Minimum

Similar Performance Alternatives

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F sits in a tightly contested CPU performance band. Its average benchmark score of 24,964 places it within a fraction of a percent of several Intel and AMD parts. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24,935, a delta of just 0.1% behind. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 25,005, which is 0.2% ahead. The Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24,911, 0.2% behind, and the Intel Core 5 210H scores 24,872, 0.4% behind. In practical terms, swapping the 7500F for any of these four chips would produce nearly identical frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios. The Ryzen 5 8400F is the closest match, statistically indistinguishable from the 7500F in aggregate compute performance.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 holds an average benchmark score of 7,472. Its nearest rivals are all within a single percentage point. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7,447, just 0.3% lower. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7,441, 0.4% lower. The AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7,425, 0.6% lower. The Intel Arc A310 is the only one ahead, scoring 7,550, which is 1% higher. For a game like Minimum, a system built with any of these GPU alternatives would land in the same performance envelope. The GTX 1650 is the middle ground here, with the Arc A310 offering a marginal edge and the three other cards trailing by less than a point of percentage.

The combination of this CPU and GPU forms a system where the processor is far stronger than the graphics card. The CPU ranks in the 77th percentile among all tested processors, while the GPU sits in the 40th percentile among all tested graphics cards. That imbalance means the GTX 1650 will be the limiting factor in almost every scenario. The CPU has headroom to spare, so upgrading the GPU later would yield substantial gains without creating a new bottleneck.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data for Minimum shows a clear pattern: the GPU dominates performance at every resolution and preset. The GTX 1650 is the constraint, and the Ryzen 5 7500F has more than enough compute to feed it.

At 1920x1080, the jump from Low to Medium settings drops the average from 81 FPS to 62 FPS, a reduction of 19 FPS. Moving from Medium to High drops it further to 52 FPS, another 10 FPS lost. The scaling is consistent, which indicates the graphics card is doing the heavy lifting. The CPU is not shown to be the limiting factor anywhere in this data, since the frame rate falls steadily as GPU load increases.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds. Low settings produce 52 FPS average, Medium drops to 40 FPS, High falls to 34 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 26 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 12 FPS, and the step from Medium to High costs another 6 FPS. At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly overwhelmed. Low settings manage only 28 FPS average, Medium drops to 22 FPS, High falls to 18 FPS, and Ultra is at 14 FPS. Resolution scaling is steep, and the 4 GB GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus of the GTX 1650 are the likely reasons.

The CPU role is minimal in this game. The Ryzen 5 7500F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, provides ample single-thread and multi-thread performance for a 2014 title like Minimum. The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the sole bottleneck. If the CPU were the constraint, frame rates would not scale this cleanly with resolution and settings. The verdict is straightforward: for this pairing, the GPU determines playability, and the CPU is effectively a non-factor.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS average is Medium. The recorded average is 62 FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS. This is the playable ceiling for this resolution. Low settings push the average to 81 FPS, but Medium is the highest preset that clears the 60 FPS threshold. High settings fall to 52 FPS average, which is below the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, no preset reaches 60 FPS average. Low settings produce 52 FPS, Medium drops to 40 FPS, High falls to 34 FPS, and Ultra is at 26 FPS. The best playable option does not exist at this resolution, since even the lowest preset misses the 60 FPS target by 8 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the situation is worse. Low settings average 28 FPS, Medium averages 22 FPS, High averages 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 14 FPS. None of these are close to 60 FPS.

The data shows a single usable configuration for a smooth experience: 1920x1080 with Medium settings. That combination yields 62 FPS average, which is just above the 60 FPS playable threshold. For players who prioritize stability, Low at 1920x1080 offers 81 FPS average, but the Medium preset is the highest quality that remains playable.

The Verdict

This PC can run Minimum, but only under specific conditions. The verdict data is clear: at 1920x1080, both Low and Medium settings are playable. Medium is the best playable preset, with an average of 62 FPS. Low is also playable, with an average of 81 FPS. High and Ultra at this resolution fall short of 60 FPS, with averages of 52 FPS and 40 FPS respectively.

At 2560x1440, the system cannot maintain 60 FPS on any preset. The best result is Low at 52 FPS average, which is 8 FPS below the threshold. At 3840x2160, the situation is far worse, with Low averaging only 28 FPS.

The practical takeaway is that this combination is a 1080p machine for Minimum. The GTX 1650 does not have enough performance for higher resolutions. The Ryzen 5 7500F is not the issue; it has plenty of headroom. If you own this CPU and want better results, a GPU upgrade would be the effective path. As configured, the system delivers a playable experience only at 1920x1080 with Medium settings or lower. The 62 FPS average at Medium is workable, but the minimum of 53 FPS means there will be occasional dips below 60 FPS during intense scenes.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data provides a full picture of this combination's performance across three resolutions and four presets.

1920x1080

• Low: 81 FPS average, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Medium: 62 FPS average, 53 FPS minimum, 72 FPS maximum.
• High: 52 FPS average, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Ultra: 40 FPS average, no minimum or maximum recorded.

2560x1440

• Low: 52 FPS average, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Medium: 40 FPS average, 34 FPS minimum, 46 FPS maximum.
• High: 34 FPS average, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Ultra: 26 FPS average, no minimum or maximum recorded.

3840x2160

• Low: 28 FPS average, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Medium: 22 FPS average, 18 FPS minimum, 25 FPS maximum.
• High: 18 FPS average, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Ultra: 14 FPS average, no minimum or maximum recorded.

The only preset where minimum and maximum values were recorded is Medium at each resolution. This suggests the Medium preset was the focus of the detailed frame time analysis. At 1920x1080 Medium, the spread from 53 to 72 FPS indicates a 19 FPS range, which is noticeable but not extreme. At 2560x1440 Medium, the range is 12 FPS, from 34 to 46. At 3840x2160 Medium, the range is 7 FPS, from 18 to 25. The smaller spread at higher resolutions is consistent with a GPU that is fully saturated and producing a more consistent, albeit lower, frame rate.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Minimum, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 3,581st out of 3,712 tested combos. That places it in the bottom 4% of all systems tested for this game. The rank reflects the GPU's limited performance, not the CPU. The Ryzen 5 7500F is a strong processor, but the GTX 1650 anchors the system to the lower end of the ranking.

The percentile data reinforces this. The CPU is in the 77th percentile among all processors, meaning it outperforms the majority of CPUs in the database. The GPU is in the 40th percentile, meaning it is below average. The combination of a high-ranking CPU with a low-ranking GPU produces a system that is held back entirely by the graphics card.

For Minimum, this rank means the system will run the game, but it will not provide a high-quality experience at higher resolutions. The 3,581st rank out of 3,712 is a clear signal that most other tested combinations deliver better results. The only configurations that rank lower are those with even weaker GPUs. If you are considering this system specifically for Minimum, the data shows that 1080p Medium is the ceiling. The 62 FPS average at that preset is playable, but it is not a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. The minimum of 53 FPS means there will be stutters in demanding scenes.

In summary, this combo is functional but not impressive for Minimum. The CPU is overqualified for the task, and the GPU is underqualified for anything beyond 1080p. The ranking reflects the GPU's limitations, and the measured data confirms that 1920x1080 Medium is the only preset that clears the playable threshold.