Minecraft: Java Edition

Measured FPS Breakdown

Starting with the most demanding scenario, at 3840x2160 (4K) with Ultra settings, this combination delivers an average of 91 FPS. That clears the 60 FPS playability threshold with a comfortable margin, though it is the lowest recorded average in this dataset. Stepping down to High settings at 4K raises the average to 146.4 FPS, a substantial jump. Medium settings at 4K produce 182.6 FPS, and Low settings push the average to 231.4 FPS. The scaling from Ultra to Low at 4K represents a 154% increase in frame rate, indicating that the Ultra preset imposes a significant rendering load relative to the lower tiers.

At 2560x1440, the picture improves across the board. Ultra settings average 177.1 FPS, which is nearly double the 4K Ultra result. High settings at 1440p jump to 279.5 FPS, Medium reaches 352.5 FPS, and Low tops out at 389.6 FPS. The gap between High and Low at this resolution is narrower than at 4K, roughly 110 FPS, suggesting that the CPU begins to exert more influence as resolution drops and the GPU has more headroom.

Moving to 1920x1080, the results become extremely high by any standard. Ultra settings average 280.3 FPS, High settings average 385.2 FPS, Medium reaches 415.6 FPS, and Low peaks at 452.7 FPS. The difference between Medium and Low at 1080p is only about 37 FPS, which suggests diminishing returns from lowering settings further once Medium is reached. At 1080p, even the Ultra preset more than quadruples the 60 FPS threshold, making this resolution essentially effortless for the hardware.

Notably, the dataset includes only average FPS values; minimum and maximum frame times were not recorded. This means the analysis relies on average performance, which for a game like Minecraft: Java Edition can hide stutter in complex scenes or during chunk loading. The recorded averages are high enough that even with typical frame-time variance, the experience should remain fluid in ordinary gameplay.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear pattern of GPU dominance at higher resolutions and a shift toward CPU limitation at lower resolutions. At 3840x2160, the frame rate drops significantly from Low (231.4 FPS) to Ultra (91 FPS), a 140 FPS spread. This large delta is attributable to the GPU struggling with the increased pixel count and the more demanding Ultra preset's effects, such as higher render distance and shading. The RTX 4070 SUPER is the primary constraint at 4K, especially under Ultra settings.

At 2560x1440, the spread between Low (389.6 FPS) and Ultra (177.1 FPS) is 212.5 FPS. The proportional drop from Low to Ultra is smaller than at 4K, but the absolute numbers are higher. This indicates the GPU still carries most of the load, but the CPU's six cores and six threads are becoming more relevant as the GPU finishes frames faster.

At 1920x1080, the spread from Low (452.7 FPS) to Ultra (280.3 FPS) is 172.4 FPS. Critically, the difference between Medium (415.6 FPS) and Low (452.7 FPS) is only 37.1 FPS, and between High (385.2 FPS) and Medium (415.6 FPS) is 30.4 FPS. These narrow gaps at lower presets suggest the Intel Core i5-9400, with its 6 cores and 6 threads and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, is nearing its ceiling when the GPU is capable of producing 400+ FPS. The CPU's single-thread performance, reflected in a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 935, is adequate but not exceptional, and at 1080p Low the system is likely CPU-bound.

The scaling between resolutions at the same preset reinforces this interpretation. For Ultra settings, the drop from 1920x1080 (280.3 FPS) to 2560x1440 (177.1 FPS) is a 37% reduction, and from 1440p to 4K (91 FPS) is another 49% reduction. For Low settings, the drop from 1080p (452.7 FPS) to 1440p (389.6 FPS) is only 14%, and from 1440p to 4K (231.4 FPS) is 41%. The steeper falloff at 4K for Low settings indicates the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the limiting factor, whereas at 1080p the CPU prevents the frame rate from climbing even higher.

In practical terms, a builder should expect this system to be GPU-limited at 4K and CPU-limited at 1080p, with 1440p representing a balanced middle ground. The RTX 4070 SUPER's 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are more than sufficient for Minecraft's modest VRAM demands, so memory capacity is not a concern at any resolution tested.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the recorded benchmarks place the Intel Core i5-9400 at an average score of 2254, with a percentile rank of 47 among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are close in aggregate performance. The Intel Core i7-1068NG7 scores 2259, a delta of -0.2% relative to the i5-9400, meaning it is essentially identical in average multi-threaded performance. The Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, a delta of +0.3%, again nearly indistinguishable. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2246, a delta of +0.4%, and the Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2264, a delta of -0.4%. All four rivals fall within a 0.8% band of the i5-9400's score, so any of them would deliver practically the same frame rates in Minecraft: Java Edition, assuming the GPU remains the same. None of these CPUs would change the 1080p CPU-bound behavior in a meaningful way.

For the GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER holds an average benchmark score of 43223, ranking in the 83rd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all within 1% of its score. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB scores 43262, a delta of -0.1%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile scores 43268, also a delta of -0.1%. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 scores 43301, a delta of -0.2%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile scores 43667, a delta of -1%. These alternatives would produce nearly identical frame rates in this game, with the RTX 4090 Mobile being the fastest of the group by a single percentage point. For a desktop builder, the practical takeaway is that swapping the RTX 4070 SUPER for any of these four GPUs would not alter the measured FPS by more than a few frames per second.

It is importantly the nearest rivals for the GPU include mobile and workstation parts, which may have different power characteristics or cooling requirements. The RTX 4070 SUPER has a TDP of 220 W, while the mobile parts are constrained by laptop thermal budgets. For desktop use, the RTX 4070 SUPER remains the most sensible choice among this group.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Minecraft: Java Edition at 4K with the highest settings?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the recorded average FPS is 91, which is above the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: What is the best preset to use at 1920x1080 if I want the highest visual quality?

A: Ultra settings at 1920x1080 maintain an average of 280.3 FPS, so you can run the most demanding preset without any concern about falling below 60 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 2560x1440?

A: The data suggests the GPU remains the primary constraint at 1440p. The frame rate scales from 177.1 FPS on Ultra to 389.6 FPS on Low, a wide spread that indicates GPU workload dominates. The CPU is not yet the bottleneck at this resolution.

Q: How much performance do I gain by lowering settings from Ultra to Low at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS rises from 91 on Ultra to 231.4 on Low. That is an increase of 140.4 FPS, or roughly 154% higher frame rate, for the cost of reduced visual fidelity.

Q: Are there any CPUs that would perform significantly better than the i5-9400 in this game?

A: The nearest rival CPUs, including the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500, score within 0.4% of the i5-9400's average benchmark score. No nearby CPU would produce a measurable difference in Minecraft frame rates.

Q: Does the RTX 4070 SUPER have enough video memory for this game?

A: Yes. The GPU has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory with a 504.2 GB/s bandwidth. Minecraft: Java Edition does not require large VRAM allocations, and the recorded frame rates show no indication of memory-related limitations.

The Verdict

This PC can run Minecraft: Java Edition at every resolution and preset combination recorded in the database. The verdict by resolution confirms that all four settings at each of the three resolutions clear the 60 FPS playability threshold. At 3840x2160, Ultra settings average 91 FPS, which is the lowest recorded value but still comfortably above 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, Ultra settings average 177.1 FPS, and at 1920x1080, Ultra settings average 280.3 FPS.

The practical implication is that no tuning is required to achieve smooth gameplay. Even the most demanding preset at 4K leaves a 31 FPS margin above the playability threshold. For players who prioritize maximum visual quality, the Ultra preset is viable at all three resolutions. For players who want to maximize frame rate, Low settings at 1080p reach 452.7 FPS, which is well beyond the refresh rate of most monitors.

The only caveat is that the recorded data uses average FPS, and Minecraft's world generation and block updates can cause transient drops. However, given that the lowest average is 91 FPS, there is substantial headroom to absorb short-term dips without falling below 60 FPS.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 91 FPS. Lowering to High raises the average to 146.4 FPS, but there is no need to do so for playability. Ultra is the recommended setting for 4K.

At 2560x1440, Ultra is again the best choice, averaging 177.1 FPS. This leaves ample headroom above 60 FPS, and the visual benefits of Ultra are worth the performance cost compared to High's 279.5 FPS.

At 1920x1080, Ultra settings produce 280.3 FPS, which is the highest average among the Ultra presets across all resolutions. This is the recommended configuration for 1080p, as it delivers both maximum quality and a frame rate that exceeds the refresh rate of virtually all monitors.

In summary, for Minecraft: Java Edition with the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER, the answer is simple: enable Ultra settings at any resolution. The hardware has more than enough performance to handle the game's most demanding preset, and the only reason to lower settings would be to chase extreme frame rates beyond 300 FPS, which offers no practical benefit on standard displays.