You're fine, High for sure, probably Ultra. The only reservation I have is we don't know whether the game is somehow sensitive to cards with dedicated VRAM less than 1GB.
You're fine too, High for sure, probably Ultra. That's not one of the fastest quad cores, but it's still a quad, and the game is known to take advantage of multiple cores.

That's what it's been taken to mean in this case -- and this case only.

The "minimum" requirements are set very high, and the game is said to perform well on systems that are minimum. This gives us hardware geeks some reasonable reason to believe that strong sub-minimum systems will still be able to play the game.

The "recommended" requirements are calling for what is in effect a teraflop supercomputer on your desktop. Systems less than the "recommended" requirements have been seen to play on Ultra (though not everybody would find the frame rate satisfactory).

Systems like yours, that are well above the recommended requirements, should have little trouble with Ultra.

This is very much different from a lot of games, where the "minimum" requirements are more along the line of "if you have this, we hope you can play without it crashing, or artifacting, or turning into a PowerPoint show".

thank you for your reply:)

Ok, do you think this system will be able to maintain at least 60 FPS on Ultra (so that the game runs smoothly with Vsync enabled)?

Win7 64bit
Intel i7 930 @ 3.8ghz
6 GB DDR3 in tri-channel
Nvidia GTX 470
2xVelociraptor 10K RPM drives in RAID 0
1920x1080 native resolution

Any info how this would handle witcher 2? aiming for ultra

Win7 64 bit
Intel Core2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 2.83Ghz
8,0GB Ram
Nvidia Asus GTX 480 1536MB GDDR5
300 GB WD VelociRaptor, 3.5 , Serial ATA2, 10.000rpm, 16MB
and Samsung SyncMaster 2233rz monnitor

How dare I? - In my opinion Minecraft is more of a toy or an editing tool than a game in it self. The idea of building stuff in a 3d world is cool and everything but not everyone likes to spend a few hours on building something and then stuff possibly screwing up. I like it when I can get right into the story line or action in the game. That is the same problem I have with free MMORPGS and even some that aren't free they pull your leg around and it takes forever to get into something that is exciting and eventually I quit :(.

My specs:

AMD Athlon 2 X4 630
8 Gigs Ram
Gigabyte Radeon 6850 1 Gig
Monitor 1600x900

I'm thinking I should be able to play Ultra with playable frame rates.

Ahm... you guys that want to know that .... GO TO....

http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri/

Search for: "The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings" and click on "Can you run it?", it will execute a java application, (allow it).

You will get something like:

CPU
Minimum: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+
You Have: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 870 @ 2.93GHz
PASS

CPU Speed
Minimum: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+
You Have: 2.9 GHz
PASS

RAM
Minimum: 1 GB Windows XP / 2 GB Windows Vista and Windows 7
You Have: 8.0 GB
PASS

OS
Minimum: Windows XP SP2 / Windows Vista SP2 / Windows 7 (32/64-bit)
You Have: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Basic Edition (build 7600), 64-bit
PASS

Video Card
Minimum: 512 MB RAM, supporting Pixel Shader 3.0 (NVIDIA GeForce 8800 or ATI Radeon HD 3850)
You Have: GeForce GTS 240
PASS
Features: Minimum attributes of your Video Card
Required You Have
Video RAM 512 MB 4.0 GB
Pixel Shader version 3.0 4.0
Vertex Shader version 3.0 4.0

Free Disk Space
Minimum: 8 GB for game and 8 GB bonus content
You Have: 74.7 GB
PASS

Everyone, enjoy, and if this was useful leave me a note, I´m feeling alone waiting for the witcher 2 release :D

My CPU is below minimum (Core2Duo e4400, 2.0 Ghz) but everything else is ok (6 Gb RAM, GF 9600 GSO 512, and so on...)

I'll test if the game works, if not... I'll overclock the CPU to 2.4 Ghz and try again. Problem solved.

Isn't the 9600 GSO below minimum as well? 9600 GSO slower then the 8800. So you might need a new video card as well.

Nah, 9600 is renamed 8800 chip.

How well do you think my comp will run it?

AMD Quad Phenom at 3.2
8 GB of Ram
Nvidia 275GTX

I realize it's above recommended, but with this, do you think it will look close to the videos shown already?

I'l throw my rig into the ring, how well should I be able to run it?

i7 920@3ghz
6 gb DDR3 @~1500
Sapphire 4850@700 mhz clock

Also, an interesting question, which shall be answered on release day: Should I keep hyper threading on?

The 9600 is not a renamed 8800. There are several variants of 9600. One 9600 GSO is a cut-down 8800 (96 vs. 112 shaders) and underperforms it. Another "9600 GSO 512" is a different chip (G94) that is not much better than a 9500 GT.

Any of them is still within shouting distance of minimum specification, so I think the game will run OK.
No, the 9800 is the refresh of the 8800; the 9600 is a lesser GPU.

The 9600 is sometimes a cut-down 8800 (with just 96 shaders) or otherwise a different chip (G94) with just 48 shaders, depending on the many variations of this card.