TO GAME DEVELOPERS, HERE'S AN IDEA:
USE BENCHMARK SCORES AS SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS.
Why are we still using hardware requirements? To confuse players? There are so many system requirements lists out there that list something as vague as "DirectX 11 graphics card with 1GB RAM". Newbies to PC gaming can never figure out if a card can run the game from that line, because there are so many classes of cards that fit that description. From that, I could even say that Intel HD graphics can run that game, since it is DirectX 11 and has 1GB of shared RAM, right?
The same with CPUs. Why are we using core count and clock speed as the primary specifications of CPUs in a list of requirements? Most of these specifications say something like "Dual-core CPU at 2.8GHz or above", or something along that format. In which case people could naturally assume that an ond Core Duo would be able to run it, or that a modern i3 can't. If you don't know already, neither core count nor clock speed are indicative of a CPU's performance, so why are you specifying a minimum core count and a minimum clock speed?
Instead, you should use benchmark scores. Imagine how simple that would be. You just list "a 3DMark 11 performance score of 2000 or above", and people would go home and test their system on that benchmark to determine if it can run a game. No fuss, no confusion, no false assumptions. Just a quick 5-minute test and the system's capability is determined.