Well the goal is for the cloth map to be playable on netbooks, so you're definetly good there (and I know that isn't what you were asking about). I have a similar laptop, but with a slightly better processor, and the beta has run fine (apart from the memory leaks and stuff ). I'm pretty confident you'll be able to play it. But if you're really concerned, wait until the demo comes out (sometime after release) and see how that runs.

You can do that or maybe this game will get enough traffic will someone will post specs similar to yours and say how it plays for them. This community is pretty good in the technical department, so I would imagine we'll get a few threads talking about performance sooner than later.

This is why beta's aren't that great anymore. So many companies have been doing "demo" beta's that you get people dumb enough to not understand that a real beta can't be used to compare to the final product. At least some of them will realize this after the 24th I guess.

He's just a troll Praetoriani just ignore him. There's always a blabbermouth like him on every forum.

what are the recommended system req's anyway?  all i've seen listed are the min req.

And there are always asinine fools on every forum that decide to read too much into a few short sentences. Guess which one you are?

(minus texture sizes and perhaps a couple of other settings which i haven't fiddled with) this game seems to just fine on my computer at max and Although my CPU is higher spec, my GPU is the real bottleneck (Ati Mobility Radeon HD 2600 XT (3/4 years old!)) and the game hasn't had any noticeable drops in frame rate. the only thing that is really slow (by my eye) is the map generation and after a very long game, due to the memory leak.

Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz
4GB DDR2
Ati Mobility Radeon HD 2600 XT – or Pro (idk)
For reference the res is also quite high, but not huge by any stretch, 1920x1200.

 

He is a troll now he just wants to agitate a needless arguement. Just ignore the troll.

Now back to the topic. I have an i7 920 overclocked to 3.20ghz and 6gb ddr3 ram and an ATI 5770 1gb video card and I got no issues at all with performance in the beta. So, most of those bad reports are just with dudes who don't know how to optimize their systems or get rid of viruses they don't even know they have. I love the way so many are ready to blame the program before even checking into their own system issues.

As is usually the best recommendation for these kinds of questions - wait for the demo. The demo will run off finished code, and since they release it after launch it might even contain some patch optimizations (since the demo build would be based off the current latest game build).

Indeed, I'm asking for anecdotal evidence. Why should I not? While computer setups and configurations differ wildly, there are only three real variables (CPU, GFX and RAM) that have to be taken into account when you assume said system is well-maintained, like mine is (or should be). In the end, anecdotal evidence is all I can ask for - you can't blame me for not trying my hardest at engaging in a meta-analysis of different studies pertaining how well this game could and should run. As a science grad student, I get enough of that already at my day job.

My question rested on the premise that beta 4 and 0-day performance should not differ greatly, which Frogboy has said earlier. I've said that before - perhaps you read over it. This should make my question 'logical'. Seeing as you only argued that my logic in this was flawed (of course, it isn't) but the question itself sound, it follows that my question is valid.

Also, you might want to check your grammar and overall contextual vocabulary ('archaic reference?') before going all-out and flaming me for no particular reason. Yes, I've read that your post wasn't particularly aimed at anyone, but it sure seemed aimed at me and other people who were very helpful.

To everyone, thanks! Keep those anecdotal accounts coming!

Wow sure are lots of trolls in this thread especially dragoaskani and praetoriani.

I'm assuming (like they've repeatedly said) that the beta's performance and the release day 0 will be VERY different.

I'm very much above the listed requirements

8 gb ram vista 64

2gb 5970 ATI Radeon

quad core processor Q6600

I can run multiple new games at max 1920x1200 settings without any dip in FPS but this game brings the FPS down to the teens often and requires restarts frequently to clear it up (once an hour or so)

I'll throw my opinion of your specs in here, since people are posting some pretty high spec'ed computers.

So the minimum requirements are just that I would assume, minimum to get into the game and play it normally. Even a netbook has MUCH lower specs than the minimum specs listed for the game, but it can play it on the cloth map. Ok.

Keeping that in mind, you have a processor that comes close to the recommended. Your RAM exceeds the recommended requirement, and your video card is FAR from terrible; from some some benchmark websites, ranks higher than the 7900gs video card:

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

So I think you don't have anything to worry about. Like some people are mentioning, don't compare the beta performance to the gold version. Your specs are not bad at all, and I think you should be fine; you're right up there with the recommended specs.