It's got AVX, so there's quite a compatibility range for modern games a Core2 can't run. 😀

Curiously, I've been testing games for some time on an HP laptop with an A10-7300 APU (https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD- … 20A10-7300.html), 16gb RAM and a 240gb SSD. And Windows 7 64.
And I was thinking of starting a thread in this regard and since it has already been raised I am not going to make a new one but rather contribute to this one for education.

The GPU built into this APU is this https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon- … -graphics.c2630. It is at the level of a GT 220. The results have surprised me because it has turned out to be very compatible, I have not found graphic errors in any of the games I tried, and quite powerful considering its 19W TDP.
After my tests so far, I would say that you can run all games up to 2005 with high details and at the native resolution of this laptop (1600x900), after that you need to reduce the resolution if you want high details and keep 30FPS.
Games I've been testing...
Games that run smoothly at native 1600x900 resolution and high details, except for antialiasing, which I don't like.

-Sacred original version on DVD.
-Sacred Gold version GOG.
-Divine divinity version GOG.
-Titan Quest original DVD version updated to v1.3.
-Neverwinter Nights Diamond version GOG.
-Half life 2 original version DVD.
-Fable the lost chapters original CD version.
-Shadow of memories original version CD.
-Sudeki version GOG.
-Enclave GOG version
-Planescape storm version GOG.
-Septera core version GOG.
-Legrand legacy version GOG (this case is surprising because on the GOG page it says to require a GT 650, but in the end it has the pre-rendered backgrounds and only the characters are in 3D).
-Maelstrom 2007 Codemasters. (Strategy games aren't my favorite, so I only tried the first mission and maybe with more units as it usually happens with strategy games, it won't be playable at this resolution anymore).
-Final Fantasy VIII remastered Steam version. (I am not going to try more Steam games because the client is disgusting and consumes a lot of resources considering that it is only for playing).

Games that work without problems, but you have to reduce the resolution (I like to go down to 1024x768 which seems to me a good resolution for the time of these games) to keep the 30FPS with high details, this is not a problem because the scaling of the GPU maintaining the aspect ratio is very good and good image quality is maintained with side bands. In the case of a normal 15-inch laptop (mine is 17) that have a typical resolution of 1366x768, the results should be better.
-Prey 2006 original version DVD.
-Oblivion original DVD version.

In some games I made little progress, and surely they would need more tests, but in most I spent hours.
I'm going to keep trying more games, but the problem is that a 240gb SSD fills up easily.
If I don't forget, which happens to me easily, I'll be adding other games that I try.

This is my opinion regarding these processors.
If someone who thinks about buying one of these laptops with AMD APUs before the Zen architecture, don't get too excited because what makes them interesting in my opinion is only the power consumption/graphic performance ratio.
For the laptop that I use, I only paid €30 (although I later expanded it, of course), because this computer is almost useful for many current things, YouTube for example is already slow until the moment you see a video that the GPU starts working. And the Turbo core feature is working, and the laptop reaches 68c max, so it's no an overheating isue or something like that.
The IPC of these APUs was lousy compared to the Intel processors of the same time, being at the level of Celeron or I3 processors according to the benchmarks of the time, but the GPU on the Intel processors of the time was bad, and it was very poorly compatible. If you add a dedicated GPU to an Intel processor from that era, the results should be better, but the power consumption of Intel processors was much higher (Intel liked to hide the real max power draw of its processors, at least back then) and if you add the consumption of the dedicated GPU, the performance/consumption for games is much worse in the case of Intel.
So, nobody got excited and go pay €200 for an A10-5750m with 8gb ram and an SSD...
As a note, I have a special appreciation for AMD because of the long history of AMD computers that I have had, but there are truths that cannot be hidden.

Working with this low performace System is somewhat like "slowfood".
I even enjoy it sometimes when not everything is working in a haste but takes it time to start up.
Even the games must be simpler to run properly and not so high strung or maxed out fo speed - good for my nerves 😀

Your GPU can run plenty of stuff, whereas the CPU is hard to be sure about since 1.5GHz is so much lower than anything I've run on desktop for ages. It's more comparable to some of my laptops, which I rarely try to run games on because the GPUs are too old to even attempt it...

Ys Origin (or Oath or Ys 6)
Guilty Gear X2 Reload
Unreal II
Agarest
Trails in the Sky series
Jade Empire

Add another two games to the list.
-Need for speed Porsche unleashed CD version, didn't try the vanilla version, applied a patch, and it runs perfectly in 1600x900, even the smoke is clear gray.
-Deus EX CD version 1.0 without any patch, 1600x900x32 without graphical errors.
I'm trying old games because I think that it's a great retro gaming laptop.

I've recently tried a couple of games in a n4020 laptop (5W chip or so from 2019) with the HD 600 graphics, I was fairly positive, played some Halo and Flatout very nicely, better than with high tier midrange hardware of the time I think.

I wouldn't underestimate this PC. The Radeon R7 240 should be roughly around 8800GT performance level and I wouldn't expect the CPU to be slower than an early Core2, like the E4000 series. That would make the PC able to run anything from the mid-2000s maxed out.

My laptop has a Radeon HD 7570M which is also around the same performance level, although paired with an i5-3320M. That GPU can run Far Cry on Linux Mint through Proton very well.

Just tried Far Cry, the original 5CD version on my laptop and with everything maxed out and at 1600x900, witought antialiasing it is always over 40 FPS. I'm very surprised.
So, the A4-5000 and the R7 240 should be very capable, like RandomStranger said. But I expect the R7 240 to be only a bit more than a half of the 8800GT, 6 gigapixels vs 9 and 15 gigatexels vs 33.
The R7 has half the rops of the 8800gt, 8 vs 16, but the 7570M also has 16, so it's closer to a 8800GT I think.

How about the FM1 APUs like A10-6800K or A10-5800K? I have both but chipset it uses in that HP computer I'm not sure for windows 98SE and XP.

Cheers,

ildonaldo wrote on 2023-02-12, 12:44:

Working with this low performace System is somewhat like "slowfood".
I even enjoy it sometimes when not everything is working in a haste but takes it time to start up.
Even the games must be simpler to run properly and not so high strung or maxed out fo speed - good for my nerves 😀

Exactly. That's why so many users here love to tinker with XTs and the 8088/8086 CPUs.
Each time after I'm finished 'working' with my XT compatible, all the other classic PCs around me feel insanely quick.
These old XTs teached me to be grateful, essentially. 😀

Hoping wrote on 2023-02-12, 21:13:

The R7 has half the rops of the 8800gt, 8 vs 16, but the 7570M also has 16, so it's closer to a 8800GT I think.

You can't compare these 3 GPUs 1:1 based on specs. They are three different atchitectures. It's difficult to find an official review which has all 3 of these GPUs.

This has the R7-240 and an HD6670 which is maybe around 50% faster than the 7570M
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r … 250,3717-4.html

And here is the Techpowerup database which has the 9800GT (which is the same as the 8800GT):
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-r7-240.c2463
On this list the HD7570M should be where the HD4670 is.

pentiumspeed wrote on 2023-02-12, 23:03:

How about the FM1 APUs like A10-6800K or A10-5800K? I have both but chipset it uses in that HP computer I'm not sure for windows 98SE and XP.

Cheers,

I'm also curious if first generation APUs could run XP, I'm trying to get a laptop with an e-450 APU or one with an E1-2000 for a good price, because they are useless for anything nowadays terms and if they aren't useful for XP.... I don't need more computers in storage 😉.
For Windows XP it would be interesting. I think there are drivers for FM1 and XP, but I don't have anything to test at the moment.

Fm1 CPUs can run XP afaik, they have up to a 320SPs GPU similar to the HD 5570.

That's very interesting, I've played the first Dragon age with an HD 5570 back then. That level of performance could be what I want for XP. I never play late era XP games on XP because I think that they were already designed with Win7 in mind.
Like I said, I'm focused on the laptops, so FM1 could be a future project.
I also got another HP with an A10-5750m to test, but my wife took it out of my hands 😀, women's things. Maybe she will get bored of the laptop soon, or maybe not.....

RandomStranger wrote on 2023-02-13, 10:05:

You can't compare these 3 GPUs 1:1 based on specs. They are three different atchitectures. It's difficult to find an official re […]
Show full quote

Hoping wrote on 2023-02-12, 21:13:

The R7 has half the rops of the 8800gt, 8 vs 16, but the 7570M also has 16, so it's closer to a 8800GT I think.

You can't compare these 3 GPUs 1:1 based on specs. They are three different atchitectures. It's difficult to find an official review which has all 3 of these GPUs.

This has the R7-240 and an HD6670 which is maybe around 50% faster than the 7570M
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r … 250,3717-4.html

And here is the Techpowerup database which has the 9800GT (which is the same as the 8800GT):
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-r7-240.c2463
On this list the HD7570M should be where the HD4670 is.

Yes I know, sorry, it was a rough comparison, I have an R7 260x and in numbers is close to the HD 5870, that I also have, but the 5870 has a lot more punch. Maybe the R7 would be better than the 5870 with a DX12 game, never tried it.
The last game I've tried on an 8800GT G92 was The Witcher 2 and the results were good at 1366x768, I like the 8800GT because it had a very good price/performance ratio when I got it.

Cooler GPU is 9800GTX+. I got one, based on G92 as well.

Cheers,