Minimum

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER lands at rank 2256 out of 3712 tested combinations for Minimum. This places the combo in the top 39% of all tested systems, a solid mid-pack result for a third-person shooter released in 2014. The ranking reflects a balance between a modern 6-core CPU and a previous-generation GPU that still delivers competitive frame rates.

The CPU itself sits at the 77th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 25005. Its nearest rivals are remarkably close: the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964, a delta of just 0.2%, while the Intel Core i7-11850H and Intel Core i7-13620H trail by 0.3% and 0.4% respectively. The AMD EPYC 9474F leads by 0.4%, meaning the 8400F is effectively in a dead heat with several established desktop and mobile parts. This tight grouping suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor in this pairing.

The GPU, meanwhile, sits at the 65th percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 20282. Its nearest rivals are all within 1.5%: the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M is 1% ahead, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile is 1.2% ahead, and the Intel Arc B570 and Intel Arc A750 are 1.3% and 1.5% ahead respectively. The RTX 2070 SUPER holds its own against these newer competitors, though the margins are narrow enough that driver optimization and game-specific behavior will matter more than raw compute.

The combination rank of 2256 suggests that while neither component is a standout in isolation, together they produce a coherent system for Minimum. The CPU's 12 threads and the GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory provide enough headroom for the game's demands, and the measured frame rates confirm that the pairing works well across most settings and resolutions.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data shows a clear shift in which component dominates as resolution increases. At 1920x1080, the CPU carries more of the workload, as evidenced by the large FPS gains when lowering settings. The low preset at 1080p hits 188.4 FPS, while the ultra preset drops to 90.8 FPS, a reduction of roughly 52%. This wide spread indicates that the GPU is being fed plenty of data, and the CPU's single-thread performance (a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2943) is sufficient to keep frame rates high even at low graphics settings.

At 2560x1440, the GPU begins to assert its influence. The spread between low and ultra narrows: low delivers 118.7 FPS, medium 93.5 FPS, high 77.5 FPS, and ultra 58 FPS. The gap from low to ultra is about 51%, similar to 1080p, but the absolute numbers suggest the GPU is working harder. The RTX 2070 SUPER's 9.062 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 448.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth are being utilized more fully at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck. The low preset manages 65.9 FPS, but medium drops to 49.5 FPS, high to 41.4 FPS, and ultra to 30.9 FPS. The scaling is dramatic: ultra delivers less than half the frame rate of low. This pattern indicates that the 4K resolution overwhelms the GPU's 8 GB frame buffer and compute capacity, while the CPU still has headroom to spare. The Ryzen 5 8400F's 16 MB of L3 cache and DDR5 memory support are not stressed at 4K, as the GPU is simply unable to render frames fast enough.

Preset scaling also reveals the nature of the workload. At 1080p, the jump from medium to high costs 23.1 FPS (from 143.9 to 120.8), while high to ultra costs another 30 FPS. At 1440p, medium to high costs 16 FPS, and high to ultra costs 19.5 FPS. At 4K, medium to high costs 8.1 FPS, and high to ultra costs 10.5 FPS. The diminishing returns at higher resolutions confirm that the GPU is the limiting factor, as each additional graphics setting has less absolute impact when the render resolution is already taxing the hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. The low preset averages 188.4 FPS, medium 143.9 FPS, high 120.8 FPS, and ultra 90.8 FPS. Every preset clears the 60 FPS playable threshold by a wide margin, with low exceeding it by over three times. The minimum and maximum FPS values were not recorded, so the average figures represent the complete picture from the database.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but less uniformly so. Low averages 118.7 FPS, medium 93.5 FPS, and high 77.5 FPS, all comfortably above 60. Ultra drops to 58 FPS, just below the threshold. This is the first resolution where the most demanding preset fails to maintain playable frame rates, indicating that ultra settings at 1440p require more GPU headroom than this card provides.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes significantly. Low averages 65.9 FPS, barely clearing the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 49.5 FPS, high 41.4 FPS, and ultra 30.9 FPS. Only the low preset is playable at this resolution, and even that is marginal. The drop from low to medium is 16.4 FPS, a 25% reduction, while ultra delivers less than half the frame rate of low. This resolution clearly exceeds the GPU's comfortable operating range for this game.

The pattern across resolutions shows a consistent hierarchy: low is always fastest, ultra is always slowest, and medium and high sit between them. The absolute differences shrink as resolution increases, which is expected given that the GPU becomes the bottleneck. At 1080p, the spread from low to ultra is 97.6 FPS; at 1440p, it is 60.7 FPS; at 4K, it is 35 FPS.

The Verdict

This PC can run Minimum, but the answer depends heavily on resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, all four presets clear 60 FPS, with ultra delivering 90.8 FPS. This is the ideal environment for this combo, providing smooth gameplay even at maximum quality. The verdict for 1080p is unequivocal: this system handles the game with ease.

At 2560x1440, three of four presets are playable. High averages 77.5 FPS, medium 93.5 FPS, and low 118.7 FPS. Ultra falls short at 58 FPS, a marginal miss that means dropping to high is the recommended path for 1440p gaming. The verdict is positive, with a caveat that the highest preset is out of reach.

At 3840x2160, only the low preset clears 60 FPS, averaging 65.9 FPS. Medium, high, and ultra all fall below the threshold, with ultra delivering just 30.9 FPS. The verdict for 4K is conditional: the game is playable, but only at the lowest settings, and the margin is slim. Users seeking higher quality at 4K would need more GPU performance.

The verdict by resolution from the database confirms this: 1080p has all four settings marked playable, 1440p has three (low, medium, high), and 4K has only low. The best settings at each resolution are ultra at 1080p (90.8 FPS), high at 1440p (77.5 FPS), and low at 4K (65.9 FPS).

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is ultra, which averages 90.8 FPS. This is the full experience, and the combo delivers it without strain. There is no reason to reduce settings at this resolution, as even the heaviest preset leaves substantial headroom above the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is high, averaging 77.5 FPS. Ultra drops to 58 FPS, so high represents the optimal balance of visual quality and performance. Low and medium also work, but high offers the best visual experience while maintaining a comfortable margin above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the only playable preset is low, averaging 65.9 FPS. This is a narrow margin above the threshold, and users should expect occasional dips below 60 FPS in demanding scenes, though the average remains playable. Medium at 49.5 FPS and high at 41.4 FPS are not viable for smooth gameplay.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 60 FPS on ultra settings at 1080p?

A: Yes. The ultra preset at 1920x1080 averages 90.8 FPS, well above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the highest playable setting at 2560x1440?

A: High settings average 77.5 FPS at 1440p. Ultra drops to 58 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 4K gaming possible with this combo?

A: Only on low settings. The low preset at 3840x2160 averages 65.9 FPS, while medium drops to 49.5 FPS and is not playable.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 8400F compare to its closest rivals?

A: The CPU scores 25005 on average, which is within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, Intel Core i7-11850H, Intel Core i7-13620H, and AMD EPYC 9474F. Performance is effectively identical across these parts.

Q: How does the RTX 2070 SUPER compare to similar GPUs?

A: The GPU averages 20282 in benchmarks, with the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M 1% ahead, the RTX 3070 Mobile 1.2% ahead, and the Intel Arc B570 and Arc A750 1.3% and 1.5% ahead respectively. The differences are minor.

Q: What frame rate can I expect on medium settings at 1080p?

A: Medium settings at 1920x1080 average 143.9 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS threshold and offers a strong balance of quality and speed.