Minimum

Similar Performance Alternatives

The recorded data places the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 in a narrow performance band relative to its nearest rivals. Its average benchmark score of 21,484 sits within 1.2% of four comparable processors. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V trails by only 0.2% with a score of 21,440, making it the closest match in the database. The Intel Core i9-11900H scores 21,367, a 0.5% deficit, while the Intel Xeon D-1746TER leads by 0.7% at 21,635. At the outer edge of this cluster, the AMD EPYC 9454 posts 21,223, which is 1.2% behind the Ryzen 5 2600. These delta values are remarkably small, indicating that any of these processors would produce nearly indistinguishable frame pacing in CPU-bound scenarios. The 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs reinforces this position: the Ryzen 5 2600 sits comfortably above the median, though not in the top tier of desktop processors.

On the graphics side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 shows a similar story of tight clustering. Its average benchmark score of 54,247 is nearly identical to the RTX 4080 SUPER, which scores 54,209, a delta of just 0.1%. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X outperforms it by 1.1% at 54,828, while the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB and AMD Radeon 8060S lead by 2.6% and 2.7% respectively, with scores of 55,698 and 55,757. The 86th percentile ranking among all GPUs places this card well above the vast majority of graphics hardware. For this game specifically, the measured FPS data shows that the RTX 4080 is rarely the limiting factor, even at 4K resolution. The practical takeaway from these rival comparisons is that swapping the CPU or GPU for any of the listed alternatives would likely shift frame rates by only a few percent, far less than the margin between quality presets. The database indicates that this combination behaves like a well-matched pairing, where the CPU's moderate standing and the GPU's high standing create a system that leans heavily on the graphics card for performance headroom.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals a clear division of labor between the Ryzen 5 2600 and the RTX 4080 when running Minimum. At 1920x1080, the frame rates are extraordinarily high, with the Low preset averaging 239 FPS and the Medium preset at 217 FPS. These numbers far exceed what the RTX 4080 would need to demonstrate its full capability; instead, they suggest that the CPU is doing the heavy lifting at this resolution. The 1080p Ultra preset still averages 174 FPS, which is 13% below the Medium preset's 217 FPS, but the gap between Low and Ultra is only 65 FPS, a 27% drop. This compression of performance across presets at 1080p indicates that the CPU's single-thread performance, reflected in its Geekbench single-core score of 1,154 and Passmark single-thread score of 2,239, is adequate to feed the GPU at these high frame rates, but the GPU is not being pushed to its limits.

Moving to 2560x1440, the scaling becomes more pronounced. The Low preset drops from 239 FPS at 1080p to 206 FPS at 1440p, a 14% reduction. The Medium preset falls from 217 to 176 FPS, a 19% drop, while High goes from 204 to 148 FPS, a 27% decline. The Ultra preset shows the largest relative decrease, falling from 174 to 112 FPS, a 36% reduction. This pattern indicates that the GPU begins to assert its influence more strongly at this resolution, as the pixel count increases by 78% and the memory bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s becomes more relevant. The RTX 4080's 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 256-bit bus width are clearly sufficient for 1440p, but the scaling shows that the GPU is now the primary driver of performance differences between presets.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's dominance is undeniable. The Low preset averages 124 FPS, which is 48% lower than the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset averages 95 FPS, High drops to 79 FPS, and Ultra falls to 61 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra at 4K represents a 51% reduction in average frame rate, from 124 to 61 FPS. This steep curve demonstrates that the RTX 4080 is the sole bottleneck at this resolution, as the CPU's role diminishes with each pixel added. The measured minimum FPS values at Medium settings reinforce this: 80 FPS at 4K, 149 FPS at 1440p, and 184 FPS at 1080p. These minimums track the averages closely, indicating consistent frame delivery without sudden CPU stutters. The data suggests that for Minimum, the CPU matters most at 1080p where frame rates exceed 200 FPS, while the GPU becomes the deciding factor at 4K where the Ultra preset barely clears 60 FPS.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes, but just barely. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 61 FPS, which is exactly 1 FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The database lists Ultra as a playable setting at this resolution, but there is minimal headroom for demanding scenes.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combination?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 offers the best balance. The Ultra preset at this resolution averages 112 FPS, which is 84% higher than the 4K Ultra result and still 36% below the 1080p Ultra result. This provides high visual quality with a comfortable margin above 60 FPS.

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

A: The Ryzen 5 2600 scores 21,484 in the average benchmark, placing it within 1.2% of four rival processors. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is 0.2% slower, the Intel Core i9-11900H is 0.5% slower, the Intel Xeon D-1746TER is 0.7% faster, and the AMD EPYC 9454 is 1.2% slower. These differences are negligible for gaming performance.

Q: Is the RTX 4080 significantly faster than its closest rival?

A: No, the RTX 4080's average benchmark score of 54,247 is only 0.1% higher than the RTX 4080 SUPER's 54,209. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.1% faster, while the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB and AMD Radeon 8060S lead by 2.6% and 2.7% respectively. These are minor differences in the database.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: The measured data shows an average of 217 FPS, with a minimum of 184 FPS and a maximum of 249 FPS. This preset provides a very smooth experience with no risk of dropping below 60 FPS.

Q: Does the GPU or CPU limit performance more at 4K?

A: The data strongly indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at 3840x2160. The frame rate drops by 48% from Low to Ultra at 4K, compared to a 27% drop at 1080p. The CPU's contribution becomes negligible as the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the bottleneck.

The Verdict

The database verdict is unambiguous: this PC can run Minimum at all tested resolutions and presets, clearing the 60 FPS playable threshold in every configuration. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 174 FPS, which is 190% above the threshold, making this resolution almost trivially easy for the RTX 4080. The 2560x1440 Ultra preset averages 112 FPS, still 87% above the threshold, providing excellent headroom for demanding scenes. The 3840x2160 Ultra preset averages 61 FPS, which clears the threshold but leaves only a single frame of margin. The verdict by resolution confirms all four settings at each resolution are playable, with the best settings listed as Ultra at every resolution. The 1080p and 1440p results are far beyond what is needed for smooth gameplay, while 4K Ultra sits right at the edge of comfortable performance. For players who prioritize maximum visual fidelity, the 4K Ultra option is playable but not ideal; for those who want a safety margin, the 4K High preset at 79 FPS would provide a more comfortable experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded data shows a wide range of performance across presets. The Low preset averages 239 FPS, the highest result in the entire dataset. The Medium preset averages 217 FPS, with a minimum of 184 FPS and a maximum of 249 FPS. The High preset averages 204 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 174 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra represents a 27% reduction in average frame rate, from 239 to 174 FPS. The minimum FPS at Medium settings is 184, which is 207% above the playable threshold, indicating that even the most demanding moments at 1080p remain far from any risk of stutter.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales downward predictably. The Low preset averages 206 FPS, which is 14% below the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset averages 176 FPS, with a minimum of 149 FPS and a maximum of 202 FPS. The High preset averages 148 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 112 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 46%, larger than the 27% gap at 1080p, showing the GPU's increasing influence. The minimum FPS at Medium settings is 149, which is 148% above the threshold, still offering substantial headroom.

At 3840x2160, the data reveals the steepest performance curve. The Low preset averages 124 FPS, which is 48% below the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset averages 95 FPS, with a minimum of 80 FPS and a maximum of 109 FPS. The High preset averages 79 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 61 FPS. The reduction from Low to Ultra is 51%, from 124 to 61 FPS, and the minimum FPS at Medium settings is 80, which is 33% above the threshold. The Ultra preset at 61 FPS is the only result in the entire dataset that sits close to the playable boundary, with just 1 FPS of margin.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the most demanding option that remains playable, averaging 174 FPS. This is the highest visual quality setting available at this resolution, and it still delivers nearly three times the playable threshold. The database lists Ultra as the best settings at 1080p, and the recorded 174 FPS average provides a comfortable cushion for any scene complexity.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset also qualifies as the best settings, averaging 112 FPS. This is 87% above the 60 FPS threshold, offering both high visual fidelity and a solid safety margin. The 112 FPS result is 36% lower than the 1080p Ultra result, but it remains far above what would be considered a minimum playable experience.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset is again listed as the best settings, but the margin is thin. The average FPS is 61, which is exactly 1 FPS above the playable threshold. This configuration is technically playable, but the data suggests that any demanding scene could push it below 60 FPS. The High preset at 79 FPS would provide a more stable experience, but the database's verdict confirms Ultra as the best settings at this resolution. For players who prioritize frame rate stability over absolute visual quality, the High preset would be the safer choice, but the recorded data supports Ultra as the highest playable setting.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this combination at position 617 out of 3,712 tested combinations for Minimum. This places the Ryzen 5 2600 and RTX 4080 pairing in the top 17% of all tested systems, a strong showing for a CPU that was released in 2018 and a GPU that was released in 2022. The rank reflects the GPU's dominant contribution to overall performance, as the RTX 4080's 86th percentile standing among all GPUs carries more weight than the CPU's 75th percentile standing. The 617th rank indicates that there are 616 combinations in the database that perform better in this game, likely featuring newer CPUs with higher single-thread performance or even more powerful GPUs. However, the measured FPS data shows that this combination delivers playable performance at every resolution and preset, including 4K Ultra. The rank of 617 is more a reflection of the competitive landscape than a criticism of this system's capability. The delta between this combo and the top-ranked systems would likely be most visible at 1080p, where the CPU's 200+ FPS results could be exceeded by newer processors, but at 4K, the GPU's performance is the deciding factor, and the RTX 4080 holds its own. The 617th rank out of 3,712 is a solid result, placing this system well above the median and comfortably in the upper quartile of tested configurations.