It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
here are my specs

CPU: AMD FX-8120 3.10 GHz Eight-Core AM3+ CPU 8MB L2 Cache & Turbo Core Technology

HDD: 500GB SATA-II 3.0Gb/s 16MB Cache 7200RPM HDD [-13] (Single Hard Drive)

MEMORY: 8GB (2GBx4) DDR3/1600MHz Dual Channel Memory Module (Kingston HyperX)

MOTHERBOARD: * [CrossFireX] GigaByte GA-970A-D3 AMD 970 Socket AM3+ ATX Mainboard w/ On/Off Charge, 7.1 Audio, GbLAN, USB3.0, SATA-III RAID, 2 Gen2 PCIe X16, 3 PCIe X1 & 2 PCI

SOUND: HIGH DEFINITION ON-BOARD 7.1 AUDIO

VIDEO: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 1GB 16X PCIe Video Card
avatar
sirladon: here are my specs

CPU: AMD FX-8120 3.10 GHz Eight-Core AM3+ CPU 8MB L2 Cache & Turbo Core Technology

HDD: 500GB SATA-II 3.0Gb/s 16MB Cache 7200RPM HDD [-13] (Single Hard Drive)

MEMORY: 8GB (2GBx4) DDR3/1600MHz Dual Channel Memory Module (Kingston HyperX)

MOTHERBOARD: * [CrossFireX] GigaByte GA-970A-D3 AMD 970 Socket AM3+ ATX Mainboard w/ On/Off Charge, 7.1 Audio, GbLAN, USB3.0, SATA-III RAID, 2 Gen2 PCIe X16, 3 PCIe X1 & 2 PCI

SOUND: HIGH DEFINITION ON-BOARD 7.1 AUDIO

VIDEO: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 1GB 16X PCIe Video Card
Depends on what you're willing to consider "maxed", and what your frame rate tolerance is.

"All possible eye candy enabled", no. There's an expensive feature called Ubersampling that has never been really satisfactory on anything less than a high-end Crossfire or SLI setup.

"Ultra, less Ubersampling", maybe. The 560 isn't much of a step up from the 460. You should be able to get Ultra, but the frame rate may be disappointing. The 560Ti (which is quite a bit more powerful than the 560) is the usual recommendation for good results on Ultra.

"Ultra, less some expensive features", probably. Some features like Motion Blur or SSAO are expensive, and you may not like the results anyway. Turning off features like these will help.
I've a GTX470 which is rougly as fast as the the new GTX560, the new one may go ahead in newer games while my GTX470 is faster where its memory bandwidth will help.

Anyway, I recently installed Witcher 2 hoping I would be able to play it. At max 1080p except Ubersampling I had roughly 30FPS average, lowest probably around 25 (never saw lower) and a few times at 40FPS. However, this is was with an older Q9550 stock speed so with your new AMD CPU you might be able to run it a few FPS faster especially where it's less GPU intensive and more CPU demanding.

Without any blur, SSAO, AA and tweaked shadows and others I was able to run at average 40FPS, sometimes up to 50 and 60 but it was seldom (played with VSync and triple buffering).
avatar
sirladon: here are my specs

CPU: AMD FX-8120 3.10 GHz Eight-Core AM3+ CPU 8MB L2 Cache & Turbo Core Technology

HDD: 500GB SATA-II 3.0Gb/s 16MB Cache 7200RPM HDD [-13] (Single Hard Drive)

MEMORY: 8GB (2GBx4) DDR3/1600MHz Dual Channel Memory Module (Kingston HyperX)

MOTHERBOARD: * [CrossFireX] GigaByte GA-970A-D3 AMD 970 Socket AM3+ ATX Mainboard w/ On/Off Charge, 7.1 Audio, GbLAN, USB3.0, SATA-III RAID, 2 Gen2 PCIe X16, 3 PCIe X1 & 2 PCI

SOUND: HIGH DEFINITION ON-BOARD 7.1 AUDIO

VIDEO: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 1GB 16X PCIe Video Card
I wouldn't worry about it. Even if you have to turn down a few of the settings, the game will look great. The Witcher 2 looks beautiful even on low / medium settings. You have a ton of features that you can tweak to make the game run well on your system. You'll probably be able to play it high, if not ultra though.