Working solution for Intel dual core CPUs!

Here is a better analogy (I think) since it relates directly to disclaimers (which is what those minimum requirements essentially are).

The label on the side of my cup of coffee says "contents hot, may burn you". Are the contents hot by my definition? Maybe not. In fact... most of the time the contents don't seem hot to me. Lets say I've bought coffee many times and it was "tepid" by my definition 100 out of 100 times. I know other people have gotten coffee they consider to be hot... but what matters to me is my own experience and the experience of the people I want to listen to.  I, therefore, used inductive reasoning to assume it would never be hot in the future for me. That label still exists though... which means that if I open that cup of coffee in an irresponsible manner and burn myself the company did its due dilligence. Period. The fact that i was burned was not that companies fault. My experience, and my inductive conclusions based on that experience, is entirely irrelevant. You've yet to explain why this sceario (which I attempted to explain through the gambling analogy) is fundamentally different. Your inductive reasoning used to selectively choose when you feel that the word requirement really means requirement is entirely irrelevent.

That's not to say I don't have a case if I end up with 3rd degree burns over 1/3 of my body (in that case a specific cup of coffe was made unreasonably hot and/or a policy is in place that made that coffee unreasonbly hot) but in a fundamental way the company did it's due diligence and, more importantly, my anecdotal perceptions are entirely irrelevent.

To bring us full circle... here I am looking at the back of a PC game and its list of requirements. I know X requirement is flexible (at least based on my inherently limited anecdotal experience). That doesn't actually change that it's a requirement. My inductive reasoning doesn't change the words on the box or what they actually mean. This company is communicating, clearly to me, that I shouldn't buy this game unless I meet this minimum. My person experience is irrelevent. They are telling me to hold on to my money until I meet those minimums.  Do they want my money?! Of course.. but they would rather their customers have a good chance of being realtively happy with their product. I have actually always assumed that they inflate those minimums to play it safe... in my book that makes them responsible advocates on behalf of the consumer. Does that assumption change the substance of that disclaimer in any way?! No. If my CPU is 1mhz below those disclaimers I am taking my chances. I get that you, on a personal level, don't seem to think that is reasonable... I just disagree.