Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600X paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 delivers a strong performance profile for Minimum, a third-person shooter released on 2014-06-25. The measured data, which is marked as directly measured, shows that this combination is capable of high frame rates across all tested resolutions. The analysis below breaks down the optimal settings, performance scaling, and how this specific hardware pairing ranks against other tested configurations.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that maintains an average frame rate at or above the 60 FPS playable threshold is High, which achieves an average of 60.9 FPS. While the Medium preset also clears the threshold at 69.4 FPS, High represents the best visual quality that still stays above 60 FPS; the Ultra preset falls short at 42.5 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the data shows that all four presets are playable. The best settings for this resolution are Ultra, which delivers an average of 83.7 FPS. This is a significant margin above the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that the hardware has substantial headroom at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the clear choice, producing an average of 130.5 FPS. This is more than double the playable threshold, and the data indicates that even the most demanding settings are easily handled at this resolution. The Low preset at this resolution reaches 261.9 FPS, showing that the combination is severely underutilized at lower settings.

FAQ

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

A: The highest recorded average frame rate is 261.9 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. Even at 3840x2160 with Low settings, the average remains high at 91.7 FPS.

*Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K with maximum settings?*

A: No. At 3840x2160 with the Ultra preset, the measured average frame rate is 42.5 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The best playable setting at this resolution is High, with an average of 60.9 FPS.

Q: How does the average frame rate scale between Low and Ultra settings at 2560x1440?

A: At 2560x1440, the average frame rate drops from 170.8 FPS on Low to 83.7 FPS on Ultra. This represents a performance reduction of approximately 51% when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Which resolution provides the largest performance headroom above the 60 FPS threshold?

A: At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 130.5 FPS, which is 70.5 FPS above the playable threshold. This is the largest absolute margin among all tested resolutions and presets.

Q: Is the Ultra preset playable at any resolution?

A: Yes. The Ultra preset is playable at both 2560x1440 and 1920x1080, with average frame rates of 83.7 FPS and 130.5 FPS respectively. It is only at 3840x2160 that the Ultra preset fails to reach 60 FPS.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Medium presets at 3840x2160?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 91.7 FPS, while the Medium preset averages 69.4 FPS. The difference is 22.3 FPS, indicating a notable cost to visual fidelity at this high resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the data reveals a clear progression across presets. The Low preset averages 91.7 FPS, the Medium preset averages 69.4 FPS, and the High preset averages 60.9 FPS. The Ultra preset drops significantly to 42.5 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is 18.4 FPS, which is the largest single-step decline at this resolution, suggesting the Ultra preset introduces a substantial rendering load.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates are considerably higher. The Low preset reaches 170.8 FPS, Medium hits 129 FPS, High achieves 106.9 FPS, and Ultra still manages 83.7 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline, with the largest drop occurring between Medium and High (22.1 FPS). This resolution offers a wide range of playable options, with even the most demanding preset staying well above 60 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the combination is exceptionally fast. The Low preset averages 261.9 FPS, Medium reaches 203.1 FPS, High hits 167.4 FPS, and Ultra achieves 130.5 FPS. The differences between presets are significant, with a 58.8 FPS gap between Low and Medium, and a 36.9 FPS gap between High and Ultra. This resolution demonstrates that the hardware is not the limiting factor, as even the Ultra preset maintains a very high frame rate.

The Verdict

The data confirms that this PC can run Minimum effectively across all tested resolutions. At 3840x2160, the system is playable on the High, Medium, and Low presets, with High being the best playable setting at 60.9 FPS. The Ultra preset is not viable at this resolution, as it drops to 42.5 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the system is fully playable on all four presets. The Ultra preset is the best choice, delivering 83.7 FPS. This provides a strong experience with maximum visual quality while maintaining a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold.

At 1920x1080, the system is overwhelmingly capable. All presets, including Ultra at 130.5 FPS, are well above the playable threshold. This resolution is where the combination shows the most headroom, making it suitable for high-refresh-rate displays. The overall verdict is positive: the Ryzen 5 7600X and RX 9070 provide a playable experience at 4K with high settings, and a fully maxed-out experience at lower resolutions.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU becomes less relevant as resolution decreases. At 3840x2160, the frame rates are substantially lower than at 1920x1080. For instance, the Ultra preset averages 42.5 FPS at 4K compared to 130.5 FPS at 1080p. This 88 FPS difference strongly suggests that the rendering load at 4K is heavily dependent on the GPU's capabilities.

At 2560x1440, the performance is between the extremes, with Ultra averaging 83.7 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 4K shows a drop of 41.2 FPS on the Ultra preset, reinforcing that the GPU is the limiting factor as pixel count increases. The CPU, an AMD Ryzen 5 7600X with 6 cores and 12 threads, has benchmark scores that include a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15236 and a single-core score of 1965, which are likely sufficient to keep up with the GPU at lower resolutions.

At 1920x1080, the very high frame rates (e.g., 261.9 FPS on Low) suggest that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU adequately, but the GPU is still the dominant component in determining final output. The relative consistency of the performance gap between presets across resolutions points to a GPU-bound scenario, particularly at 4K where the Ultra preset's 42.5 FPS is a clear indicator of GPU limitation. The data does not provide evidence of a CPU bottleneck at any resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600X and AMD Radeon RX 9070 combination ranks 1112 out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the upper-middle tier of all configurations tested for this game. The percentile data for the individual components supports this positioning: the CPU is in the 79th percentile against all CPUs, and the GPU is in the 69th percentile against all GPUs.

Given the measured frame rates, this ranking makes sense. The system is not at the absolute top tier, which would likely be reserved for combinations with even higher-end GPUs that could maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra. However, it is far from the bottom, as it handles 1440p Ultra and 1080p Ultra with ease. The rank of 1112 out of 3712 indicates that a majority of tested combos perform worse, but a significant number also perform better, likely those with more powerful GPUs for 4K Ultra scenarios.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU, the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X and the Intel Core i5-12600K have average benchmark scores of 27578, which is a 0.2% delta from the Ryzen 5 7600X's average score of 27636. This indicates that these two CPUs would deliver nearly identical performance in Minimum. The AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE has a score of 27712, a -0.3% delta, meaning it is marginally slower. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 scores 27535, a 0.4% delta, making it slightly faster. In practice, these differences are negligible, and any of these CPUs would pair with the RX 9070 to produce frame rates within a few percent of the measured values.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z with an average score of 23736 (0.6% delta from the RX 9070's 23877), the AMD Radeon RX 6800S at 24063 (-0.8% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile at 23628 (1.1% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER at 24170 (-1.2% delta). These GPUs would all perform very similarly to the RX 9070 in Minimum. The RTX 2080 SUPER and RX 6800S would be slightly faster, while the GTX TITAN Z and RTX 3080 Mobile would be slightly slower. Swapping the RX 9070 for any of these would result in frame rates that are within a small margin of the numbers presented in this analysis, meaning the playability verdict at each resolution would remain unchanged.