Another Video Card Question

I know you guys are the experts, so before I do anything else I wanted your opinion. I got RCT3 today and get that infamous error message "Graphics hardware or drivers do not meet systems requirements". Bottom line is I have a Nvidia Riva TNT2 model 64 with 32 mb of memory. Do I have to spend more money now on a new video card? $%^$#!!

Thanks for your advice. I've done all of the troubleshooting and this bites to not be able to play a new game.

That's a fairly ancient card at this point. If you haven't at least tried the latest drivers from Nvidia, I'd say that yes, you'll probably need a newer card.

My family just got a new computer, and as well i just just RCT3. I also get that pop up that says the same as Lorrie's about the graphic hardware/ driver thing not meetinf the requirement for the game. I even had the problem were DirectX9 didn't let me install so i downloaded it from the official winodws site, and I still had no luck. Butanyways heres what my computer is.

Hp Pavilion a706n

512mb

160gb

Im not sure what video card is in this but it says " Intergrated graphics with 64mb shared video memory"

Now I've skimed through all the brochures to try and find where it might exactly say what this computer posses's video card wise. But in the begining I knew this game needed allot to be played, but I had figured this new computer should be able to handle it. I know the game suggest's that you have a ATI Grahpic card to play in all for it to work best. I'm going to take a trip to Best Buy and ask them what I could do. But I'm looking to maybe get some of your guys & ladies input before I went further.

Integrated graphics are junk, almost every time. That's how they can make the machines so inexpensive. I suggest buying a card in the $100 range.

Kind of a side question, but I was wondering if anybody has had experience with the offbrand cards on sites like Tiger Direct. You can get a generic card based on the same ATI card for a substantially cheaper price, so I figure the qualitiy level isn't in the off brands. Anybody have any insight on this?

Almost every brand is based on the chip manufacturer's reference design, so unless they use total crap memory, it's a safe bet that it'll be fine.

The reason shared graphics are crap is because they actually don't have any video memory whatsoever. That's what they mean when they say "shared video memory".

For example, if you have 128MB of system memory, and have an integrated card with "64MB of shared video memory", that means that the vid. card can use up to 64MB of your system memory for video. If you're using 100MB of system memory, your vid. card only has 28MB left to use.

I have a brand new HP computer with imbedded graphics (i.e. no graphics card needed). My graphics drivers have 64MB of memory, and I'm also getting the dreaded message. I've updated my drivers and tried the troubleshooting on the site, anyone have any suggestions?

Thanks in advance

Hey musik guy im in your same seat, so to speek. So your saying you went out and got a video card had it installed and now your having problems getting the game to run? Or was i just miss reading and not understanding what you said, sry if thats the case im a little sleepy ;)

---

dannerman said:
The reason shared graphics are crap is because they actually don't have any video memory whatsoever.

---

No, they're crap because they don't do any 3D rendering hardware.

Hey, how about this. I have a Radeon 9200SE. My frame rate is between 1 and 9 in some places. I have the latest drivers. the system is an Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe, 512 mB memory, 60 gb harddrive. The video card has 128 mb on board. What gives about the frame rate? I've noticed when just the track is on the screen, the frame rate is fine. This also happens in Nolimits. Ggrrrrr....

On the topic of video card's are there cards out there that could be a little less than $100 that would still be suitable to run the game. Or to say what if I purchased just what is suggested on the bottom of the box, j/w but would it make the game any worse or better to comparison let's say if i were to purchase a card thats larger than what they recomend on the box.

I've been running a GeForce 4000 mx 128mb and it's been running fine. Got it at Best Buy for well under a hundred and it installed easily.

moe: I'd suggest turning down some of the features or reducing the resolution. While the 9200SE is not the greatest card in the world (serious understatement), it *should* be able to render the game at playable framerates. BTW: what type of CPU do you have (just wondering).

lata, jeremy

--whose fiancee asked if her Riva TNT2 vid card could handle Doom3 (heheheheheh)

2Hostyl, I'm running an AMD Athlon XP 1600 on the Asus A7N8X-E Deluxe with 512 memory. I'm going to upgrade to 1 gig memory in the near future and a faster CPU and better vid card. I'm just looking for a quick fix for now til I get my upgrade. Thanks for asking. :)

I bought an ATI Radeon 64mb card and I'm able to play now. The only thing I notice is when you ride the rides, it's slow. Should I have gone with 128mb?

I went with a higher card. if for no other reason, a 64 will be outdated much sooner.

Okie so Im assuming I should save up the extra cash and go for a 128mb card,I'm gonna guess that will it be a better investment than the 64mb. Could anyone give me an idea of what the price of a 128 ATI Radeon card goes for? I looked through add's in sundays paper but really couldn't come across any general price findings.

I would be of the opinion that the chipset matters, not the amount of memory on the card.

(i.e. an ATI 9800 with 64mb would run MUCH better than an ATI 9200 with 256mb onboard)

*** Edited 12/28/2004 8:16:36 PM UTC by Lord Gonchar***

Funny aside, there is no point in buying *any* card that has 256MB of memory; 128 is more than enough. As of now, even memory hungry games like Doom3 dont benefit much (if at all) from the extra memory. By the time games *will* require 256, the current crop of vid cards will be outdated.