Generally we play at 1024x768, or 1280 x 1024, and I think most of us use an ATI x800 here. I play on a similar spec'ced system at home. 3.2ghz., 2gigs of ram memory, ATI x800.
1920x1200 isn't supported by most monitors, but we take most shots at that resolution for use as wallpapers, etc. But yea, still very playable at 1920 on a fast box. I think Brad plays at that resolution here at work.
Personally, I am waiting until just before release to upgrade my home card. Lots of really sweet tech coming out soon. - 15 November 2005
The December beta 1 screenshots were taken from my work machine. This was a 3.8 Ghz processor with 2 gigs of RAM and a ATI x1800xl video card.
But to be clear, that has nothing to do with the quality of the visuals. The faster machine helps with, rather, the FPS.
As long as you have a pixel shader 2.0 or higher card, any machine can display the game at this quality. Obviously a mid or lower end machine can't display the game at this quality (with all the graphics options turned on and the resolution at 1920x1200) with a good framerate at the moment, though on my 3.6 at home I play in this resolution and with all the graphics settings on every night just fine. But many people are playing in beta at lower resolutions with all the settings on.
We've still got a couple of optimization passes to go and hardware will be a lot cheaper by the time we launch. So while I don't know if I can promise the average gamer machine will be able to run at that rez even at launch, you should be able to run with those graphics settings. - 18 November 2005
Source: Aradune Mithara
I am getting between 15 and 30fps at 1920x1200 on a high end machine right now, and do every night when I play, and we're not even totally optimized. I am using a 3.8ghz pentium and an ATI 1800XT and fully admit that's a high-end machine that's relatively costly (though those screenshots were using 850XTs and 1800XLs depending on the date). But the card, cpu, etc. really only determines the framerate in this case, not the quality of the image. You can get that quality of an image on any shader 2.0 card (the x1800s are shader 3.0 but we're not using any 3.0 instructions as of yet). E.g. the game looks that good on a 9800XT, although currently with optimizaitons not done and all of those options on, I think most wouldn't find the game enjoyable at that rez on a lower end system with a much slower shader 2.0 card.
That said, there are many people in beta playing at lower resolutions (1280x1024, etc.) and without HDR/worldlighting on 9800s, 6800s, etc. and on 2.8ghz or so systems and playing just fine. Lastly, based on what both ATI and Nvidia are saying, cards that perform like x1800s (or even faster) will be in the under $150 dollar range by the middle of next year. - December 21, 2005 (Beta 2)
Source: Aradune Mithara