Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the data shows consistently low performance across all tested settings. High preset delivers an average of 21 FPS, Medium averages 25 FPS with a measured range of 21 to 29 FPS, Low averages 33 FPS, and Ultra drops to 16 FPS. None of these figures approach the 60 FPS playability threshold, and the spread between presets is modest: roughly a 17 FPS gap between the fastest (Low at 33 FPS) and slowest (Ultra at 16 FPS) settings.

Stepping down to 2560x1440 improves results meaningfully but still leaves most presets below the target. Low settings average 61 FPS, which clears the threshold by a single frame. Medium averages 47 FPS with a range of 40 to 54 FPS. High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The scaling from 4K to 1440p is substantial: Low gains 28 FPS (from 33 to 61), Medium gains 22 FPS (from 25 to 47), High gains 18 FPS (from 21 to 39), and Ultra gains 14 FPS (from 16 to 30). This indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint at higher resolutions, as reducing pixel count produces outsized gains.

At 1920x1080, the picture changes considerably. Low settings average 95 FPS, Medium averages 72 FPS with a range of 62 to 83 FPS, and High averages 61 FPS. Ultra remains below the threshold at 46 FPS. The jump from 1440p to 1080p continues to show strong scaling: Low gains 34 FPS, Medium gains 25 FPS, High gains 22 FPS, and Ultra gains 16 FPS. At 1080p, three of the four presets are playable, and the recorded data shows that the 60 FPS line is crossed at High, Medium, and Low.

The measured FPS data includes min and max figures only for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 4K Medium, the range is 21 to 29 FPS, which is a tight band of 8 FPS, suggesting consistent frame pacing despite the low average. At 1440p Medium, the range widens slightly to 40 to 54 FPS, a 14 FPS spread. At 1080p Medium, the range is 62 to 83 FPS, a 21 FPS spread, which indicates more variance at higher frame rates but still no dips below the 60 FPS floor. The absence of min/max data for other presets means the database only confirms frame stability for the Medium setting at each resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo achieves in Minimum?

A: The highest recorded average is 95 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K with any preset?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the best recorded average is 33 FPS on Low settings, with High at 21 FPS, Medium at 25 FPS, and Ultra at 16 FPS. All fall well short of the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Which presets are playable at 2560x1440?

A: Only Low settings clear 60 FPS, averaging exactly 61 FPS. Medium (47 FPS), High (39 FPS), and Ultra (30 FPS) all remain below the playable threshold.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Arc B390's average benchmark score is 1482, placing it 2.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM and 2.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710. It is also 1.3% ahead of the GeForce GT 520MX and 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank among tested configurations?

A: This CPU/GPU combination ranks 3299 out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the bottom 11 percent of the database.

Q: Does the CPU hold back performance at any resolution?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D sits in the 89th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Arc B390 sits in the 9th percentile among all GPUs. The large frame rate gains when lowering resolution (for example, Low settings jumping from 33 FPS at 4K to 95 FPS at 1080p) are consistent with GPU-bound scaling.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data points to a heavily GPU-bound scenario for Minimum. The CPU, an AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, ranks in the 89th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 44573. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core i9-13950HX (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (0.6% ahead), while the Intel Core i5-14600 trails by 0.7%. This is a strong processor with 6 cores, 12 threads, and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, plus 96 MB of shared L3 cache.

The GPU, an Intel Arc B390, tells a different story. It ranks in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1482. Its nearest rivals are all low-end NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% behind), GeForce 800M (1.5% behind), GT 625 OEM (2.5% behind), and GT 710 (2.7% behind). The Arc B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2500 MHz and FP32 throughput of 7.680 TFLOPS.

The scaling pattern across resolutions confirms that the GPU is the bottleneck. When moving from 3840x2160 to 2560x1440, a 2.25x reduction in pixel count, average FPS roughly doubles for most presets: Low goes from 33 to 61, Medium from 25 to 47, High from 21 to 39. Moving from 1440p to 1080p, a further 1.78x pixel reduction, yields additional large gains: Low goes from 61 to 95, Medium from 47 to 72, High from 39 to 61. If the CPU were the limiting factor, these resolution reductions would produce much smaller FPS improvements, since the CPU workload per frame would remain similar. The recorded data instead shows near-linear scaling with pixel count, which is the signature of GPU-bound rendering.

The preset scaling also supports this conclusion. At 1080p, Ultra drops to 46 FPS from High's 61 FPS, a 25% penalty. At 1440p, Ultra drops to 30 FPS from High's 39 FPS, a 23% penalty. These consistent penalties across resolutions indicate that the GPU's fill rate and shading capacity, rather than CPU instruction throughput, determine the frame rate. The CPU's high single-thread score of 3494 and multithread score of 25047 in the database are more than sufficient for a 2014-era third-person shooter; the bottleneck is clearly the Arc B390's modest 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, the nearest rivals in the database are close in overall benchmark score. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H averages 44466, a 0.2% delta. The Intel Core i9-13950HX averages 44342, a 0.5% delta. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 averages 44309, a 0.6% delta. The Intel Core i5-14600 averages 44889, which is 0.7% higher than the 7500X3D. Any of these CPUs would be expected to produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum, since the game is GPU-bound at all tested resolutions and presets. The choice among these processors would not meaningfully alter the measured FPS values.

For the Intel Arc B390, the nearest GPU rivals are all significantly weaker in absolute terms but statistically close in the database's scoring. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower. The GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% lower. The GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower. The GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower. These deltas are small enough that in practical gaming terms, particularly in a GPU-bound title like Minimum, the frame rates would be nearly indistinguishable. A system using any of these GPUs paired with a similarly strong CPU would likely land within 1 to 3 FPS of the Arc B390's results at each resolution and preset.

The combination of a top-tier CPU with a bottom-tier GPU creates a lopsided pairing. The database shows the CPU at the 89th percentile and the GPU at the 9th percentile. Swapping the Arc B390 for any of its nearest rivals would not change the experience: the system would still be GPU-bound, and the frame rates would remain in the same general range. Swapping the CPU for any of its nearest rivals would also have negligible impact, since the GPU would continue to limit performance. The measured results are therefore representative of a broad class of weak-GPU, strong-CPU configurations.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3299 out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum. That places it in the bottom 11.1 percent of all configurations in the database. The rank reflects the GPU's severe limitations: while the CPU is in the 89th percentile, the GPU is in the 9th percentile, and the game's frame rates are dictated almost entirely by the GPU.

The rank is consistent with the measured FPS data. At 4K, no preset reaches even half of the 60 FPS target. At 1440p, only Low settings clear the bar. At 1080p, three of four presets are playable, but the Ultra preset still fails. A combo ranking 3299 out of 3712 would be expected to struggle at high resolutions and high presets, which is exactly what the measurements show.

It is importantly the combo's rank is not a reflection of the CPU, which is a high-end part. In a different game with lighter GPU demands, or at lower resolutions, this CPU could drive much higher frame rates. But in Minimum, the Arc B390's 9th percentile standing dominates the outcome. The 3299 rank is effectively a GPU-limited result, and swapping in a stronger GPU while keeping the same CPU would dramatically improve the ranking. The data does not include such a swap, but the percentile disparity makes the conclusion straightforward.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Minimum? The answer depends on resolution and settings. The verdictByResolution data provides clear guidance.

At 3840x2160, no settings are playable. The best result is Low at 33 FPS, which is less than 60 percent of the 60 FPS target. High averages 21 FPS, Medium 25 FPS, and Ultra 16 FPS. This resolution is not viable for smooth gameplay with this hardware.

At 2560x1440, exactly one preset is playable: Low, at 61 FPS. This clears the threshold by a single frame, which is technically playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes. Medium (47 FPS), High (39 FPS), and Ultra (30 FPS) all fall short. Players at this resolution must accept Low settings and even then should expect occasional frame rate fluctuations near the threshold.

At 1920x1080, the system performs adequately for most settings. High averages 61 FPS, Medium averages 72 FPS, and Low averages 95 FPS. Ultra remains unplayable at 46 FPS. The best playable preset at 1080p is High, which hits exactly 61 FPS on average. For a 2014 third-person shooter, this is a serviceable experience, though not one with high-end visual fidelity.

The overall verdict: this combo can run Minimum at 1080p with High settings or lower, and at 1440p only with Low settings. It cannot run the game at 4K with any preset. The 60 FPS threshold is met at 1080p High, 1080p Medium, 1080p Low, and 1440p Low. The Ultra preset is not playable at any resolution.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the database records no playable settings. The verdictByResolution field lists an empty playableSettings array and a null bestSettings. The closest option is Low at 33 FPS, but since this falls below the 60 FPS threshold, it cannot be recommended as a playable configuration. Users at 4K should consider lowering the resolution.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is Low, with an average of 61 FPS. This is the only preset that clears the 60 FPS bar at this resolution. Medium is close at 47 FPS but remains below the threshold, and High (39 FPS) and Ultra (30 FPS) are further behind. The recommendation is Low at 1440p, accepting reduced visual quality for a playable frame rate.

At 1920x1080, the best playable setting is High, with an average of 61 FPS. Medium is also playable at 72 FPS, and Low at 95 FPS offers the highest frame rate. Ultra is not playable at 46 FPS. The database identifies High as the best playable preset, meaning it provides the highest visual quality while still maintaining an average at or above 60 FPS. Players who prefer higher frame rates can drop to Medium or Low, but High is the optimal balance of quality and performance.

The summary of recommended settings: 1080p High at 61 FPS average, 1440p Low at 61 FPS average, and no playable option at 4K. These are the only configurations where the measured data confirms the 60 FPS threshold is met.