If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
In ,
Shane had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: Hi all, hopefully posting this to several groups isn't a problem. My parents have an old dell from maybe 6 years ago, and their display recently started getting vertical lines through it, so I assumed that the video card had gone. I got a new one and threw it in (a better card than the one they had, went from 16MB to 32), and I cannot get the OS to recognize it. It's an agp card in an agp slot. When I downloaded the driver for the card (ATI 128 Rage pro), I install them no problem, but then it gives me an error wherein it states the "driver does not support the display adapter." Irritating for sure. I then tried a bunch of other video cards of varying types and MB, and it's always the same; Windows refuses outright to see that there is a card there, so it only allows me 16 colors and 600x480 screen res. I have NO idea why this is, and any help or insight here would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Well, everyone else has added their thoughts. You state 32 MB VRAM. Yet the card is 128... Couple of thoughts on this. Does the AGP slot support the 6x or 8x card that you have? If not then there may be jumpers on the card to slow it down. I could be way off base and I'm not too sure of the math but I *think* you need (need??? subject to being wrong on this one but I thought I'd throw this out there so that if I'm wrong I can learn too) at least 4x for that. Your MOBO is quite old and may only be 2x which means that the most you could probably support would be 32 MB VRAM??? I'm really not at all sure about this as I'm not really into graphics all that much. In other words I think that the 128 might refer to the VRAM (video RAM) and that your motherboard simply may not support it. Many video cards have jumpers on them (though you might be able to control this in a limited fashion through the BIOS as has been clued to you already by Jeff) which will allow you to set the speed back down to what the motherboard can handle. Again, I might be completely off base with this one but I thought I'd thow it out there as an idea for you to check. As for the monitor going all funny it could have been something so easy as an update killing it (unlikely) or the drivers having become corrupted (more likely.) It could even be something as basic as the monitor has reached the end of it's useful life span and is to be no more which is not unheard of though I've monitors which have seemingly lasted forever here. Galen -- Signature changed for a moment of silence. Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Reply below....
"Galen" wrote in message ... In , Shane had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: Hi all, hopefully posting this to several groups isn't a problem. My parents have an old dell from maybe 6 years ago, and their display recently started getting vertical lines through it, so I assumed that the video card had gone. I got a new one and threw it in (a better card than the one they had, went from 16MB to 32), and I cannot get the OS to recognize it. It's an agp card in an agp slot. When I downloaded the driver for the card (ATI 128 Rage pro), I install them no problem, but then it gives me an error wherein it states the "driver does not support the display adapter." Irritating for sure. I then tried a bunch of other video cards of varying types and MB, and it's always the same; Windows refuses outright to see that there is a card there, so it only allows me 16 colors and 600x480 screen res. I have NO idea why this is, and any help or insight here would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Well, everyone else has added their thoughts. You state 32 MB VRAM. Yet the card is 128... Couple of thoughts on this. Does the AGP slot support the 6x or 8x card that you have? If not then there may be jumpers on the card to slow it down. I could be way off base and I'm not too sure of the math but I *think* you need (need??? subject to being wrong on this one but I thought I'd throw this out there so that if I'm wrong I can learn too) at least 4x for that. Your MOBO is quite old and may only be 2x which means that the most you could probably support would be 32 MB VRAM??? I'm really not at all sure about this as I'm not really into graphics all that much. In other words I think that the 128 might refer to the VRAM (video RAM) and that your motherboard simply may not support it. Many video cards have jumpers on them (though you might be able to control this in a limited fashion through the BIOS as has been clued to you already by Jeff) which will allow you to set the speed back down to what the motherboard can handle. Again, I might be completely off base with this one but I thought I'd thow it out there as an idea for you to check. As for the monitor going all funny it could have been something so easy as an update killing it (unlikely) or the drivers having become corrupted (more likely.) It could even be something as basic as the monitor has reached the end of it's useful life span and is to be no more which is not unheard of though I've monitors which have seemingly lasted forever here. Galen -- Signature changed for a moment of silence. Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side. Thanks for all the help gents, the answers are much appreciated. However, the funniest thing happened. I had resigned myself to going over and doing either soem hardware work or reinstalling win98, but when I sat down, I decided to just reboot a few times for the hell of it. On the third reboot, everything was fine. Card was recognized, exactly as it should have gone in the first place. Saved me some work anyway. Galen, in response to your post: the card itself does have 32 MB of VRAM, but the logo on the card says "powered by ATI 128 Rage PRO," which I thought was a bit misleading also. I guess it was their then name for the graphics engine, but is not an indicator (for this particular card anyway) of amount of VRAM on the card itself. Anyway, the problem seems to have resolved itself. When in doubt, reboot! Thanks all. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
video card issues
Reply below....
"Galen" wrote in message ... In , Shane had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: Hi all, hopefully posting this to several groups isn't a problem. My parents have an old dell from maybe 6 years ago, and their display recently started getting vertical lines through it, so I assumed that the video card had gone. I got a new one and threw it in (a better card than the one they had, went from 16MB to 32), and I cannot get the OS to recognize it. It's an agp card in an agp slot. When I downloaded the driver for the card (ATI 128 Rage pro), I install them no problem, but then it gives me an error wherein it states the "driver does not support the display adapter." Irritating for sure. I then tried a bunch of other video cards of varying types and MB, and it's always the same; Windows refuses outright to see that there is a card there, so it only allows me 16 colors and 600x480 screen res. I have NO idea why this is, and any help or insight here would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Well, everyone else has added their thoughts. You state 32 MB VRAM. Yet the card is 128... Couple of thoughts on this. Does the AGP slot support the 6x or 8x card that you have? If not then there may be jumpers on the card to slow it down. I could be way off base and I'm not too sure of the math but I *think* you need (need??? subject to being wrong on this one but I thought I'd throw this out there so that if I'm wrong I can learn too) at least 4x for that. Your MOBO is quite old and may only be 2x which means that the most you could probably support would be 32 MB VRAM??? I'm really not at all sure about this as I'm not really into graphics all that much. In other words I think that the 128 might refer to the VRAM (video RAM) and that your motherboard simply may not support it. Many video cards have jumpers on them (though you might be able to control this in a limited fashion through the BIOS as has been clued to you already by Jeff) which will allow you to set the speed back down to what the motherboard can handle. Again, I might be completely off base with this one but I thought I'd thow it out there as an idea for you to check. As for the monitor going all funny it could have been something so easy as an update killing it (unlikely) or the drivers having become corrupted (more likely.) It could even be something as basic as the monitor has reached the end of it's useful life span and is to be no more which is not unheard of though I've monitors which have seemingly lasted forever here. Galen -- Signature changed for a moment of silence. Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side. Thanks for all the help gents, the answers are much appreciated. However, the funniest thing happened. I had resigned myself to going over and doing either soem hardware work or reinstalling win98, but when I sat down, I decided to just reboot a few times for the hell of it. On the third reboot, everything was fine. Card was recognized, exactly as it should have gone in the first place. Saved me some work anyway. Galen, in response to your post: the card itself does have 32 MB of VRAM, but the logo on the card says "powered by ATI 128 Rage PRO," which I thought was a bit misleading also. I guess it was their then name for the graphics engine, but is not an indicator (for this particular card anyway) of amount of VRAM on the card itself. Anyway, the problem seems to have resolved itself. When in doubt, reboot! Thanks all. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
In ,
Shane had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: snip Galen, in response to your post: the card itself does have 32 MB of VRAM, but the logo on the card says "powered by ATI 128 Rage PRO," which I thought was a bit misleading also. I guess it was their then name for the graphics engine, but is not an indicator (for this particular card anyway) of amount of VRAM on the card itself. Anyway, the problem seems to have resolved itself. When in doubt, reboot! Thanks all. Rebooting does do some interesting things at times. Maybe it was just having a difficult time loading the drivers. I'm rather amused that the card would say 128 in the title yet be only a 32 MB VRAM card. It's definately misleading. I haven't purchased a new ATI in a very long time. I've been sticking with nVidia for quite some time. Glad to hear that it worked for you and that it's all good. I can't explain why it did that but I suspect it was just being a problematic driver (or software) installation. Galen -- Signature changed for a moment of silence. Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
video card issues
In ,
Shane had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: snip Galen, in response to your post: the card itself does have 32 MB of VRAM, but the logo on the card says "powered by ATI 128 Rage PRO," which I thought was a bit misleading also. I guess it was their then name for the graphics engine, but is not an indicator (for this particular card anyway) of amount of VRAM on the card itself. Anyway, the problem seems to have resolved itself. When in doubt, reboot! Thanks all. Rebooting does do some interesting things at times. Maybe it was just having a difficult time loading the drivers. I'm rather amused that the card would say 128 in the title yet be only a 32 MB VRAM card. It's definately misleading. I haven't purchased a new ATI in a very long time. I've been sticking with nVidia for quite some time. Glad to hear that it worked for you and that it's all good. I can't explain why it did that but I suspect it was just being a problematic driver (or software) installation. Galen -- Signature changed for a moment of silence. Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
I really am happy with my ATI Radeon 9200 card with 8x AGP and 128 mbs of
video ram. smile "Galen" wrote: In , Shane had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: snip Galen, in response to your post: the card itself does have 32 MB of VRAM, but the logo on the card says "powered by ATI 128 Rage PRO," which I thought was a bit misleading also. I guess it was their then name for the graphics engine, but is not an indicator (for this particular card anyway) of amount of VRAM on the card itself. Anyway, the problem seems to have resolved itself. When in doubt, reboot! Thanks all. Rebooting does do some interesting things at times. Maybe it was just having a difficult time loading the drivers. I'm rather amused that the card would say 128 in the title yet be only a 32 MB VRAM card. It's definately misleading. I haven't purchased a new ATI in a very long time. I've been sticking with nVidia for quite some time. Glad to hear that it worked for you and that it's all good. I can't explain why it did that but I suspect it was just being a problematic driver (or software) installation. Galen -- Signature changed for a moment of silence. Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
video card issues
I really am happy with my ATI Radeon 9200 card with 8x AGP and 128 mbs of
video ram. smile "Galen" wrote: In , Shane had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: snip Galen, in response to your post: the card itself does have 32 MB of VRAM, but the logo on the card says "powered by ATI 128 Rage PRO," which I thought was a bit misleading also. I guess it was their then name for the graphics engine, but is not an indicator (for this particular card anyway) of amount of VRAM on the card itself. Anyway, the problem seems to have resolved itself. When in doubt, reboot! Thanks all. Rebooting does do some interesting things at times. Maybe it was just having a difficult time loading the drivers. I'm rather amused that the card would say 128 in the title yet be only a 32 MB VRAM card. It's definately misleading. I haven't purchased a new ATI in a very long time. I've been sticking with nVidia for quite some time. Glad to hear that it worked for you and that it's all good. I can't explain why it did that but I suspect it was just being a problematic driver (or software) installation. Galen -- Signature changed for a moment of silence. Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
In ,
Dan had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: I really am happy with my ATI Radeon 9200 card with 8x AGP and 128 mbs of video ram. smile It's not that I have anything against ATI, indeed they're fine. I've just learned to like the GeForce series. I am not really a gamer either though. Well, I do play games, but they're not graphics intensive and I don't do FPS genre games. At best you'll find me spending hours amid an RPG or strategy game. I think the last ATI that I bought was a Rage Pro 3 (or something along those lines in the name) and it was actually quite decent. Heck, at that time, it was pretty much the best on the market. I guess, to me, it's the familiarity now that keeps me using GeForce cards. Kind of like always putting the same types of tires on my car or always buying the same brand of shoe. Galen -- Signature changed for a moment of silence. Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
video card issues
In ,
Dan had this to say: My reply is at the bottom of your sent message: I really am happy with my ATI Radeon 9200 card with 8x AGP and 128 mbs of video ram. smile It's not that I have anything against ATI, indeed they're fine. I've just learned to like the GeForce series. I am not really a gamer either though. Well, I do play games, but they're not graphics intensive and I don't do FPS genre games. At best you'll find me spending hours amid an RPG or strategy game. I think the last ATI that I bought was a Rage Pro 3 (or something along those lines in the name) and it was actually quite decent. Heck, at that time, it was pretty much the best on the market. I guess, to me, it's the familiarity now that keeps me using GeForce cards. Kind of like always putting the same types of tires on my car or always buying the same brand of shoe. Galen -- Signature changed for a moment of silence. Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
video card issues
Shane wrote:
Hi all, hopefully posting this to several groups isn't a problem. My parents have an old dell from maybe 6 years ago, and their display recently started getting vertical lines through it, so I assumed that the video card had gone. I got a new one and threw it in (a better card than the one they had, went from 16MB to 32), and I cannot get the OS to recognize it. It's an agp card in an agp slot. When I downloaded the driver for the card (ATI 128 Rage pro), I install them no problem, but then it gives me an error wherein it states the "driver does not support the display adapter." Irritating for sure. I then tried a bunch of other video cards of varying types and MB, and it's always the same; Windows refuses outright to see that there is a card there, so it only allows me 16 colors and 600x480 screen res. I have NO idea why this is, and any help or insight here would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.859 / Virus Database: 585 - Release Date: 14/02/2005 Shane: IIRC the ATI drivers more or less insist on having a "clean slate" on which to work. If there is an entry for them in "Add Remove Programs" use it to remove them ( and any other video drivers that show up there) and and revert to STD VGA. _Then_ install the drivers. There may be an "uninstall" utility on ATI's web sight as well or at least more detailed instructions. Might also be worth a look in the BIOS to see if there is a setting to RESET the Plug & Play information and be sure the setting for OS type is set to P&P aware. Good Luck John -- \\\\\// "Don't take life so seriously... | | ...it's only a temporary condition." (.) (.) ========================================oOO==(_)== OOo== _____________________________________________ | John G. Dulak | | Gnomeway Services | /)| E-mail me from my home page at: |(\ / )| http://users.telerama.com/~jdulak/email.htm |( \ ( (|____________________________________________ |) )_ ((( \ \ /_) ( \ / / ))) (\\\ \ \_/ / \ \_/ / ///) \ / \ / \ _/ \_ / / / \ \ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
video card issues | Shane | General | 9 | April 13th 05 09:12 AM |
Video Card Speed Change? | saeengineer | General | 3 | November 29th 04 09:51 PM |
video card in win98 | Dexter | General | 6 | July 13th 04 11:39 PM |
video card | Todd | Monitors & Displays | 1 | July 1st 04 04:47 PM |
video card | Lil' Dave | Plug & Play | 0 | June 12th 04 12:49 AM |