• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Can I do basic 1080p video editing with a GeForce 210?

C

computerdude92

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2014
Messages
1,059
Location
Alaska
I wish I could find nice free video editing software. DaVinci Resolve Lite has ridiculously high system requirements. I can't even find the requirements for version 8 Lite, which was their first free version released in 2011.

All I want is basic video editing. Essentially a modern equivalent of Windows XP's built in movie maker, but doing 1080p video instead. I don't mind waiting longer for videos to process.

I want to do it all on Windows XP SP3 and never upgrade my video card. I don't want a high power consumption card. I love cards that are fanless and take only a few watts to run.


Thanks for any recommendations.
 
computerdude92 said:
I want to do it all on Windows XP SP3 and never upgrade my video card. I don't want a high power consumption card. I love cards that are fanless and take only a few watts to run.
Click to expand...

The GT 210 is not just "a couple of watts", it's a ~31W card depending on the core and memory clocks. It's also a pretty terrible card, being the second to the lowest entry level card in its generation. The next card up from it, the GT 220 is 200% faster than it, using only marginally more power. If you're using the GPU for video encoding, you need a much faster card.

The days of video cards running balls to the wall all the time was almost 15 years ago. Most all cards since then have power saving via clock ramping of the core and memory. Larger more powerful cards won't use that much more power idle, they only get power hungry when being utilized. Many cards also have fan spindown and won't run the fans at all when the card is at its lowest power mode. Both my GTX 1070 Ti and RTX 3070 Ti do this.
 
I was speaking figuratively, but I get the drift.

I will test out the newer Windows Movie Makers when I get the time.

Thanks for mentioning them!
 
I would aim for a 750ti. Cheap enough card, does hardware 1080p encoding/decoding via h.264. Low power usage, and will work in WinXP.

If you want h.265, in hardware, you will need a 9xx series card or newer. 9xx series is last to have drivers that work in WinXP.

Last stable drivers for 700/900 series cards and WinXP.
www.nvidia.com

GeForce Game Ready Driver | 359.06 | Windows XP | NVIDIA

Download the English (US) GeForce Game Ready Driver for Windows XP systems. Released 2015.12.1
www.nvidia.com
 
computerdude92 said:
I wish I could find nice free video editing software. DaVinci Resolve Lite has ridiculously high system requirements. I can't even find the requirements for version 8 Lite, which was their first free version released in 2011.

All I want is basic video editing. Essentially a modern equivalent of Windows XP's built in movie maker, but doing 1080p video instead. I don't mind waiting longer for videos to process.

I want to do it all on Windows XP SP3 and never upgrade my video card. I don't want a high power consumption card. I love cards that are fanless and take only a few watts to run.


Thanks for any recommendations.
Click to expand...
Are you running XP in 32-bit or 64-bit? If I were doing video editing in XP I'd go with 64-bit and take advantage of the virtually unlimited memory possibilities. Opens up a whole new world as far as video card support goes.
 
I've never heard of XP 64-bit having better video card support. I thought it was known for not having good driver support for stuff, compared to Windows versions before or since.

I'm running XP 32-bit SP3. I don't want any Nvidia card newer than the GeForce 200 series because newer cards than this have non-fixable screen tearing issues in XP. It's a limitation of the drivers/hardware.
 
computerdude92 said:
I've never heard of XP 64-bit having better video card support. I thought it was known for not having good driver support for stuff, compared to Windows versions before or since.

I'm running XP 32-bit SP3. I don't want any Nvidia card newer than the GeForce 200 series because newer cards than this have non-fixable screen tearing issues in XP. It's a limitation of the drivers/hardware.
Click to expand...
The thing is with XP 32-bit you are limited to 3.5 GB of total system memory (unless you running the server version). You may get away with 1 GB in your video card, tops, as I have in my XP 32-bit gamer. I have never had a "tearing" problem with XP in any configuration.
 
Currently I'm about to test a few Windows hotfixes/updates on my test install of Windows 7 SP1 x64... So that may open up more doors for me if I can get Win7 working right.

Building a newer computer would be really expensive for me. I really love my current computer and I don't want a newer one.
 
Last edited:
computerdude92 said:
I thought it was known for not having good driver support for stuff, compared to Windows versions before or since.
Click to expand...

This is false. Windows XP Professional x64 edition is literally Windows Server 2003 x64, and has all of the same drivers. If it had bad driver support, so would Server 2003, and that would have ended Microsoft's ambitions in the server market. The reason it got the reputation for bad driver support is that people were trying to use old Windows 9x/2000 drivers on it, which obviously wouldn't work because those are 16/32 bit drivers. 16 bit drivers wouldn't work on regular XP 32 bit either. XP 32 bit did support Windows 2000 drivers, and some well written 32 bit Windows 9x drivers, but they could still cause problems.

I ran Windows XP Professional x64 edition on my Athlon 64 and Core 2 Duo machines back in the day and never had any driver issues.

Agent Orange said:
The thing is with XP 32-bit you are limited to 3.5 GB of total system memory (unless you running the server version). You may get away with 1 GB in your video card, tops, as I have in my XP 32-bit gamer. I have never had a "tearing" problem with XP in any configuration.
Click to expand...

The 4 GB address space limit in XP is entirely artificial. Windows XP supports PAE, which allows up to 64 GB of memory to be utilized, with the limitation that no single application can use more than 4 GB of memory. Microsoft disabled this functionality in XP, but there is a way to patch around it and get it working again. The RTM release of XP actually did not have a 4 GB memory cap, that was introduced with SP1.
 
computerdude92 said:
I wish I could find nice free video editing software. DaVinci Resolve Lite has ridiculously high system requirements. I can't even find the requirements for version 8 Lite, which was their first free version released in 2011.
Click to expand...
Shotcut - free, easy to use and runs fine on old hardware. I'm using it on a PC from 2013.
 
Does Adobe still have that post-server activation key still available for Premiere Pro 2 on their website? There was controversy when they put it up because it meant anyone (really they were aiming at existing customers who already had legit keys but it doesn't check for that) could then activate a copy and it wouldn't phone the non-existant servers anymore but by then Premiere 8 / Pro 2.0 was completely obsolete.

That will do 1080. I even did it on an AGP card (sapphire HD3850) and 3gb ram. It's by no means a speed demon in that configuration but yes you can if we look at that as the lowest the bar will go.
 
Last edited:
For Xmas I was given a fancy Phenom II x6 1075T gaming PC with two GTX 660 Ti cards in SLI... :-D

Big thanks to my best friend who got it from his bible reading sessions buddy. I couldn't easily afford such a system back in the day. I'm going to put Windows 7 on it and try to learn 3D modeling with Iclone. The PC can run versions 5, 6, and 7.

Also I'm going to take out one of the video cards and keep it as a spare. Now that the tide has changed, what easy-to-use video editing software is recommended now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top