Minecraft: Java Edition

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Minecraft: Java Edition with the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 covers three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 188.8 FPS, Medium reaches 146.6 FPS, High runs at 119.3 FPS, and Ultra drops to 73.3 FPS. Stepping up to 2560x1440, the same presets yield 119.9 FPS at Low, 95.8 FPS at Medium, 73.3 FPS at High, and 45.4 FPS at Ultra. At 3840x2160, the numbers compress further: Low averages 61.5 FPS, Medium 49.2 FPS, High 39.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 25.6 FPS. The database records no minimum or maximum frame rate values for these runs, so the analysis relies entirely on average FPS.

The pattern across all settings is consistent: each increase in preset quality costs a measurable chunk of performance. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium reduces the average by 42.2 FPS, from Medium to High by 27.3 FPS, and from High to Ultra by 46.0 FPS. At 1440p, the same transitions cost 24.1 FPS, 22.5 FPS, and 27.9 FPS respectively. At 4K, the gaps are 12.3 FPS between Low and Medium, 9.8 FPS between Medium and High, and 13.8 FPS between High and Ultra. The Ultra preset is disproportionately heavier than the others at every resolution, which suggests a specific rendering feature or shadow setting in that tier.

Resolution scaling also follows a clear trajectory. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 119.3 at 1080p to 73.3 at 1440p, a decline of 46.0 FPS, then to 39.4 at 4K, another 33.9 FPS loss. At Low settings, the drop from 188.8 at 1080p to 119.9 at 1440p is 68.9 FPS, and from 1440p to 4K the loss is 58.4 FPS. The percentage losses are steep but not identical across presets, which hints at where the bottleneck shifts.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals how the balance of responsibility changes with resolution. At 1920x1080, the GTX 1650 is clearly the limiting factor at higher presets, but the Ryzen 7 7700 has enough headroom that the Low and Medium presets run far above the 60 FPS threshold. The 188.8 FPS at Low and 146.6 FPS at Medium are strong indicators that the CPU is feeding frames faster than the GPU can display them, even at this modest resolution.

At 2560x1440, the GPU begins to take a firmer grip. The High preset still manages 73.3 FPS, which is above the playable threshold, but Ultra drops to 45.4 FPS. This 27.9 FPS gap between High and Ultra at 1440p, versus a 46.0 FPS gap at 1080p, shows that the GPU is nearing its ceiling. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is not the constraint here; the recorded Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,760 and single-core score of 1,930 place it well above what this workload demands at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is unequivocally the dominant factor. The Ultra preset manages only 25.6 FPS, and even High sits at 39.4 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium at 4K is 12.3 FPS, and between Medium and High is 9.8 FPS, both smaller than the same gaps at lower resolutions. This compression indicates that pixel throughput, not geometry or draw calls, is the limiting factor. The GTX 1650's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are simply insufficient for 4K Ultra settings in this game.

The scaling between presets at each resolution tells the same story. At 1080p, the CPU can push enough frames that the GPU's fill rate and shading units become the bottleneck at Ultra. At 4K, the GPU is so far beyond its comfort zone that even the CPU's strong single-thread performance cannot compensate. The Ryzen 7 7700's PassMark single-thread score of 4,063 and 3DMark single-thread score of 1,049 are exemplary, but they do not matter when the GPU cannot rasterize fast enough.

Best Settings per Resolution

For a 60 FPS target, the database records the following optimal presets. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset runs at an average of 73.3 FPS, which clears the threshold with 13.3 FPS to spare. This is the most demanding setting that remains playable. At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 73.3 FPS, also above the threshold, while Ultra falls to 45.4 FPS and is not recommended. At 3840x2160, only the Low preset reaches 61.5 FPS, barely above the 60 FPS line; Medium at 49.2 FPS and High at 39.4 FPS are both below.

The interesting detail is that the best playable preset at 1440p and 1080p both land on 73.3 FPS, but for different reasons. At 1080p, Ultra achieves that number because the GPU is still capable enough at that resolution. At 1440p, High achieves the same number because Ultra is too heavy. This coincidence in the average FPS masks a different performance envelope: the 1080p Ultra run likely has more frame time variance than the 1440p High run, even though the averages match.

The 4K result is worth noting. The Low preset at 61.5 FPS is playable, but it is a narrow margin. Any scene with heavy entity counts or complex redstone contraptions could push the average down. The database's playable threshold is exactly 60 FPS, and this combo sits 1.5 FPS above it at 4K Low. That is a thin cushion.

How This Combo Ranks

The database places this CPU and GPU combination at rank 1,639 out of 1,727 tested combos for Minecraft: Java Edition. That puts it in the bottom 5.1% of all recorded systems, which is a sobering position for a processor as capable as the Ryzen 7 7700. The ranking reflects the GPU's limitations more than the CPU's strengths.

The CPU alone sits in the 87th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 40,081. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 at 40,048 (0.1% slower), the Intel Core 5 221E at 40,144 (0.2% faster), the AMD Ryzen 9 270 at 40,246 (0.4% faster), and the Intel Core i9-13905H at 40,313 (0.6% faster). These are all within a rounding error of each other, confirming that the 7700 is a strong mid-range CPU.

The GPU, by contrast, sits in the 40th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7,472. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 8850M at 7,447 (0.3% slower), the Intel UHD Graphics 750 at 7,441 (0.4% slower), the AMD Radeon R7 350 at 7,425 (0.6% slower), and the Intel Arc A310 at 7,550 (1.0% faster). The GTX 1650 is a low-end part by modern standards, and the combo ranking reflects that.

The gap between the CPU's 87th percentile and the GPU's 40th percentile explains the overall rank. The Ryzen 7 7700 has more than enough compute for this game, but the GTX 1650 drags the entire system down. In a game that is known for being CPU-bound at lower resolutions, this combo inverts that expectation at 4K, where the GPU becomes the absolute ceiling.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Minecraft at 1080p with all settings maxed?

A: Yes. The Ultra preset at 1920x1080 averages 73.3 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 2560x1440?

A: The High preset at 1440p averages 73.3 FPS. The Ultra preset drops to 45.4 FPS and is not playable.

Q: Is 4K gaming feasible with this hardware?

A: Only at the Low preset, which averages 61.5 FPS. Medium (49.2 FPS), High (39.4 FPS), and Ultra (25.6 FPS) all fall below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The GTX 1650 scores 7,472 on average, which is 0.3% faster than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, 0.4% faster than the Intel UHD Graphics 750, 0.6% faster than the AMD Radeon R7 350, and 1.0% slower than the Intel Arc A310.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 7700 compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The 7700 scores 40,081 on average, which is 0.1% faster than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 0.2% slower than the Intel Core 5 221E, 0.4% slower than the AMD Ryzen 9 270, and 0.6% slower than the Intel Core i9-13905H.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank in the database?

A: It ranks 1,639 out of 1,727 tested combos for Minecraft: Java Edition, placing it in the lower portion of all recorded systems.

The Verdict

The data shows that this PC can run Minecraft: Java Edition at 60 FPS or higher at every tested resolution, but only with specific settings. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 73.3 FPS, so the full visual experience is available. At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 73.3 FPS, which is playable, but Ultra is not. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 61.5 FPS, which barely clears the threshold, and no higher preset is playable.

The verdict by resolution is clear. For 1080p, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are above 60 FPS. For 1440p, three presets (Low, Medium, High) are above 60 FPS. For 4K, only the Low preset is above 60 FPS. The system is capable of running the game smoothly at 1080p and 1440p with reasonable visual quality, but 4K gaming is limited to the lowest settings.

The bottleneck is unambiguous. The Ryzen 7 7700 is a top-tier CPU in the 87th percentile, but the GTX 1650 is a 40th percentile GPU. The combination works well at 1080p, where the CPU's strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,930) helps push high frame rates. At 4K, the GPU's 4 GB memory and 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance are simply not enough for anything above Low settings.

For a player with a 1080p monitor, this system is more than adequate. For a 1440p player, it is acceptable with High settings. For a 4K player, it is playable only at Low, and even then with a narrow margin above the 60 FPS line.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest CPU rivals to the Ryzen 7 7700 are all within 0.6% of its average benchmark score. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (0.1% slower), Intel Core 5 221E (0.2% faster), AMD Ryzen 9 270 (0.4% faster), and Intel Core i9-13905H (0.6% faster) would all behave nearly identically in Minecraft: Java Edition, since the game is not heavily multi-threaded and these differences are negligible. Any of these processors paired with the GTX 1650 would produce FPS figures within a fraction of the recorded numbers.

The nearest GPU rivals to the GTX 1650 are similarly close. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M (0.3% slower), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% slower), AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% slower), and Intel Arc A310 (1.0% faster) would all land within a few FPS of the GTX 1650's results. A system with one of these GPUs and the Ryzen 7 7700 would show the same pattern: strong 1080p performance, acceptable 1440p at High, and 4K limited to Low.

The practical takeaway is that the GPU is the binding constraint. Swapping the GTX 1650 for a significantly stronger GPU would change the 4K results dramatically, while swapping the Ryzen 7 7700 for any of its near rivals would change almost nothing. Conversely, pairing the GTX 1650 with a weaker CPU would hurt 1080p frame rates, since the game can use single-thread performance effectively. The recorded data supports this: the CPU is in the 87th percentile, the GPU in the 40th, and the combo ranks in the bottom 5% for this specific game. The GPU must be upgraded first to improve the overall experience.