"Ok, this is what I can tell. The demo itself is not a big deal, bad usage of graphics like mid price games from 5 years ago. But it is very slow. I have 18 to 20fps at 640x480 4xAF no-AA on the videocard. It seems a debug preview, so the code may not be well optimized, it's hard to tell. There are config files to hack of course
--
Processor Genuine Intel® Processor (3GHz+) supporting Hyper-Threading Technology (Intel® Dual-Core Processor supporting Hyper-Threading Technology recommended)
Memory 512 MB RAM (1 GB recommended)
NVIDIA® GeForce™ 6200 or better
ATI® Radeon™ 9800 or better
--
The part of requiring P4 is bull. It is there artificially because this is a demo sponsored by Intel, no big deal. It seems to explicitely look for "AuthenticAMD" and stop, it makes a good effort to identify the brand of the CPU. believe that the reference to Hungary has to do with the last Intel CEO was from there, so it can be a bad taste joke So this a marketing war only.
The P4 may become at last as fast as an A64 for the same ratio, so people with an A64 3200+ should be fine. The AMD CPU has lower clock speed but digests poor code much better than a P4. DO NOT "upgrade" from a P4 with HT to an Athlon though.
Graphics: very large potential to kill a videocard. Shadows as usual. A lot of light computations per pixel. Specially tuned code for Nvidia cards using their CG language and the cards are already specialist on that stuff. Unless there are some good parameters to tweak, some people will really need to upgrade if want to play at medium settings. I don't expect miracles. Maybe 640x480 2xAA 2xAF or 800x600 no-AA no-AF. At 1024x768 4xAF no-AA, I have 6 to 9fps, but old ATI.
Physics: quite nice, I believe that it is the videocard that is me holding back severely even at low resolutions, so it may run fine without PPU card at reasonably high settings. This is a demo of the physics engine in action:
link"
