My friend doesn't have a card like that. He's been excited for this for a while and asked me to make this post because he can't right now. Do you really need a 256Mb graphics card to run this game as the system requirements say? I'm not computer savvy but that's what he says that it requires from the system requirements. I don't really see why you would need that kind of card to run this thing. He has a lap top with 64mb card.

No.

Your best bet is to use the Experimental Windows 95 Patch.
The GOG version uses Dosbox and Carmageddon is a hard nut to emulate and therefore requires steep hardware.
The Experimental patch hardly uses any emulation at all, so especially low end computers will benefit from this.

Doctalen was asking about this for me. Thanks man. But yeah, I'd like to know if I could run it before I buy it. In other words the Win 95 patch will allow me to run it with a 64 mb card? I was in school and saw the specs on my phone, saw that 256 mb card and my jaw dropped :P

In others words, what I'm asking is this: Can someone please confirm to me whether or not you can play it with a 64 MB graphics card with the patch? Money is really tight right now, and I don't want to risk buying it and having it not work. Any feedback would be great.

I just bought game and I felt a little disappointed about it.

The game is pretty unplayable on DosBox, I don't know the exact number of fps, but is horrible enough.

With the win95 patch, it becomes faster, something around 40fps. It's playable, but not smooth. :/

My notebook specs:
Intel Core 2 Duo T5750 @ 2.00Ghz
4,00GB RAM
Mobile Intel® GM45 Express (pretty crappy)

I'm still searching for some tweaks, but for now, this is how things are.

Thanks for replying man. My processor is slightly faster, same amount of RAM, not sure about the chipset, though I know mine is also an Intel Express and is 64 mb. I'll probably take a chance and buy it. I can always reduce the resolution too if it runs that slow. Thanks again for replying :)

You're welcome. If you buy it, please post the results here. I really hope that I missed something, and that will be the reason for such low fps.

Try setting renderer to 'gdi' in ddraw.ini.

Hey, that worked fine.
It ain't smooth, but is absolutely playable. Many thanks. ;)

Or set dosbox renderer to direct3d with glide. GOG is notorious for using outdated dosbox versions and also using the absolute WORST default configs for performance and quality. I would seriously recommend using ykhwong's cvs build with the latest version of nglide, and rebuilding your .conf for max quality/performance.

Another complaint I have with GOG is how they set up dosbox.shortcuts, which are completely the wrong way to do it. GOG makes the "Start In" folder the game folder, but the True EXE is Dosbox, which should be using Dosbox as a start in folder. This royally screws up dependencies like pixel shaders, and you have to manually fix this for EVERY game. Total PITA. GOG needs to step up its QC and reconfigure every single game shortcut to run the right way, not the current Rube Goldberg way, and also fix ti's Dosbox configurator, because it currently doesn't work either. Config flies and the game folder should be inside dosbox, and this can be fixed without moving folders by putting dosbox in the Program Files (x86)\GOG.com directory.

The only good comment I have about this release is that it fixes the CD music problem and saves space.