Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 combination delivers a remarkably consistent performance profile across the board, placing 867th out of 3712 tested combos for Minimum. The data indicates a system that is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions, but the CPU's strong multi-threaded and single-threaded scores ensure it never becomes a bottleneck. The measured frame rates show that this pairing is not just playable but often overkill for the game's demands, with performance scaling predictably from 1080p to 4K. Notably, the system clears the 60 FPS threshold at every single resolution and preset combination tested, with the only exception being the most demanding 4K Ultra setting.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU each have near-identical siblings in terms of average benchmark scores, meaning a system with one of these alternatives would behave almost exactly the same in Minimum. For the processor, the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D sits between the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700. The Ryzen AI 9 365 is a mere 0.7% faster on average, while the Ryzen 7 7700 is 0.8% slower, putting all three within a single percentage point of each other. The other two rivals, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450, are also extremely close, with a delta of just 0.4% and 0.7% respectively. In practical terms, swapping the 9800X3D for any of these chips would yield nearly identical frame rates in a game like Minimum, which doesn't appear to be heavily CPU-dependent at high resolutions.

On the graphics side, the RTX 4070's closest rival is the NVIDIA Tesla P4, which scores a 0.1% delta, making it virtually a performance twin. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is also very close, with a 0.4% delta, followed by the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile, which is 1.3% faster, and the AMD Radeon PRO W6400, which is 1.3% slower. All four of these GPUs would provide a nearly indistinguishable experience in Minimum, with differences of just a few frames per second at most. This suggests that the RTX 4070 is a well-positioned mid-range card where the performance envelope is densely packed with comparable options from both AMD and NVIDIA, and any of these alternatives would hit the same 60 FPS targets.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals a clear shift in system bottleneck depending on the resolution and preset. At 1920x1080, the system is heavily CPU-bound, as evidenced by the massive frame rates. The jump from Low to Ultra settings at this resolution only decreases the average FPS from 277.1 to 138.8. This 138.3 FPS drop shows that even at Ultra, the CPU is still capable of feeding the GPU enough data to maintain a very high frame rate. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D's high single-thread score of 1212 in 3dmark and 4430 in Passmark ensures that the game's main thread is not the limiting factor, allowing the GPU to run at its maximum potential.

As the resolution increases to 2560x1440, the load shifts towards the GPU. The average FPS at Ultra drops to 90.4, a significant decrease from the 138.8 FPS seen at 1080p Ultra. This shows that the GPU is now the primary constraint, as it has to render more pixels. However, the CPU is still not a bottleneck, as the frame rates remain well above the 60 FPS threshold. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra is a reduction of roughly 35%, which is a typical pattern for a game that is becoming more GPU-limited.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is definitively the limiting factor. The Ultra preset drops to 47.3 FPS, which is below the playable threshold. The scaling from 1440p to 4K at Ultra is another 48% reduction in performance. This is a clear indication that the RTX 4070's 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are being maxed out. The CPU, by contrast, has headroom to spare, as demonstrated by the fact that the Low preset at 4K achieves 98.1 FPS, showing that the CPU can handle the frame generation even when the GPU is under heavy pixel-pushing load. The role of the CPU is to provide a stable foundation, while the GPU's raw rasterization power dictates the ceiling at higher resolutions.

Best Settings per Resolution

The data shows that this system can achieve 60 FPS at every resolution, but the optimal settings vary to maximize visual quality. At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which delivers an average of 138.8 FPS. This is a clear victory for the system, as it allows for maximum visual fidelity with a frame rate that is more than double the playable threshold. Even the most demanding settings are not a challenge for this hardware at 1080p.

Moving to 2560x1440, the system continues to excel. The Ultra preset is again the best option, achieving an average of 90.4 FPS. This is well above the 60 FPS target, providing a smooth and highly detailed experience. The data shows that the system has enough performance headroom at 1440p to run the game at its highest settings without compromise. There is no need to drop to High settings, as the Ultra preset maintains a comfortable margin above the playable threshold.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more nuanced. The Ultra preset drops to 47.3 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target. Therefore, the most demanding playable preset is High, which achieves an average of 61.8 FPS. This is a marginal pass, but it is a pass nonetheless. The Medium preset offers a more comfortable 71.6 FPS, and Low is even higher at 98.1 FPS, but for players seeking the best visual experience while staying above 60 FPS, High is the recommended choice. This resolution is the only one where the system's performance is constrained enough to require a settings compromise.

The Verdict

The data clearly answers the question: yes, this PC can run Minimum, and it does so exceptionally well. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous. At 1920x1080, all four presets are playable, with the best being Ultra at 138.8 FPS. At 2560x1440, the same is true, with Ultra delivering 90.4 FPS. Even at the demanding 3840x2160 resolution, the system manages to keep three out of four presets above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 4K achieves 61.8 FPS, just barely clearing the bar, while Medium and Low offer even more headroom at 71.6 and 98.1 FPS, respectively.

The only configuration that fails to meet the playability standard is the 4K Ultra preset, which averages 47.3 FPS. This is a single data point in an otherwise stellar performance profile. The system is more than capable of delivering a high-refresh-rate experience at 1080p and 1440p, and it can even handle 4K gaming if the user is willing to dial the settings down from Ultra to High. This combination is a powerful pairing that is well-suited for a wide range of gaming scenarios, with the CPU providing ample headroom and the GPU delivering strong 1440p and acceptable 4K performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at the system's performance across all tested configurations. The results are presented as average FPS, with no min or max FPS recorded for any of the tests.

1920x1080

• Low: 277.1 FPS
• Medium: 211.3 FPS
• High: 179 FPS
• Ultra: 138.8 FPS

2560x1440

• Low: 178.2 FPS
• Medium: 138.9 FPS
• High: 115.8 FPS
• Ultra: 90.4 FPS

3840x2160

• Low: 98.1 FPS
• Medium: 71.6 FPS
• High: 61.8 FPS
• Ultra: 47.3 FPS

These numbers show a consistent pattern of performance scaling. The drop from Low to Ultra at each resolution is substantial, but the system maintains a playable frame rate in all but the most extreme case. The data shows that the RTX 4070 is the limiting factor at 4K, as the frame rates compress dramatically compared to the lower resolutions. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 138.3 FPS, while at 4K it is only 50.8 FPS, confirming that the GPU is saturated at higher resolutions.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 60 FPS on a 4K monitor?*

A: Yes, but not at the highest settings. The High preset at 3840x2160 achieves an average of 61.8 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset offers a higher 71.6 FPS, and Low reaches 98.1 FPS. The Ultra preset, however, falls short at 47.3 FPS.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p gaming?

A: The Ultra preset is the best option at 2560x1440, delivering an average of 90.4 FPS. This is well above the 60 FPS target and provides the highest visual quality without any performance compromise.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is nearly identical in performance to the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, which is 0.7% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700, which is 0.8% slower. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS and AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 are also within a single percentage point, with deltas of 0.4% and 0.7%, respectively.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the main bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The benchmark data suggests the system is CPU-bound at 1920x1080. The frame rates are exceptionally high, with the Low preset reaching 277.1 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra is significant, but even at Ultra the system achieves 138.8 FPS, indicating the CPU is capable of sustaining very high frame rates.

Q: What GPU is a close performance match for the RTX 4070?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla P4 is the closest match, with a delta of just 0.1%. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is also very close at 0.4%, followed by the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile at -1.3% and the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 at 1.3%.

Q: At what resolution does the system fail to hit 60 FPS on Ultra?

A: The system fails to hit 60 FPS on the Ultra preset only at 3840x2160, where it averages 47.3 FPS. At both 1920x1080 and 2560x1440, the Ultra preset stays well above the 60 FPS threshold.