my god. I have a 2500k so my CPU should be fine, but I am running a 6950 GPU which is the previous gen to what the min settings say.... yikes.

UPDATE:
Ubisoft will cap the graphics settings on pc and make it 30FPS across all PCs for parity, Ubisoft does not want people to feel left out with lower spec PCs. This should also help to not start a debate.

Same here D:

I call overinflated bullshit.

Bethesda have done it with a few games already, as has EA with SoM, so why not Ubisoft? My guess is the minimum spec will play at 1080p, 60fps, Ultra graphics settings. Recommended will be for 4K or something equally ridiculous.

I'm starting to get suspicious that publishers are striking deals with hardware manufacturers to over inflate their minimum specs. Bring on the conspiracy theories!

I would say that Shadow of Mordor was inflated since it run on medium on my GTX650 in 1080p@30. But not The Evil Within. That piece of unoptimized garbage just runs at 720p in low, even if the visuals on ultra are worse than RE6.

Edit: Time to buy a 970.

Evil Within devs are simply technically incompetent, the graphical fidelty of the game doesnt look demanding at all. There are games on PS4 like Metro LL that look 10 times better with better resolution and 2x times better performance. It all depends on the developer 

Being Ubisoft, I wouldn't by that trick (but on medium or high, not ultra settings). After all, the min. CPU is miles better than what's inside in those consoles and the min. GPU is almost 50% more powerful too.

But as soon as the game launches we'll find out, either from reviews or from pissed users.

From all reports the current console build is a complete mess with the XBOne dropping to sub 20FPS, and it is 900P with low quality AA on consoles. I would be willing to bet that mid spec PC from last year would actually run the game at console quality. Tho chances are people wouldn't actually be happy with that level of perfomance and it would be a shame if they didn't allow you to turn down some of the more demanding effects that have a small impact on actual IQ, as these min requirements sugest it won't be scalable at all. A PC build matching the min specs will most likely run the game at far better than console quality, like it would pretty much every other multiplatform game so far. For example Dead Rising 3 which is a pretty shoddy PC port of a game that ran 720P with frequent dips below 30 FPS down as low as 15FPS on the XBone, doesn't drop below 30 FPS on a 680 at a resolution higher than 1080p, with even mid range cards hitting console level framerates at much higher resolution (when pared with a high end CPU anyway).

Ubisoft would have to fuck up pretty bad for Unity to be worse optimised... Or if you want a really unoptimised game

Keep in mind at that resolution on PS4 it frequently drops below 30FPS often to the low 20s. Or the horror that was Watch Dogs PC with it's broken texture streaming implementation (it doesn't do texture LOD like the console versions)

Remember Watch Dogs was targeted at 900P 30FPS on PS4 just like Unity.

A 7970 is actually 100%+ more powerful than the GPU in the PS4, 1.8TF vs 3.7TF.

We all know that TeraFlops don't translate well into fps.

With that said, not even your above graphs show the 7970 being twice as fast as a 7870 and I actually compared an HD7870 (which I know is more powerful than what the PS4 has) with a GTX680 at Anand's bench:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1034?vs=1348