Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT combination delivers a playable experience in Minimum at all tested resolutions, provided the right graphics preset is selected. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy where 1080p offers complete freedom, 1440p requires a slight compromise, and 4K demands a significant settings reduction to maintain fluid frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo demonstrates strong headroom across the board. The Low preset produces an average of 176.8 FPS, which is more than enough for high-refresh-rate displays. Moving to Medium drops the average to 134.1 FPS, still a substantial margin above the 60 FPS playability threshold. High settings yield 113.6 FPS average, and even the most demanding Ultra preset maintains an average of 89.3 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a total reduction of approximately 87.5 FPS, indicating that the GPU has ample compute resources at this resolution and the game's settings have a meaningful but not crippling impact on performance.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain smooth but the gap between presets widens. The Low preset delivers 112.8 FPS average, while Medium drops to 86.2 FPS. High settings produce 73.5 FPS average, which still clears the 60 FPS line comfortably. The Ultra preset, however, falls to 59.1 FPS average, just below the playable threshold. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 53.7 FPS, showing that the increased pixel count makes the higher presets noticeably more demanding. The step from Medium to High costs roughly 12.7 FPS, while the step from High to Ultra costs another 14.4 FPS, suggesting a nonlinear scaling as the render load increases.

At 3840x2160, the performance picture changes dramatically. The Low preset averages 60.8 FPS, barely clearing the playability threshold. Medium drops to 45.4 FPS, High falls to 38.5 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 32 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 28.8 FPS, a substantial gap that highlights the GPU's struggle with the massive pixel count. The step from Low to Medium alone costs 15.4 FPS, which is a larger absolute drop than the same step at 1080p. This indicates that the RX 7600 XT is heavily taxed at 4K, and only the lowest preset keeps the experience fluid.

The absence of min and max FPS data means the analysis relies solely on average frame rates. However, the consistency of the scaling pattern—where each preset step reduces performance by a predictable amount—suggests stable frame pacing rather than erratic spikes.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU becomes less relevant as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the CPU's role is more pronounced: the Ryzen 5 8400F, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, has enough single-thread performance to feed the GPU, as evidenced by the high frame rates even at Ultra settings. The 89.3 FPS average at 1080p Ultra suggests that the CPU can keep up with the GPU's output without holding it back.

At 2560x1440, the GPU's load increases, and the frame rates drop accordingly. The fact that High settings still produce 73.5 FPS while Ultra falls to 59.1 FPS shows that the GPU is now the limiting factor, as the CPU's workload remains relatively constant regardless of resolution. The CPU's 3DMark single-thread score of 951 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2943 indicate it has strong per-core performance, which is sufficient for this game's demands at all tested resolutions.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is unequivocally the dominant constraint. The RX 7600 XT's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are not enough to sustain high frame rates at 4K, with even the Low preset barely hitting 60 FPS. The CPU's role here is minimal; the Ryzen 5 8400F's multithreaded performance, reflected in its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20851, is more than adequate to handle the game's logic at 4K, but the GPU cannot keep pace.

The scaling between resolutions confirms this division of labor. From 1080p Low to 1440p Low, the average FPS drops from 176.8 to 112.8, a 36% reduction. From 1440p Low to 4K Low, it drops from 112.8 to 60.8, another 46% reduction. These consistent drops across all presets show that the GPU's rendering throughput is the deciding factor, while the CPU's contribution remains stable.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 2410 out of 3712 tested combinations in Minimum, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database. This ranking reflects the GPU's modest performance in this game relative to other combinations. The RX 7600 XT sits at the 60th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17083, while the Ryzen 5 8400F is at the 77th percentile among CPUs, with an average score of 25005.

The GPU's nearest rivals illustrate its position. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 scores 17208, which is 0.7% higher than the RX 7600 XT, making them nearly identical in raw compute. The GeForce GTX 690 scores 17037 (0.3% lower), and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M scores 17019 (0.4% lower). These small deltas suggest that the RX 7600 XT's performance in Minimum is closely matched by several older or differently-architected GPUs, which explains why the combo's overall rank is not higher.

The CPU's nearest rivals show a similar pattern. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964, just 0.2% lower than the 8400F, while the Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24935 (0.3% lower) and the Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911 (0.4% lower). These differences are negligible, meaning the CPU choice has little impact on the combo's rank. The fact that the 8400F outperforms the EPYC 9474F by 0.4% (25103 vs 25005) is notable but irrelevant for gaming. The combo's rank is therefore driven almost entirely by the GPU's position in the performance hierarchy.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Minimum at all three tested resolutions, but with caveats. At 1920x1080, the system clears 60 FPS at every preset, including Ultra with an average of 89.3 FPS. This is the ideal resolution for this combo, offering full flexibility to enable the highest visual quality without sacrificing smoothness.

At 2560x1440, the system handles High settings at 73.5 FPS average, which is comfortably playable. Medium and Low also exceed 60 FPS, but Ultra falls slightly short at 59.1 FPS. For a strict 60 FPS target, users should stick with High or lower at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the system only achieves 60 FPS on the Low preset, with an average of 60.8 FPS. Medium (45.4 FPS), High (38.5 FPS), and Ultra (32 FPS) all fall well below the playable threshold. The verdict is clear: 4K is only viable on the lowest settings, and even then, the margin is razor-thin.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals offer nearly identical performance. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F is the closest match, with a delta of 0.2% and an average score of 24964. The Intel Core i7-11850H (24935, 0.3% higher) and Intel Core i7-13620H (24911, 0.4% higher) are also within a rounding error of the 8400F's performance. Any of these CPUs would behave the same in Minimum, as the game is not heavily multithreaded and the single-thread scores are comparable.

For the GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 is the most direct alternative, with a score of 17208 versus the RX 7600 XT's 17083, a delta of 0.7%. In practice, this means the RTX 3070 would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Minimum at all resolutions and presets. The GeForce GTX 690 (17037, 0.3% lower) and AMD Radeon HD 7970M (17019, 0.4% lower) are also close, though their older architectures may lack modern driver optimizations. The NVIDIA Tesla M4 (16932, 0.9% higher) is a compute-oriented card and not a practical gaming choice.

Combining these alternatives, a system with a Ryzen 5 7500F and RTX 3070 would produce essentially the same results as the tested combo, with differences well under 1% in both CPU and GPU benchmarks.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, which delivers an average of 89.3 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that stays above 60 FPS, and it does so with a substantial margin. There is no reason to lower the preset at this resolution, as even the heaviest settings maintain high frame rates.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are High, with an average of 73.5 FPS. This preset provides the highest visual quality while staying above the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset falls to 59.1 FPS, so it should be avoided if a locked 60 FPS is required. Medium (86.2 FPS) and Low (112.8 FPS) are also viable but offer diminishing returns in visual quality.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Low, with an average of 60.8 FPS. This is the only preset that clears the 60 FPS line, and it does so by a margin of less than 1 FPS. Any increase in settings—Medium at 45.4 FPS, High at 38.5 FPS, or Ultra at 32 FPS—will result in a clearly sub-60 FPS experience. Users targeting 4K should accept the visual compromises of the Low preset or consider reducing the resolution to 1440p for higher quality.