Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT combination delivers a wide range of performance in Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014. The recorded data shows a clear path to smooth gameplay at every resolution, provided the settings are chosen to match the display's pixel count. The 60 FPS threshold is the key benchmark for playability, and this pairing clears it with room to spare at 1080p and 1440p, while 4K requires a more conservative approach to settings.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160 (4K), the most demanding preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS is Low. The measurements show an average of 62.2 FPS at this setting. Pushing to Medium drops the average to 45.2 FPS, which falls below the playable threshold. High yields 41.2 FPS, and Ultra is the heaviest at 32.9 FPS. For a locked 60 FPS experience at 4K, Low is the only viable option according to the data.

Moving to 2560x1440 (1440p), the headroom increases significantly. The High preset is the most demanding option that stays above 60 FPS, with an average of 71.5 FPS. This is a substantial improvement over 4K, allowing for much better visual fidelity. Medium runs at 88.5 FPS, and Low reaches 112.1 FPS, but High offers the best balance of image quality and performance. Ultra sits at 58.8 FPS, just below the 60 FPS target, so it is not recommended for consistent smoothness.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the CPU and GPU combination has ample power. The Ultra preset is entirely playable, delivering an average of 89 FPS. This is the highest quality setting available and it clears the 60 FPS mark by a wide margin. For users with high refresh rate monitors, the lower presets provide even higher frame rates: Medium averages 135.6 FPS, High averages 114.2 FPS, and Low reaches 174.9 FPS. The data indicates that 1080p Ultra is the sweet spot for maximum visual quality without sacrificing smoothness.

CPU and GPU Roles

The performance scaling across resolutions and presets reveals how the workload shifts between the processor and the graphics card. The data shows that the GPU is the dominant factor at higher resolutions. At 4K, the gap between Low and Ultra is 29.3 FPS (62.2 versus 32.9), which is a 47% drop in average frame rate. This steep decline indicates that the graphics card is the limiting factor when rendering a large number of pixels.

At 1440p, the spread between Low and Ultra is 53.3 FPS (112.1 versus 58.8), showing that the GPU still has a significant impact, but the overall frame rates are higher, suggesting less pressure on the graphics hardware. The CPU begins to show its influence at 1080p. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 85.9 FPS (174.9 versus 89), a much larger absolute gap than at 4K. At lower resolutions, the GPU can render frames faster than the CPU can feed it, making the Ryzen 5 2600 a more relevant factor. The 12-thread processor keeps the frame rate from climbing even higher at Low settings, where the GPU is not fully taxed.

The data suggests that for 4K gaming, the RX 7600 XT is the primary constraint, and the CPU has less impact on the final frame rate. At 1080p, the CPU becomes more important, and its performance ceiling is visible in the high frame rates of the lower presets. The Ryzen 5 2600, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is sufficient to avoid severe bottlenecks in most scenarios, but it does cap the maximum achievable frame rate in lighter settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded measurements provide a complete picture of performance across all settings and resolutions. At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are as follows: Low runs at 62.2 FPS, Medium at 45.2 FPS, High at 41.2 FPS, and Ultra at 32.9 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 29.3 FPS, which highlights the heavy cost of the higher presets at 4K.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 112.1 FPS, Medium at 88.5 FPS, High at 71.5 FPS, and Ultra at 58.8 FPS. The progression is smooth, with each step up in quality costing a noticeable chunk of performance. Ultra is the only setting that fails to reach 60 FPS, coming in just 1.2 FPS short.

At 1920x1080, the averages are: Low at 174.9 FPS, Medium at 135.6 FPS, High at 114.2 FPS, and Ultra at 89 FPS. Every preset delivers a smooth experience, and even the most demanding setting provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. The minimum and maximum frame rates were not recorded in the database, so the analysis relies on the average values, which are consistent and show no anomalies.

The Verdict

This PC configuration is fully capable of running Minimum at playable frame rates across all three tested resolutions. At 1920x1080, the verdict is clear: every preset, including Ultra, clears the 60 FPS target. The average of 89 FPS at Ultra provides a smooth and visually rich experience. For high refresh rate displays, the Medium and High presets offer even higher averages of 135.6 and 114.2 FPS, respectively.

At 2560x1440, the system delivers playable performance on High, Medium, and Low presets. High is the best choice, with an average of 71.5 FPS. The Ultra preset, at 58.8 FPS, is just below the 60 FPS line and should be avoided for strict frame rate consistency.

At 3840x2160, the system can run the game, but only on the Low preset, which averages 62.2 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below the playable threshold, with averages of 45.2, 41.2, and 32.9 FPS respectively. For 4K owners, the data indicates that Low is the only setting that provides a smooth experience.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the AMD Ryzen 5 2600, based on average benchmark scores, include the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, which scores 21440, a 0.2% difference from the Ryzen's 21484 average. The Intel Core i9-11900H is also close, with a score of 21367, a 0.5% difference. On the other side, the AMD EPYC 9454 scores 21223, a 1.2% difference, and the Intel Xeon D-1746TER scores 21635, a -0.7% difference. These processors would deliver very similar CPU-bound performance in this game.

For the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690, with an average score of 17037, a 0.3% difference from the RX 7600 XT's 17083. The AMD Radeon HD 7970M scores 17019, a 0.4% difference, and the NVIDIA Tesla M4 scores 16932, a 0.9% difference. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 scores 17208, a -0.7% difference. These GPUs would perform at a similar level in Minimum, meaning users with these components can expect comparable frame rates at the same settings and resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database's ranking of tested CPU and GPU combinations for Minimum, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT holds the 2389th position out of 3712 total combinations. This places it in the lower portion of the ranking, which makes sense given that the game is from 2014 and the hardware is modern mid-range. The rank reflects the overall performance across all tested combinations, and the data shows that this combo is far from the top, but it is also far from the bottom. The 75th percentile ranking of the CPU and the 60th percentile ranking of the GPU indicate that this is a balanced mid-range setup. The frame rates achieved in Minimum are strong enough to provide a good experience at 1080p and 1440p, and the rank is a relative measure against other combos in the database, not a reflection of the game's playability. The combination is well-suited for this title, offering smooth performance at the most common resolutions.