Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Minimum shows a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics solution. The Intel Arc B370, an integrated-class GPU, struggles to maintain fluid frame rates at higher resolutions, while the AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT provides sufficient processing headroom. The measurements span three resolutions and four quality presets, revealing a clear performance ceiling.

At 3840x2160, the results are consistently below playable thresholds. The Low preset delivers an average of 30 FPS, which is the best result at this resolution. Medium averages 23 FPS, with a minimum of 19 FPS and a maximum of 26 FPS. High drops further to 19 FPS on average, while Ultra bottoms out at 15 FPS. No minimum or maximum values were recorded for Low, High, or Ultra at this resolution, but the averages alone indicate a severe performance deficit.

Moving to 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains short of the 60 FPS playable threshold. Low produces an average of 55 FPS, the strongest result at this resolution. Medium averages 42 FPS, with a recorded range of 36 to 48 FPS. High falls to 35 FPS, and Ultra reaches only 27 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 13 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra costs 8 FPS, showing diminishing returns as settings scale upward.

At 1920x1080, the system finally approaches acceptable performance. Low averages 85 FPS, which is the only preset that comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 65 FPS, with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS. High averages 55 FPS, just below the threshold, and Ultra averages 42 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is 20 FPS, while Medium to High costs another 10 FPS. The data indicates that 1080p is the only resolution where this combo can deliver a playable experience, and only on the two lowest presets.

Best Settings per Resolution

The verdict data is unambiguous about which settings achieve at least 60 FPS on average. At 3840x2160, no preset clears the threshold. The best available average is 30 FPS at Low, but that is only half of what is required for smooth gameplay. The database lists no playable settings for this resolution, and the best settings field is null.

At 2560x1440, the same conclusion applies. No preset reaches 60 FPS. The closest result is 55 FPS at Low, which is 5 FPS short. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind. The database confirms no playable settings at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, two presets qualify as playable: Low and Medium. The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, which averages exactly 65 FPS. This makes Medium the recommended choice for 1080p gaming, as it delivers a 20 FPS improvement over High while still maintaining a comfortable margin above the threshold. Low averages 85 FPS and offers additional headroom, but Medium provides the best balance of visual quality and performance among the playable options.

The pattern is consistent: each resolution step down from 4K to 1080p roughly doubles the playable preset ceiling. At 4K, even Low is unplayable. At 1440p, Low is nearly playable but not quite. At 1080p, Medium becomes the sweet spot.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals a system where the GPU is the dominant bottleneck at every resolution. The Intel Arc B370, with its integrated design and 25 W power envelope, simply does not have the throughput to drive Minimum at high resolutions. The CPU, by contrast, is a 6-core, 12-thread Zen 3 part with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz and a 74th percentile ranking among all CPUs. Its processing power is not the limiting factor here.

Evidence for GPU dominance comes from the scaling pattern across resolutions. When moving from 1080p Medium to 1440p Medium, the average FPS drops from 65 to 42, a reduction of 35%. Moving from 1440p Medium to 4K Medium drops the average from 42 to 23, another 45% reduction. If the CPU were the bottleneck, these resolution changes would have a much smaller impact on frame rates, since the CPU workload scales less with resolution than the GPU workload does. The steep, consistent drops point directly at the graphics subsystem.

Preset scaling tells a similar story. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 43 FPS (85 to 42). At 1440p, the same preset range spans 28 FPS (55 to 27). At 4K, it spans only 15 FPS (30 to 15). As resolution increases, the absolute difference between presets shrinks, which is a classic sign of a GPU that is saturated even at the lowest settings. The GPU is already near its limit at 4K Low, so raising settings has less room to degrade performance further.

The Ryzen 5 5600GT does contribute enough to keep frame rates from collapsing entirely. Its 12 threads and high boost clock ensure that Minimum, a 2014 release, never becomes CPU-bound in the recorded tests. But the data shows that no amount of CPU headroom can compensate for the Arc B370's limited fill rate and shader throughput. At 4K, even the lowest settings produce only 30 FPS, a figure that would not improve with a faster processor.

For users considering this combo, the takeaway is straightforward: the GPU dictates the experience. The CPU is a capable partner that will not hold back performance, but the graphics solution caps the system at 1080p Medium for playable frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested hardware combinations, this pairing of AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3425 out of 3712 combos for Minimum. That places it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems. The percentile ranking for the GPU alone is 5, meaning 95% of GPUs in the database outperform it. The CPU, by contrast, sits at the 74th percentile, a strong showing that underscores the mismatch between the two components.

The combo rank reflects the GPU's overwhelming influence on gaming performance. Even a high-tier CPU like the Ryzen 5 5600GT cannot lift the system's standing when paired with a GPU that ranks near the bottom of the database. For Minimum specifically, this means the combo is positioned well below the median experience. Most tested systems will deliver higher frame rates at equivalent settings, and many will do so at higher resolutions.

The rank also has practical implications. Users with this combo should expect performance in line with the measured FPS data, not with the CPU's strong benchmark scores. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 for the Arc B370, which places it in the 5th percentile, is the more relevant metric for gaming workloads. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17272 and single-core score of 2438 are impressive for everyday tasks but do not translate into gaming headroom when the GPU is this limited.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for both components. For the Ryzen 5 5600GT, the closest matches by average benchmark score are the Intel Core i5-12490F, the Intel Xeon 6325P, the Intel Core Ultra 5 125U, and the AMD EPYC 7J13. All four sit within 0.5% of the 5600GT's average score of 20733. The i5-12490F is 0.3% behind, the Xeon 6325P is 0.4% behind, the Core Ultra 5 125U is 0.4% behind, and the EPYC 7J13 is 0.5% behind. For CPU-bound scenarios, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical performance to the 5600GT in this system.

For the Intel Arc B370, the nearest GPU rivals are dramatically different in age and class. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 0.2% higher, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 0.5% higher, the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 0.7% higher, and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1.4% lower. These are all legacy parts from an era when integrated and low-end discrete graphics delivered similar performance levels. The B370's average score of 1184 places it squarely in that historical bracket. Users coming from any of these older GPUs would see roughly equivalent frame rates in Minimum, though the B370 supports modern APIs like DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4.

The practical meaning is that swapping the 5600GT for any of its nearest rivals would not change the gaming outcome, since the GPU is the constraint. Swapping the Arc B370 for any of its nearest rivals would also produce similar results, since they all cluster within a narrow performance band. The bottleneck is structural, not specific to any single component pairing.

The Verdict

The question is whether this PC can run Minimum, and the answer is conditional on resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS threshold on Low and Medium presets. Medium is the best playable setting, averaging 65 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS. Low delivers 85 FPS for those who prefer maximum smoothness. High falls just short at 55 FPS, and Ultra is not viable at 42 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the system cannot achieve playable frame rates on any preset. The best result is 55 FPS at Low, which is 5 FPS below the threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind, with averages of 42, 35, and 27 FPS respectively. The database confirms no playable settings at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the situation is worse. Low averages 30 FPS, Medium averages 23 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 15 FPS. None of these approach 60 FPS, and the verdict data lists no playable settings.

The final assessment: this combo is a 1080p machine for Minimum, and only on lower presets. It cannot handle 1440p or 4K at any setting. Users who stick to 1080p and select Medium or Low will get a smooth experience. Those expecting higher resolutions will need a significantly stronger GPU, as the Ryzen 5 5600GT is more than capable of supporting better graphics hardware. The Arc B370 is the limiting factor, and its 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs makes that limitation clear.