I'm thinking of buying > http://www.ebuyer.com/product/252738

The basic spec is:
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 Quad Core Processor 2.66Ghz
6GB DDR3 133Mhz
nVidia GTS450 1GB dedicated GPU

Whilst I realise the graphics card isn't *brilliant* - will it be man enough to play Witcher 2 at a reasonable quality or will I have to turn the graphics down really low?
I would look to upgrade the graphics card at a later date when more money is available.

Thanks!

I believe so. I have Phenom 9750 aka quad (which is pretty old I guess) which runs 2.4 ghz, 4 gb ram and ati's 6850 oc radeon card 1 gb. And I seem to have pretty good fps with big resolution and most of the effects on. And it's a known fact that intel processors are usually a bit faster. It will punish all computers for now but I for one can play it better than assassins creed 2, which is funny, 'cos I got that game with my radeon. =)
So, I think all is well.. for you.

Without ubersampling of course. But everybody has it off. Nobody notices anything when it's on, except the frame drop.

And edit again: 133mhz memory? Sounds weird. I have ddr2 and 667.. well in bios it says something 333 mhz but whatever. I'll stick with my pointless prattle.

Not with the GTS 450, that is a very weak link in the chain. I just bought a Falcon with roughly the same specs. Performance was not worth the money spent. Talked to Falcon, traded up to a 560 TI and saw a HUGE performance increase. From 20-30 FPS to 50-60 FPS in addition to higher settings for Witcher 2 .

Just my personal experience but I would save your money ahead of time if you can modify your PC specs

I concur.
The GTS 450 does not have the price to performance ratio to be worth its price tag.

I'd recommend a Radeon HD 6850, it's twice as powerful as the GTS 450 ...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102908

(compared to the price tag of the GTS 450)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125342

It was easier when numbers meant something. =) I myself think that in most games my cpu is bottlenecking. Well, perhaps they so many years later are trying to support finally multicores not just that how big mhz is in one core or two cores. I switched nvidia 9800 gt to this radeon 6850 a while ago. Well, I got the crappy version which crashed computer (when I played some demanding) if I don't underclock my memoryclock. But when playing w2 yeasterday it didn't crash never. But this is better. But never gonna buy a thing just when it it's released. Still, this is a good card compared to my 9800.

Edit: And you'd think that when something is released and then comes some never and so on. It would be better. Well, the price says much but not all.

This is usually a problem with your power supply not providing enough power to the video card.

Yeah.. I thought about it but there was in amd forum similar problem for many, those had much better PSU:s than mine. So it was decided that cards memorycontroller (or some similar) was a bit lame and it's better with new batch of cards. It was the excact same problem what happened to me. In any case, that doesn't bother me like hell and when and if I have money, it's time to rebuild. Motherboard etc.

Edit: And when now on GOG, it's clear that we pretty much like the oldies too.
Witcher 2 was my first webpurchase ever. If you don't count gambling. =) And I just wanted to support those polish gamemakers. I like the W1 so much.

Hmm.
If a lot of people are getting the same problem, it might just be fixed with a driver update.

It should have been fixed by now if it was possible. Maybe it is. Perhaps I'll try to play without underclocking and watch does it still happen. It happened months after I bought the card.

Edit: So it was just easiest to underclock a little. That doesn't affect performance much.

Edit2: My coreclock in the card is still above normal 6850 and that makes bigger difference in gamespeeds. Normal is 775 and mine is 820 default. and if I go to 850 mhz in that, no problems. but the memoryclock was the culprit.

Thanks for the reply.

The graphics card aside, am I right in thinking the rest of the spec would be up to it?

Thanks

Actually, the graphics card is OK; it's just not good value. It's well above minimum, which means the game should be well playable on Medium, or on High with compromises.

The rest of the system is OK, though I strongly dislike the Q8xxx CPUs. Apart from mobile quads, they are among the slowest CPUs on the market, and their socket is obsolete, so there is no way to upgrade. You would do well to look for something with any Sandy Bridge CPU, even a Core i3 2100, instead.

Graphics card is not bad, it will definitely run Witcher 2 at middish settings (graphics will still look awesome). You will however notice dips in frames and dependent on your personal taste may not affect you.

If I put ultra.. infact if I put high. Those settings isn't maximum.. all that it does.. it puts shadows a bit higher and uber on. anyway most notably game reacts in resolution. which sucks if I put it in low settings.. works fine but there should be specific changes. Only thing witch consirably has an effect, is uber. I can put LOD in normal or far and I see no difference.
So it wil work in my comp but it would be nice that some settings made a difference. Well, SSAO wil take a bit tull.. but not much.
Someone somewhere bit comparet this to Batman and I see what he means. Mostly gameplay. Like the game but better be pretty high resolution if person wants to see W2 in all glory.
As said.. all of things could be a bit better. But I like the traps. If I didn't watch fps with fraps it works fine. I like the bombs but pretty much it was weird that I can drink potions only when meditating.
But if that game has 4 starts.. Will those come with W1-saves?