Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combo in Minimum covers three resolutions and four quality presets, with average frame rates ranging from 30 FPS to 179 FPS depending on the configuration. The measurements are complete for average FPS at every resolution and preset, with minimum and maximum values recorded only for the Medium preset at each resolution.

At 3840x2160, the combo produces 40 FPS on High, 62 FPS on Low, 48 FPS on Medium, and 30 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset has a minimum of 41 FPS and a maximum of 55 FPS, showing a narrow band of performance. The spread between Low and Ultra is 32 FPS, which demonstrates how heavily the Ultra preset taxes the system at 4K. The Low preset is the only one that clears the 60 FPS playability threshold at this resolution, and it does so by a margin of just 2 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the results improve substantially. High settings deliver 74 FPS, Low delivers 116 FPS, Medium delivers 88 FPS, and Ultra delivers 57 FPS. The Medium preset shows a minimum of 75 FPS and a maximum of 102 FPS, which means even the worst-case frame time stays comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset falls just short of 60 FPS, landing at 57 FPS, so it is not considered playable despite being close. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 59 FPS, indicating that the quality settings have a major impact on performance.

At 1920x1080, the combo is clearly at its best. High settings produce 115 FPS, Low produces 179 FPS, Medium produces 137 FPS, and Ultra produces 88 FPS. The Medium preset has a minimum of 117 FPS and a maximum of 158 FPS, which means the frame rate never dips below the playable threshold even in the most demanding moments. Every preset at 1080p clears 60 FPS by a wide margin, with the lowest result being Ultra at 88 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 91 FPS, which is the largest preset-to-preset gap across all three resolutions.

Resolution scaling follows the expected pattern. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 reduces the average FPS by roughly 35 to 40 percent across presets, and moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 reduces it by another 45 to 50 percent. The Low preset shows the smallest relative drop when scaling up, while Ultra shows the largest, which indicates that the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution and quality increase.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this specific CPU and GPU combination at 2274 out of 3712 tested combos for Minimum. That places it in the lower-middle portion of the field, which is consistent with the fact that the combo can handle 1080p and 1440p well but struggles at 4K with higher presets. The percentile data for the individual components reinforces this picture: the CPU sits at the 71st percentile among all tested processors, while the GPU sits at the 66th percentile among all tested graphics cards.

A rank of 2274 out of 3712 means that roughly 61 percent of tested combos perform better in this game. That is not a flattering position, but it needs to be interpreted with context. Minimum is a third-person shooter from 2014, and the recorded frame rates show that this combo still delivers playable performance at most settings. The rank reflects the fact that many newer and higher-end combinations exist in the database, not that this combo fails to run the game.

The CPU's nearest rivals in aggregate benchmark score include the Intel Core i7-1260P at 17007 (0.2 percent slower), the Intel Core i5-11400 at 17067 (0.2 percent faster), the AMD EPYC 7573X at 17070 (0.2 percent faster), and the AMD EPYC 7742 at 16998 (0.2 percent slower). These deltas are essentially negligible, meaning the Ryzen 5 3600 sits in a very tight performance cluster. The GPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL at 21153 (0.6 percent faster), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M at 21237 (1 percent faster), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT at 20713 (1.6 percent slower), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile at 21379 (1.6 percent faster). Again, the differences are small enough that swapping between these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum.

The combination of a mid-tier CPU from 2019 and a current-generation entry-level GPU results in a combo that ranks below average for this game. However, the measured FPS data shows that the rank is not the whole story, as the combo clears 60 FPS at every 1080p preset and at three of four 1440p presets.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows that the GPU is the dominant factor at higher resolutions and quality settings, while the CPU becomes relatively more important at lower resolutions and lower presets. This is evident from the scaling behavior across the measured configurations.

At 1920x1080 Low, the combo reaches 179 FPS. At 1920x1080 Ultra, it drops to 88 FPS. The CPU is likely the limiting factor at Low settings because the GPU can render frames quickly enough that the processor's single-thread performance, which scores 696 in 3DMark single-thread and 2124 in Cinebench R23 single-core, becomes the bottleneck. The fact that the CPU has 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 4.20 GHz is sufficient for this game, which was released in 2014 and does not demand high core counts. The CPU's Cinebench R20 multicore score of 6318 and PassMark multithread score of 17700 indicate that it has ample headroom for a game of this era.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. The RTX 5050 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth, and its FP32 throughput is 13.17 TFLOPS. These specifications are modest for 4K gaming, which explains why the Ultra preset drops to 30 FPS and High sits at 40 FPS. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 17326 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2502 place it in the 66th percentile, which is adequate for 1080p and 1440p but not for demanding 4K scenarios.

The scaling between presets at each resolution reinforces this division. At 1080p, the gap between Low and Ultra is 91 FPS, while at 4K the gap is 32 FPS. The larger absolute gap at 1080p suggests that the CPU can keep up with the GPU's frame output even at Ultra, allowing the GPU to fully express its performance difference between presets. At 4K, the GPU is so heavily loaded that even lowering the preset from Ultra to Low only gains 32 FPS, because the GPU is working near its limits regardless of the settings.

The Medium preset data provides additional insight. At 1080p Medium, the minimum FPS is 117 and the maximum is 158, a spread of 41 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 75 and the maximum is 102, a spread of 27 FPS. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 41 and the maximum is 55, a spread of 14 FPS. The shrinking spread at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is becoming the bottleneck, as frame time variance decreases when the GPU is consistently saturated.

The Verdict

The verdict is straightforward: this combo can run Minimum, but the playable settings depend heavily on the resolution. The database defines playable as maintaining at least 60 FPS average, and the measured data shows which configurations meet that standard.

At 3840x2160, only the Low preset is playable, with an average of 62 FPS. High at 40 FPS, Medium at 48 FPS, and Ultra at 30 FPS all fall short of the 60 FPS threshold. The best playable setting at 4K is Low, and it barely clears the bar. Anyone using a 4K display should expect to run Minimum at the lowest quality preset to stay smooth.

At 2560x1440, three presets are playable: High at 74 FPS, Low at 116 FPS, and Medium at 88 FPS. Ultra sits at 57 FPS, which is just 3 FPS below the threshold. The best playable setting at 1440p is High, which offers a comfortable 14 FPS margin above 60. The Medium preset is also a strong choice, with a minimum of 75 FPS that ensures no drops below the threshold during gameplay.

At 1920x1080, every preset is playable. Ultra delivers 88 FPS, High delivers 115 FPS, Medium delivers 137 FPS, and Low delivers 179 FPS. The best playable setting at 1080p is Ultra, and the 28 FPS margin above the threshold means that even demanding scenes should remain smooth. The minimum at Medium is 117 FPS, which indicates that the combo never comes close to falling below 60 FPS at this resolution.

The practical guidance is simple. For 1080p displays, run Minimum at Ultra settings without concern. For 1440p displays, use High or Medium settings; Ultra is borderline and may produce occasional drops below 60 FPS. For 4K displays, only Low settings are viable, and even then the margin is thin. This combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, with 1440p as a reasonable secondary option at reduced quality.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals in the database provide useful reference points for what other hardware would behave similarly to this combo. These comparisons are based on aggregate benchmark scores, not direct game measurements, but the small deltas suggest that frame rates in Minimum would be nearly identical.

For the CPU, the AMD Ryzen 5 3600 sits between the Intel Core i7-1260P and the Intel Core i5-11400. The i7-1260P scores 17007, which is 0.2 percent lower than the Ryzen 5 3600's 17035 average. The i5-11400 scores 17067, which is 0.2 percent higher. The two AMD EPYC parts, the 7573X at 17070 and the 7742 at 16998, also fall within 0.2 percent of the Ryzen 5 3600. Any of these processors paired with the RTX 5050 would produce effectively the same results in this game, since the CPU is not the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions and the differences are within measurement noise.

For the GPU, the RTX 5050 has an average benchmark score of 21035. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL scores 21153 (0.6 percent higher), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M scores 21237 (1 percent higher), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT scores 20713 (1.6 percent lower), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile scores 21379 (1.6 percent higher). The RX 5600 XT is the closest in terms of being slower, while the other three are slightly faster. In practice, all of these GPUs would deliver frame rates within a couple of FPS of the RTX 5050 in Minimum. The HD 8970M is a particularly interesting comparison, as it is a much older mobile part that still lands within 1 percent of the RTX 5050 in aggregate score, highlighting how far back the performance envelope extends.

When considering alternative combos, pairing the Ryzen 5 3600 with any of these rival GPUs would yield similar playability: 1080p at all presets, 1440p at most presets, and 4K only at Low. Likewise, swapping the CPU to an i5-11400 or i7-1260P while keeping the RTX 5050 would not meaningfully change the results, since the game is GPU-bound at higher settings and the CPU performance delta is under 1 percent.

FAQ

Q: What resolution and settings can this combo run Minimum at 60 FPS or higher?

A: At 1920x1080, all four presets clear 60 FPS, with Ultra averaging 88 FPS. At 2560x1440, High (74 FPS), Low (116 FPS), and Medium (88 FPS) are playable, but Ultra falls short at 57 FPS. At 3840x2160, only Low is playable at 62 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 5050 has an average benchmark score of 21035. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT is 1.6 percent slower, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (0.6 percent faster), AMD Radeon HD 8970M (1 percent faster), and NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (1.6 percent faster) are all slightly ahead. These differences would translate to only a few FPS in Minimum.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 3600 a bottleneck for the RTX 5050 in this game?

A: At 1920x1080 Low, the combo reaches 179 FPS, which suggests the CPU can keep up with the GPU even at high frame rates. At higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, as shown by the shrinking frame rate gaps between presets when moving from 1080p to 4K.

Q: What is the best settings choice for a 1440p display?

A: High settings give 74 FPS average, which is the best playable option. Medium gives 88 FPS but with lower visual quality. Ultra is not recommended because it averages 57 FPS, just below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Minimum?

A: Only at Low settings, which averages 62 FPS. Medium averages 48 FPS, High averages 40 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The 4K Low result barely clears the playable threshold, so users should expect minimal visual quality at this resolution.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations for Minimum?

A: It ranks 2274 out of 3712 tested combos, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database. The CPU is at the 71st percentile and the GPU is at the 66th percentile among their respective categories, which explains why the combo sits below average despite being capable at lower resolutions.