Leaving the dramas of Next Generation Content behind, we installed the game on our Mid-Range system. It's worth noting that the Recommended System Requirements on the back of the box is "only" 2.0GHz processor, 512MB RAM and a 256MB DirectX 9.0 graphics card like GeForce FX 5900-series or Radeon 9800-series. We did what we could to match that, within the limits of our test lab hardware: a GeForce 6600GT has similar performance to a Radeon 9800 Pro, and 512MB of system memory wasn't a problem since we have 1.5GB free when playing the game on our 2GB High End system.

Mid-Range System Setup:

AMD Athlon 64 3700+ (operating at 2200MHz, 11x200MHz); ABIT AN8 32X (NVIDIA nForce4 SLI X16); 2 x 256MB Kingston KHX3200K2 (operating in dual channel at 400MHz with 2-2-2-5-1T timings); Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 200GB 7,200RPM SATA II hard disk drive; AC '97 on-board sound; OCZ PowerStream 600W power supply unit; Windows XP Professional Service Pack 2; DirectX 9.0c; NVIDIA nForce4 SLI X16 platform drivers, version 6.82.

Video Cards:

• HIS Radeon X850XT IceQ II iTurbo 256MB - operating at its default clock speeds of 520/1080MHz using Catalyst 6.3 WHQL;
  
• BFG Tech GeForce 6800 GT OC 256MB - operating at its default clock speeds of 370/1000MHz using Forceware 84.25, available from nZone;
  
• HIS Radeon X1600XT IceQ iTurbo 256MB - operating at its default clock speeds of 587/1380MHz using Catalyst 6.3 WHQL;
  
• BFG Tech GeForce 6600 GT OC 128MB - operating at its default clock speeds of 525/1050MHz using Forceware 84.25, available from nZone.

Running at this level, things were far more cut and dry because Next Generation Content was not a realistic option. Our fastest mid-range card, the GeForce 6800 GT, could just about manage it at 1024x768 but the X1600XT and GeForce 6600 GT produced single-digital framerates even at 800x600.

Interestingly, when testing the generally faster Radeon X850XT, the next-gen content was completely disabled. It is the only Shader Model 2.0 card in this test, so appears that the eye candy is limited to Shader Model 3.0 cards only. This is rather curious, since neither of the "Recommended" GeForce FX 5900 nor Radeon 9800 support Shader Model 3.0 either.

Otherwise, general performance was good all-round: the faster pair of 6800GT / X850XT hit 1600x1200 and the slower pair of 6600GT / X1600XT reached 1280x1024.

If you play games on an LCD monitor rather than a CRT, there is the added complication of running at native resolution: fall short and you risk a blocky mess with the display upscaling to compensate for the lower image resolution. For example, if you've just spent £350 on 20-inch widescreen monitor you will aspire to playing at a native 1680x1050.

Pleasingly, the game supports this but on a X1600XT, this is only possible by turning AA off. You can have the smoothness of anti-aliasing but only at 1280x1024, or in widescreen, 1280x720.

Final Thoughts

As we would expect from such a mainstream game as Tomb Raider, the overall system requirements reflect the generally lower specification of mainstream gamers. Playing at 1024x768 or 1280x1024 with high detail level and even anti-aliasing should be within the grasp of most people. However, crank up the Next Generation Content and you will need to invest a four-figure sum in a PC to play it at a decent resolution and framerate.

NVIDIA gamers had best wait for a patch - we think the next-gen option adds a lot to the experience, so to complete the game at low detail just to avoid the stuttering would be to deny yourself the way it's meant to be played. Ironically.

Alteratively, we can think of worse things than buying yourself an Xbox 360 and enjoying Lara's adventures without the headaches (aside from the ones you get when you can't figure out a trap or puzzle that is).