an-NVIDIA-graphics-card-improve-the-overall-performance-of-a-PC

Now I get it! Does explain the reason why my 1050 TI did not run faster then IGP HD4600, however.

I found out that I cannot cancel my order!

 

[LTC8K6]

The 1050ti will certainly greatly improve anything related to video compared to the HD4600.

You will probably be able to have things going on in the background while streaming.

You also do qualify for Netflix UltraHD with the NV1050ti card

https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4583/~/4k-uhd-netflix-content-on-nvidia-gpus

 

[Harry_Wild]

The 1050ti will certainly greatly improve anything related to video compared to the HD4600.

You will probably be able to have things going on in the background while streaming.

You also do qualify for Netflix UltraHD with the NV1050ti card

https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4583/~/4k-uhd-netflix-content-on-nvidia-gpus

I do not have Netflix but have Amazon Prime which has 4K shows and some 4K movies. YouTube has latest movie trailers in 4K along with sporting lights like downhill ski down on mountains. They are now shot with quadcopters in 4K and helmet cams.

 

[Harry_Wild]

Talk with Newegg and I kind of stuck with it unless it does not work like DOA status! Crappo! Should of left this alone when I was good. Now I need to upgrade the to a new displayport cable too since my is around 3 years old and standards have change to 1.4b! Ugh!

 

[Tup3x]

Help
Does anyone still feel that the 1050 TI 4GB with Nvidia drivers load graphics card running Windows 10 will be faster then the IGP Intel HD4600 for rendering webpages faster, smoother video streaming and for general boot up, overall more video/display accleration, etc...?

HD 4600 is slow with crappy driver support for Windows 10. Even dragging calculator around the screen lags. It has better video decoding engine too and I've never been a fan how Intel does de-interlacing and video processing. Also web browsers are starting to take advantage of GPUs more and more. Even things like Google Maps benefit from better GPU since it uses WebGL for rendering.

There's not a single thing where HD 4600 is better.

 

[Harry_Wild]

HD 4600 is slow with crappy driver support for Windows 10. Even dragging calculator around the screen lags. It has better video decoding engine too and I've never been a fan how Intel does de-interlacing and video processing. Also web browsers are starting to take advantage of GPUs more and more. Even things like Google Maps benefit from better GPU since it uses WebGL for rendering.

There's not a single thing where HD 4600 is better.

HD 4600 is better in that is nothing, used less power and is supported universally by all software manufacturers and hardware vendors. We will see if any graphic card can beat the HD 4600 in boot up acceleration and webpage rendering speed in Windows 10.

 

[LTC8K6]

HD 4600 is better in that is nothing, used less power and is supported universally by all software manufacturers and hardware vendors. We will see if any graphic card can beat the HD 4600 in boot up acceleration and webpage rendering speed in Windows 10.

The video card has no affect on boot up. Why do you keep mentioning that? It will render web pages faster, but it will not be anything you will notice because webpage rendering is light duty.
The 1050ti is leaps and bounds faster than HD4600 in nearly everything video related, it supports far more features, and the card will last you many years.

 

[LTC8K6]

HD4600 from late 2012 Shading Units160 TMUs20 ROPs2 uses slow system ram
Pixel Rate2.700 GPixel/s
Texture Rate27.00 GTexel/s
DirectX12.0 (11_1)
OpenGL4.3
OpenCL1.2
Vulkan1.1.80
Shader Model5.1

1050Ti from late 2016 Shading Units768 TMUs48 ROPs32 has it's own 4gb of fast GDDR5
Pixel Rate44.54 GPixel/s
Texture Rate66.82 GTexel/s
DirectX12.0 (12_1)
OpenGL4.6
OpenCL1.2
Vulkan1.1.95
CUDA6.1
Shader Model6.2

 

[Harry_Wild]

HD4600 from late 2012 Shading Units160 TMUs20 ROPs2 uses slow system ram
Pixel Rate2.700 GPixel/s
Texture Rate27.00 GTexel/s
DirectX12.0 (11_1)
OpenGL4.3
OpenCL1.2
Vulkan1.1.80
Shader Model5.1

1050Ti from late 2016 Shading Units768 TMUs48 ROPs32 has it's own 4gb of fast GDDR5
Pixel Rate44.54 GPixel/s
Texture Rate66.82 GTexel/s
DirectX12.0 (12_1)
OpenGL4.6
OpenCL1.2
Vulkan1.1.95
CUDA6.1
Shader Model6.2

Does not mean it is faster in the boot up process or in the opening up a webpage site to display to that of the HD 4600. 4K playback streaming is the same. These above statistics are only for doing games and video editing better I think.

 

[LTC8K6]

Does not mean it is faster in the boot up process or in the opening up a webpage site to display to that of the HD 4600. 4K playback streaming is the same. These above statistics are only for doing games and video editing better I think.

Can you explain why you think a video card would have anything to do with boot up time?

Also, displaying a web page takes very little GPU power. You would not notice a difference even if you went back to HD2500 graphics.

Your criteria for comparison are ridiculous, imo.

What you appear to be saying is that for you, HD4600 is overkill already, and you'd like to get a less powerful GPU if you can.

Well, when you get the 1050ti, just leave it in the box unopened and sell it and be done with it.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Your criteria for comparison are ridiculous, imo.

Yep. Might as well test which RGB lighting strips help boot speed as well.

 

[Harry_Wild]

Just saying what I wanted out an upgrade performance in a new higher end graphics card, that being faster acceleration displaying of images, video and text along with boot up time.

 

[heymrdj]

Just saying what I wanted out an upgrade performance in a new higher end graphics card, that being faster acceleration displaying of images, video and text along with boot up time.

Graphics cards do not help in boot time. In fact, they can make booting slower because it’s another driver and piece of software that has to load at boot time. Most IGP have zero issues rendering any of that. It’s pretty much what they were made for, and they do it darn well. My current work laptop is an I7-6600U, using the IGP. I run three 1080P monitors off of it and it doesn’t even flinch when I have video and in motion charts full screens on all three.

 

[Harry_Wild]

If I do return my 1050 ti, it is shipping cost plus 15% restocking cost - $12 + $25 or $37. I purchase after the 24th of December! I can return it!

 

[Harry_Wild]

Got my 1050 TI a day late and install it about 3 hours ago. It took me maybe 4 minutes since I done it already two times in swapping the full size brackets to small and back again. Insert it in the 16X 3.0 slot and then boot my PC. It took a solid 2 minutes for the monitor to be trigger by the PC. After that; I load the most recent BIOS from Windows and never gone to Nvidia website to get the latest because I don't need it.

Seems like normal acceleration to me even with the 1050 TI 4GB GDDR5! I am good for another 5 years in terms of graphics card needs. It somehow change my arrow pointer to a lite instead of white. I don't know how to turn this function off. It also change my sound card to the Dell P2715Q Nvidia High Definition Sound but that not connect to anything so I had to switch it back to my PC sound card. I set the default the third time in the Control Panel. It seems to keep now.

 

[Harry_Wild]

The noise level from my SFF case is slightly higher pitch and it is also slightly louder too with the 1050 TI! Did not notice this when I was testing it the first time around. But I have been on my computer for about 5 hours now and it is definitely louder with the graphic card inside then without it!

 

[LTC8K6]

You didn't mention if you are running an SSD or not.

Putting your OS on an SSD will greatly shorten boot time compared to a HDD.

It also just makes the computer quicker overall.

 

[Harry_Wild]

You didn't mention if you are running an SSD or not.

Putting your OS on an SSD will greatly shorten boot time compared to a HDD.

It also just makes the computer quicker overall.

I have a Samsung 1TB EVO 860 SSD SATA III. Thank you for reply. Maybe with new technology in 2019 coming out, the SATA III standard might be a little bit faster. It is still quite fast, but looking at pushing the envelope if I can. Probably upgrade to a 2TB SSD at end of 2019 too!

 

[LTC8K6]

i have a 4790K system with an 850 Evo and boot time is so fast that I wouldn't even think about trying to speed it up.

It cold boots very fast.

So it seems odd to me that with the good SSD you have, that you'd be trying to speed up what should already be a very fast boot up.

 

[Harry_Wild]

i have a 4790K system with an 850 Evo and boot time is so fast that I wouldn't even think about trying to speed it up.

It cold boots very fast.

So it seems odd to me that with the good SSD you have, that you'd be trying to speed up what should already be a very fast boot up.

Just trying to push the envelope given my existing PC system. I like fast boot ups. I hate it when Windows 10 does not full get loaded until around 14 seconds after the scene come up and Wi-Fi and other Startup programs are done. I will try to take out my anti-virus and malware, Apple iTune, stuff, etc... in the Startup program. I will also remove software that I never use too. I run anti spy software and registry fix software every week to keep it at maximum performance. Windows 10 gets a lot of adware and spyware that really slows the entire system down. I never open any email that I am not know who the sender is.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Windows 10 gets a lot of adware and spyware that really slows the entire system down.

Really? Methinks, you're doing something wrong...

 

[Harry_Wild]

Really? Methinks, you're doing something wrong...

Tell that to Norton’s, not me! I just buy their subscription annually but I going to try VPN again without Nortons. It seems to work out much better for me. No running of these utilities with VPN setup and you get privacy too!