Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F paired with the Intel Arc B390 is a combination that demands careful scrutiny. For a 2014 third-person shooter, the data shows a stark divide between CPU capability and GPU limitation. The processor is a modern desktop part, while the graphics solution is an integrated GPU based on Intel’s Panther Lake architecture. The recorded measurements reveal that playability, defined as maintaining at least 60 FPS, occurs only at specific resolutions and presets. The database places this combination at rank 3299 out of 3712 tested combos, indicating that while the CPU is far above average, the GPU holds the entire system back in this title.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU in this system occupy very different performance strata, and the nearest rivals from the database highlight this disparity. For the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, the average benchmark score is 24964, placing it in the 77th percentile of all tested CPUs. The closest alternatives in the database are remarkably tight in performance. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24935, which is 0.1% slower than the 7500F. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 25005, a margin of 0.2% faster. The Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911, again 0.2% slower, and the Intel Core 5 210H scores 24872, which is 0.4% slower. These deltas are negligible in real-world gaming, so any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical frame pacing in CPU-bound scenarios. The 7500F’s six cores and twelve threads, with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, clearly put it in the same league as these mobile and desktop hybrids.

On the GPU side, the Intel Arc B390 is a completely different story. Its average benchmark score from the database is 1482, which places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. This is an extremely low ranking, and the nearest rivals confirm it. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% slower. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% slower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% slower, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% slower. These are all very old, very low-end discrete GPUs, and the Arc B390 is essentially competing with them. The Arc B390’s 1536 shading units and 24 ROPs, combined with system-shared memory, do not provide the bandwidth or fill rate necessary for demanding modern titles. For Minimum, the GPU is the clear bottleneck, and any of these rival GPUs would produce similar average frame rates, within a few percent.

The practical implication is that a user upgrading from one of these rival GPUs to the Arc B390 would see almost no performance change in Minimum. Conversely, upgrading the CPU while keeping this GPU would yield zero benefit in GPU-bound scenarios. The data suggests that the Arc B390 behaves like a legacy entry-level part, despite its modern architecture and features like DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 support. The CPU side is robust, but the GPU side caps the experience.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate that the Intel Arc B390 is the dominant factor in Minimum’s performance across all tested resolutions and settings. The CPU, despite being a strong desktop processor, rarely becomes the limiting component because the GPU’s raw throughput is so low. The scaling between resolutions and presets confirms this. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 95. Moving to High settings at the same resolution drops the average to 61 FPS, which is a 36% reduction. This drop is almost entirely due to increased GPU load from higher-quality textures, shaders, and effects. The CPU has ample headroom, as evidenced by its high single-thread score of 974 in 3dmark_single_thread and its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3218.

At 2560x1440, the gap between presets widens further. Low settings yield 61 FPS average, while High drops to 39 FPS, a 36% reduction again. The Medium preset sits at 47 FPS, and Ultra falls to 30 FPS. This pattern indicates that the GPU is saturated at higher presets, and the CPU is not the limiting factor. At 3840x2160, the situation becomes extreme. Low settings average 33 FPS, Medium averages 25 FPS, High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. None of these are near the 60 FPS threshold. The resolution scaling from 1080p Low (95 FPS) to 2160p Low (33 FPS) represents a 65% performance drop, which is consistent with a GPU that is starved for memory bandwidth and pixel throughput.

The CPU’s role is more visible at lower resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080 Low, the system reaches 95 FPS, which is likely close to the CPU’s frame generation limit for this game, given the game’s age and the CPU’s modern architecture. However, even at this point, the GPU is still the primary constraint because the Arc B390’s pixel rate is only 60.00 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, both of which are modest figures. The database shows no scenario where the CPU becomes the bottleneck in a way that prevents the GPU from delivering its maximum. Therefore, the analysis is straightforward: the GPU dictates playability, and the CPU ensures that the GPU is never waiting on the processor.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data provides a complete picture of how this combo performs in Minimum. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system achieves its best results. With Low settings, the average FPS is 95, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings produce an average of 72 FPS, with a minimum of 62 FPS and a maximum of 83 FPS, indicating stable performance above the playable line. High settings average 61 FPS, which is exactly at the threshold, though the minimum is not recorded. Ultra settings drop to an average of 46 FPS, which is below the threshold and likely feels stuttery during intense firefights.

At 2560x1440, the performance degrades noticeably. Low settings average 61 FPS, matching the 1080p High result, so this is the only playable preset at this resolution. Medium settings average 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS, which consistently misses the 60 FPS target. High settings average 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 14 FPS, showing that even a modest increase in graphical fidelity costs a significant portion of the frame rate.

At 3840x2160, the system is not playable at any setting. Low settings average 33 FPS, which is nearly half of the target. Medium averages 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS. High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. The scaling from 1080p Low (95 FPS) to 2160p Low (33 FPS) is severe, and the GPU simply cannot handle the pixel count. The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution step up reduces performance by roughly 35-40%, and each preset step up at the same resolution reduces performance by 20-30%. The only recorded min/max values are for Medium presets at each resolution, which suggest that frame pacing is relatively consistent, but the averages are too low to matter at 1440p and 2160p.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this combination at 3299 out of 3712 tested combos for Minimum. This places it in the bottom 11% of all systems tested, which is a poor showing for a PC with a modern six-core CPU. The rank is heavily influenced by the GPU’s low average benchmark score of 1482, which is in the 9th percentile. The CPU’s high percentile, 77th, does not compensate for the GPU’s weakness in this game. The rank indicates that most other combinations, including those with older mid-range GPUs, deliver better frame rates in Minimum.

The implications of this rank are clear: the system is not well suited for this game beyond low resolutions and settings. The CPU is overkill for the GPU, and the combination as a whole is unbalanced. In the context of the database, this combo sits near the bottom, alongside systems with integrated graphics or very old discrete GPUs. The fact that the GPU’s nearest rivals are the GT 710 and GT 625 OEM, both from roughly a decade ago, underscores the performance ceiling. A user with this combo would experience frame rates similar to those from a budget laptop or an office PC with a basic discrete GPU.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Minimum? The answer depends on the resolution and preset. According to the verdict data, at 3840x2160 there are no playable settings. None of the presets reach an average of 60 FPS, with the best being Low at 33 FPS. At 2560x1440, only the Low preset is playable, achieving 61 FPS on average. This clears the threshold by just 1 FPS, which means it is technically playable but leaves no headroom for demanding scenes. At 1920x1080, three presets are playable: Low at 95 FPS, Medium at 72 FPS, and High at 61 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 46 FPS, which is not playable.

The verdict clearly states that the system is only suitable for 1080p gaming for this title, with a maximum of High settings. At 1440p, the user must drop to Low settings, which is a compromise in visual quality. At 2160p, the system fails entirely. The 60 FPS threshold is a reasonable target for a third-person shooter, and the data shows that this combo can meet it at 1080p with High settings, but barely. The lack of recorded minimum FPS for the High preset at 1080p means we cannot confirm stability, but the average of 61 FPS suggests that occasional dips below 60 are possible. For a game from 2014, this is a disappointing result, as the CPU is more than capable, but the GPU is not.

Best Settings per Resolution

The database provides a clear recommendation for each resolution based on the most demanding preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, the best playable preset is High, with an average FPS of 61. This is the highest visual quality option that still clears the threshold, and it offers a significant improvement over Medium (72 FPS) in terms of graphical fidelity, such as better shadows and textures, while sacrificing only 11 FPS on average. Low is also playable at 95 FPS, but High is the preferred choice for users who want a better-looking experience without falling below 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the best playable preset is Low, with an average FPS of 61. This is the only option that reaches the threshold, and it does so with minimal visual quality. Medium at this resolution averages 47 FPS, which is a 14 FPS deficit, and the min FPS of 40 confirms that the game will stutter during action. Therefore, users at 1440p must accept Low settings to play smoothly, which defeats the purpose of a higher resolution. At 3840x2160, there is no best playable preset. The database lists no playable settings, and the highest average FPS is 33 at Low, which is far below the 60 FPS target. The system is not capable of running Minimum at 4K with acceptable performance.

In summary, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F and Intel Arc B390 combination is viable only at 1080p with High settings or lower, and at 1440p with Low settings. The CPU is a strong performer, but the GPU is the limiting factor, and the overall combo rank of 3299 out of 3712 reflects this. For a game like Minimum, which is not graphically demanding by modern standards, this result is surprising and indicates that the Arc B390 is not a suitable gaming GPU for anything above entry-level expectations.