Minecraft: Java Edition

FAQ

Q: What is the highest playable preset at 1920x1080 for this PC?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti can run Minecraft: Java Edition at Ultra settings in 1920x1080, with an average frame rate of 118 FPS.

Q: Can this combination handle 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but not at the Ultra preset. At 3840x2160, the playable settings are High (65.3 FPS), Medium (79 FPS), and Low (101.1 FPS). Ultra drops below the 60 FPS threshold, averaging 36.9 FPS.

Q: Which resolution offers the highest average frame rate on Low settings?

A: The lowest resolution tested, 1920x1080, delivers 305 FPS on Low settings. For comparison, 2560x1440 Low averages 193.4 FPS, and 3840x2160 Low averages 101.1 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, scores 2259, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, which is 0.4% lower.

Q: How does the GPU compare to similar graphics cards in average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti has an average benchmark score of 7723. The AMD Radeon 540 scores 7673, which is 0.7% lower, and the Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, which is 2.3% lower.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra at 2560x1440?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 193.4 FPS, while Ultra averages 72.6 FPS. The gap between these two presets is substantial, with Low delivering roughly 2.7 times the frame rate of Ultra.

How This Combo Ranks

The database places this CPU and GPU combination at rank 1479 out of 1727 tested combos for Minecraft: Java Edition. That places it in the lower portion of the overall distribution, around the 14th percentile of all tested systems. This ranking reflects the fact that the GTX 1660 Ti, while a capable 1080p card, sits below many newer and higher-tier GPUs in the database. The CPU also ranks near the middle of all tested processors, with a percentileVsAllCpus of 47.

The rank is not a measure of playability, however. The game itself is not demanding in absolute terms, and the measured frame rates show that this combo clears the 60 FPS threshold at every resolution tested except for one preset. The rank of 1479 simply means that many other combinations produce higher average frame rates, particularly at lower resolutions where the CPU and GPU are less constrained. At 1920x1080, the system produces 191.9 FPS on High and 118 FPS on Ultra, which are well above the playable threshold. The low rank is therefore more a reflection of the hardware's position in the broader database than an indication of a poor experience in this specific game.

The percentile data supports this interpretation. The GPU's percentileVsAllGpus is 41, meaning it outperforms 41% of all GPUs in the database. The CPU's percentileVsAllCpus is 47. Neither component is a top-tier part, but both are sufficient for this game's modest requirements. The combination rank of 1479 out of 1727 suggests that many faster systems exist, but the measured FPS numbers show that this system is not struggling in practice.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, with an average of 65.3 FPS. The Medium preset averages 79 FPS and Low averages 101.1 FPS, but High is the highest visual quality tier that remains playable. Ultra falls to 36.9 FPS, which is well below the 60 FPS threshold and not recommended at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are Ultra, which averages 72.6 FPS. This is the highest preset available and it still clears the playable threshold by a comfortable margin. The other presets all exceed 60 FPS as well: High averages 119.2 FPS, Medium averages 153.9 FPS, and Low averages 193.4 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the best settings are also Ultra, with an average of 118 FPS. This is more than double the 60 FPS threshold, leaving ample headroom for demanding scenes or background tasks. The lower presets are even faster, with High at 191.9 FPS, Medium at 240.7 FPS, and Low at 305 FPS.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The database lists four nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-9400 based on average benchmark score. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259, which is 0.2% higher than the i5-9400's 2254. The Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, which is 0.4% higher. The Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, which is 0.3% lower. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, which is 0.4% lower. In practice, any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minecraft: Java Edition, since the game's performance at these settings is not heavily dependent on small CPU differences.

For the GPU, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon 540, with an average score of 7673, which is 0.7% lower than the GTX 1660 Ti's 7723. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7580, which is 1.9% lower. The AMD Radeon R7 250 scores 7557, which is 2.2% lower. The Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, which is 2.3% lower. These deltas are small, so a system with any of these GPUs paired with a similar CPU would deliver frame rates within a few percent of the measured results. For Minecraft: Java Edition, the differences would be barely noticeable at most presets, though the GTX 1660 Ti holds a slight edge that becomes more relevant at 4K Ultra where the frame rate drops below 60.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling between resolutions reveals how the workload shifts between the CPU and GPU. At 1920x1080, the frame rates are extremely high across all presets, ranging from 118 FPS at Ultra to 305 FPS at Low. These numbers are high enough that the game is likely limited by the CPU in many scenarios, since even a modest GPU can produce triple-digit frame rates in this title at 1080p. The CPU's single-core performance is the more relevant factor here, as Minecraft: Java Edition is known for its reliance on a single primary thread.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates drop but remain very high. Ultra falls from 118 FPS at 1080p to 72.6 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of roughly 38%. Low falls from 305 FPS to 193.4 FPS, a reduction of roughly 37%. This consistent drop across presets indicates that the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor as the pixel count increases, but the CPU still has enough headroom to keep frame rates well above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the dominant constraint. Ultra drops to 36.9 FPS, which is below the playable threshold. High drops to 65.3 FPS, and even Low drops to 101.1 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is steep: Ultra loses about 49% of its frame rate, High loses about 45%, and Medium loses about 49%. This pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering resolution directly impacts the number of pixels the GPU must process. The CPU's role diminishes at this resolution because the frame rate is low enough that even a weaker CPU would produce similar results.

The preset scaling within each resolution tells a similar story. At 1080p, going from Low to Ultra reduces the frame rate from 305 to 118, a drop of 61%. At 1440p, the same preset change reduces the frame rate from 193.4 to 72.6, a drop of 62%. At 4K, the drop from Low to Ultra is from 101.1 to 36.9, a drop of 63%. The consistency of these percentages across resolutions suggests that the preset scaling has a similar relative impact regardless of resolution, but the absolute frame rates are lower at higher resolutions because the GPU has less spare capacity.

The Verdict

This PC can run Minecraft: Java Edition at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, averaging 118 FPS. It can also run the game at 2560x1440 with Ultra settings, averaging 72.6 FPS. At 3840x2160, the best playable preset is High, which averages 65.3 FPS. The system fails to maintain 60 FPS only at 4K Ultra, where the average drops to 36.9 FPS.

The verdict by resolution is clear. At 1920x1080, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with the lowest being Ultra at 118 FPS. At 2560x1440, all four presets are also playable, with Ultra at 72.6 FPS. At 3840x2160, three presets are playable: Low (101.1 FPS), Medium (79 FPS), and High (65.3 FPS). Ultra is the only non-playable setting in the entire dataset.

For users with a 1080p or 1440p monitor, this system provides a smooth experience at the highest settings. For 4K users, High settings deliver acceptable performance, but Ultra should be avoided. The database's playable threshold is 60 FPS, and this combo clears that threshold in 11 out of 12 measured configurations.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measurements are as follows. Low settings average 305 FPS. Medium settings average 240.7 FPS. High settings average 191.9 FPS. Ultra settings average 118 FPS. All presets are far above the 60 FPS playable threshold, and even the most demanding preset leaves substantial headroom.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high. Low settings average 193.4 FPS. Medium settings average 153.9 FPS. High settings average 119.2 FPS. Ultra settings average 72.6 FPS. The step from High to Ultra is the largest single drop, from 119.2 to 72.6, a reduction of 39%. Still, all presets clear the playable threshold.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates drop more noticeably. Low settings average 101.1 FPS. Medium settings average 79 FPS. High settings average 65.3 FPS. Ultra settings average 36.9 FPS. The 4K Ultra preset is the only configuration in the entire dataset that falls below 60 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra at this resolution is substantial, from 65.3 to 36.9, a reduction of 43%. Users targeting 4K should stick with High or lower.

The measured data includes only average frame rates, with no minimum or maximum values recorded. The absence of min and max data means the analysis relies on average performance, which is sufficient for determining playability at the 60 FPS threshold. The overall pattern is consistent: this system is more than adequate for 1080p and 1440p at all settings, and it handles 4K at up to High settings with average frame rates above 60.