Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Minimum on this AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination shows a wide performance spread depending on resolution and preset. The game is a third-person shooter from 2014, and the measurements cover three resolutions and four settings levels.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly below playable thresholds. The Low preset delivers an average of 28.2 FPS, which is the strongest result at this resolution. Medium drops to 24.6 FPS, High falls to 17.8 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 15.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 12.7 FPS, indicating that the GPU is heavily taxed at 4K regardless of settings. No minimum or maximum frame time data was recorded for these runs, so the averages stand as the primary reference.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance improves but still fails to reach the 60 FPS threshold on any preset. Low settings produce an average of 54.2 FPS, which is the closest result to playability at this resolution. Medium averages 39.3 FPS, High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 25.1 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline of roughly 7 FPS per tier, with the Low preset sitting just 5.8 FPS short of the 60 FPS target.

At 1920x1080, the picture changes meaningfully. Low settings deliver an average of 78.5 FPS, clearing the 60 FPS threshold by a comfortable margin. Medium averages 61.6 FPS, still above the playable mark. High drops to 49.7 FPS, and Ultra averages 42.1 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 36.4 FPS, which shows that preset selection has a substantial impact on performance even at the lowest resolution tested.

The frame rate scaling across resolutions follows an expected pattern. At Low settings, the average drops from 78.5 FPS at 1080p to 54.2 FPS at 1440p to 28.2 FPS at 4K. At Medium, the corresponding figures are 61.6, 39.3, and 24.6 FPS. The 4K results are consistently less than half of the 1080p results, which points to the GPU reaching its bandwidth and fill rate limits. The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth, and the 4K resolution appears to saturate that resource.

The database also records a combo rank of 3610 out of 3712 combinations for this game, putting this configuration near the bottom of the tested pool. That rank is consistent with the measured frame rates, which only reach playable levels at 1080p on the two lighter presets.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 60 FPS on Ultra settings?

A: No. The best Ultra result is 42.1 FPS at 1920x1080. At 2560x1440, Ultra averages 25.1 FPS, and at 3840x2160, it averages 15.5 FPS. None of these approach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the highest settings preset that stays at or above 60 FPS?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium settings average 61.6 FPS, which is above the threshold. Low settings average 78.5 FPS. At 2560x1440 and 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings?

A: At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 78.5 FPS at 1920x1080 to 54.2 FPS at 2560x1440, a decrease of 24.3 FPS. That is roughly a 31% reduction in average frame rate.

Q: Which resolution shows the largest gap between Low and Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080, the gap between Low (78.5 FPS) and Ultra (42.1 FPS) is 36.4 FPS. At 2560x1440, the gap is 29.1 FPS, and at 3840x2160, the gap is 12.7 FPS.

Q: Is the GTX 1650 a bottleneck at 4K in this game?

A: The data indicates a hard GPU limit at 3840x2160. Even the Low preset only averages 28.2 FPS, and Ultra averages 15.5 FPS. The frame rate compression between presets at 4K, compared to the wider spread at 1080p, suggests the GPU cannot keep up with pixel throughput demands.

Q: How does this CPU and GPU combination rank among all tested combos for Minimum?

A: The configuration ranks 3610 out of 3712 combinations in the database. This places it in the lower percentile of tested hardware for this specific game.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold. The best average is 28.2 FPS on Low settings, which is still far from playable. The database records no playable settings for this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the same situation applies. Low settings produce the highest average at 54.2 FPS, but that remains below the 60 FPS mark. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind, with averages of 39.3, 32, and 25.1 FPS respectively. No playable settings are recorded for 1440p.

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that keeps the average at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 61.6 FPS. Low settings also clear the threshold with 78.5 FPS, but Medium represents the best visual quality that remains playable. High drops to 49.7 FPS and Ultra to 42.1 FPS, so those presets should be avoided if the 60 FPS target is mandatory.

The verdict data confirms this: 1920x1080 lists Low and Medium as playable settings, with Medium as the best settings option at 61.6 FPS. Both 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 list no playable settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU each have close rivals in the database based on average benchmark scores.

For the AMD Ryzen 5 2600, the nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, with an average score of 21440 versus the Ryzen's 21484, a delta of 0.2%. The Intel Core i9-11900H scores 21367, which is 0.5% behind the Ryzen. On the other side, the Intel Xeon D-1746TER scores 21635, putting it 0.7% ahead, and the AMD EPYC 9454 scores 21223, which is 1.2% behind. These four processors all sit within a narrow band of roughly 1.9% of each other in average score, meaning any of them would likely produce very similar CPU-bound behavior in Minimum.

For the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, with an average score of 7447 versus the GTX 1650's 7472, a delta of 0.3%. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441, which is 0.4% behind. The AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425, 0.6% behind, and the Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, which is 1% ahead. The GTX 1650 sits in the middle of this group, so swapping to any of these GPUs would likely shift frame rates by only a few percent in either direction.

The GPU's percentile rank is 40 among all GPUs, and its average benchmark score is 7472. The CPU's percentile rank is 75 among all CPUs. This mismatch suggests the GPU is the limiting component in most scenarios for this game, especially at higher resolutions.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results show a clear division of labor between the Ryzen 5 2600 and the GTX 1650 in Minimum. The CPU ranks in the 75th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 40th percentile among all GPUs. That gap alone points to the GPU as the primary constraint.

Resolution scaling confirms this. At 1920x1080 Low, the average is 78.5 FPS. At 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 54.2 FPS. At 3840x2160 Low, it falls to 28.2 FPS. The frame rate roughly halves when moving from 1080p to 4K, which is a classic sign of GPU pixel throughput limits. The CPU does not need to double its work to render more pixels; the GPU does.

Preset scaling tells a similar story. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 36.4 FPS. At 1440p, that gap narrows to 29.1 FPS. At 4K, it shrinks to 12.7 FPS. When the GPU is already saturated at 4K, changing settings has less impact because the bottleneck is raw pixel fill, not shading complexity. The GTX 1650's 53.28 GPixel/s pixel rate and 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are simply insufficient for 4K in this title.

At 1080p, the CPU has more room to show its capabilities. The Ryzen 5 2600 has 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, and its benchmark scores are competitive with the nearest rivals. The 78.5 FPS result at Low settings suggests the CPU can feed the GPU adequately at this resolution. The drop to 61.6 FPS at Medium and 49.7 FPS at High indicates the GPU becomes the limiting factor as shading load increases.

At 1440p, the CPU role diminishes further. The Low preset averages 54.2 FPS, close to the 60 FPS target but not over it. The GPU is now the clear constraint, as the CPU has no trouble keeping up with the reduced frame rate demands. At 4K, the CPU is almost certainly idle much of the time, waiting on the GPU to finish each frame.

The practical takeaway is that this configuration is GPU-bound in Minimum at nearly every resolution and preset combination. Users with a stronger GPU would likely see substantial frame rate gains at 1080p and 1440p, while a CPU upgrade alone would yield little benefit.

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 can run Minimum, but only at 1920x1080 and only on Low or Medium settings. The Medium preset averages 61.6 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold by a slim margin. Low averages 78.5 FPS, providing more headroom for demanding scenes.

At 2560x1440, the configuration is not playable. The best result is 54.2 FPS on Low settings, which falls short of the 60 FPS target. Medium, High, and Ultra all produce averages below 40 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the configuration is not playable on any preset. The highest average is 28.2 FPS on Low, and Ultra averages just 15.5 FPS. The GPU's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are not enough for 4K rendering in this title.

The database lists this combo at rank 3610 out of 3712, which places it in the bottom tier of tested hardware for Minimum. The playable settings are limited to the two lightest presets at the lowest resolution. For a 1080p setup with modest expectations, the system works. For 1440p or 4K, the data is unambiguous: this hardware cannot maintain a playable frame rate.

The verdict by resolution is clear. At 1920x1080, Low and Medium are playable, with Medium as the best preset at 61.6 FPS. At 2560x1440 and 3840x2160, no settings reach the 60 FPS threshold. Users targeting higher resolutions would need a more capable GPU, as the CPU is not the limiting factor in this configuration.