Minimum

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X paired with the AMD Radeon RX 570 ranks 3531 out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the bottom 5 percent of all configurations measured. This low ranking is almost entirely attributable to the graphics card rather than the processor. The CPU itself sits in the 91st percentile among all tested processors, while the GPU rests in the 74th percentile. The combination of a top-tier 16-core, 32-thread Zen 3 processor with a 2017-era Polaris GPU creates a lopsided pairing where the processor's capability far exceeds what the graphics card can feed into the display pipeline.

Benchmark results indicate the system delivers playable frame rates only at 1920x1080 with Low or Medium settings, and even then just barely crosses the 60 FPS threshold at Medium with an average of 61 FPS. At higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the definitive bottleneck. The recorded data shows the frame rate drops by roughly half when moving from 1080p to 1440p at the same settings, and again when moving from 1440p to 4K. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-limited scenario, where the CPU has ample headroom but the graphics processor cannot sustain the pixel throughput required at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 60 FPS on a 4K display?

A: No. The highest average frame rate recorded at 3840x2160 is 30.8 FPS on Low settings. High settings produce 15.3 FPS, Medium produces 24.3 FPS, and Ultra produces 16.4 FPS. None of these approach the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1920x1080?

A: Medium settings deliver an average of 61 FPS, which is the highest quality preset that maintains at least 60 FPS. Low settings average 82.5 FPS, while High averages 55.7 FPS and Ultra averages 39.2 FPS, so High and Ultra fall short of the playability line.

Q: How does the RX 570 compare to its nearest rivals in overall GPU benchmarks?

A: The RX 570's average benchmark score of 28766 is nearly identical to that of the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, which scores 28874 with a delta of -0.4 percent. The AMD Radeon RX 470 scores 28996, a delta of -0.8 percent, while the AMD Radeon R9 M295X scores 28580, a delta of 0.7 percent. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 scores 28421, a delta of 1.2 percent.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is the clear limiting factor at all resolutions. The Ryzen 9 5950X ranks in the 91st percentile among CPUs, while the RX 570 ranks in the 74th percentile among GPUs. The frame rate scales dramatically with resolution changes, which indicates GPU-bound performance, and the CPU's massive multi-threaded capabilities are largely unused by this title.

Q: What resolution delivers the best balance of visual quality and performance?

A: 1920x1080 is the only resolution with any playable settings. At Medium quality, the system averages 61 FPS, which meets the playability threshold. At 2560x1440, no settings reach 60 FPS, with Low averaging 51.8 FPS and Medium averaging 38.5 FPS. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only manage 30.8 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic performance?

A: The Ryzen 9 5950X has an average benchmark score of 51947. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 52073, a delta of -0.2 percent, and the AMD EPYC 8124P scores 52121, a delta of -0.3 percent. The Intel Core i9-13900F scores 51730, a delta of 0.4 percent, and the Intel Core i7-14700 scores 52301, a delta of -0.7 percent.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data covers three resolutions and four quality presets each, providing a complete picture of how this combination behaves across the spectrum of display configurations.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles across the board. Low settings produce an average of 30.8 FPS, which is the only preset that exceeds 30 FPS. Medium drops to 24.3 FPS, Ultra falls to 16.4 FPS, and High produces the lowest result at 15.3 FPS. The ordering of High below Ultra is notable and suggests that High preset may enable certain effects that are more demanding than the Ultra preset's configuration, though the exact cause cannot be determined from the aggregate data. No minimum or maximum frame time data was recorded for any resolution.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates improve substantially but remain below the playability threshold. Low settings average 51.8 FPS, which is the closest approach to 60 FPS at this resolution. Medium averages 38.5 FPS, High averages 31.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 28.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is approximately 13 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is approximately 7 FPS, and the gap between High and Ultra is approximately 3 FPS. This suggests diminishing returns in performance cost as quality increases from Low to Ultra.

At 1920x1080, the system finally reaches playable territory. Low settings average 82.5 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings average exactly 61 FPS, just barely meeting the playability criterion. High settings drop to 55.7 FPS, which falls short of the threshold, and Ultra settings produce 39.2 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a consistent decline: roughly 21 FPS from Low to Medium, 5 FPS from Medium to High, and 16 FPS from High to Ultra. The steep drop from High to Ultra indicates that the Ultra preset carries a significant performance penalty relative to its visual benefit in this title.

The Verdict

This system can run Minimum, but only under specific conditions. According to the verdict by resolution, 1920x1080 is the sole resolution with playable settings, and the playable presets are Low and Medium. The best playable setting is Medium, which achieves an average of 61 FPS, just one frame above the 60 FPS threshold. Low settings provide more headroom at 82.5 FPS average.

At 2560x1440, no settings achieve 60 FPS. The closest is Low at 51.8 FPS, which is roughly 14 percent below the playability threshold. At 3840x2160, the situation is worse, with the best result being Low at 30.8 FPS, which is nearly half the required frame rate. The database records no playable settings at either of these resolutions.

The practical conclusion is that this pairing is suitable for 1080p gaming in Minimum, provided the user is willing to run at Medium quality or lower. Anyone targeting 1440p or 4K would need a substantially more powerful GPU, as the RX 570 simply lacks the pixel throughput to maintain 60 FPS at those resolutions regardless of the CPU's capabilities.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in average benchmark score are the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX at 52073, the AMD EPYC 8124P at 52121, the Intel Core i9-13900F at 51730, and the Intel Core i7-14700 at 52301. All of these processors score within less than one percent of the Ryzen 9 5950X's 51947 average, meaning any of them would behave nearly identically in Minimum. Since this game is GPU-bound for this configuration, swapping the CPU to any of these alternatives would produce virtually no measurable difference in frame rates.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6800M at 28874, the AMD Radeon R9 M295X at 28580, the AMD Radeon RX 470 at 28996, and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 at 28421. The RX 570's average score of 28766 sits essentially in the middle of this group. The RX 470 is particularly relevant as a direct sibling product, and its 0.8 percent higher score would translate to negligible FPS differences in Minimum. The RX 6800M, despite being a mobile part, scores within 0.4 percent of the RX 570, indicating that mobile and desktop GPUs from this era perform more similarly than generational branding might suggest.

The practical implication is that users with any of these GPUs would experience nearly identical performance in Minimum. A user upgrading from an RX 470 to an RX 570 would see essentially no change in this game. Similarly, the CPU alternatives would all feed the GPU at the same rate, so the system's overall behavior would remain unchanged.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS, so there is no best playable setting. The highest average frame rate is 30.8 FPS on Low, which is the only preset that exceeds 30 FPS, but it remains far below the playability threshold.

At 2560x1440, no preset achieves 60 FPS either. Low settings produce 51.8 FPS, which is the highest recorded value at this resolution, but it still falls short of the 60 FPS target. Medium produces 38.5 FPS, High produces 31.4 FPS, and Ultra produces 28.5 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the best playable setting is Medium, which achieves an average of 61 FPS. This is the only preset that both meets the 60 FPS threshold and offers higher quality than Low. Low settings average 82.5 FPS and are also playable, but Medium provides the best visual quality while still maintaining playability. High and Ultra are not playable, averaging 55.7 FPS and 39.2 FPS respectively.

For users who prioritize frame rate stability over visual quality, Low at 1920x1080 provides a comfortable 82.5 FPS average, which offers headroom for demanding scenes. For users who want the best visuals that still maintain playability, Medium at 1920x1080 is the recommended choice, delivering 61 FPS on average.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data clearly shows that the GPU dominates performance in Minimum for this configuration. The evidence lies in the resolution scaling behavior. At 1920x1080 Low, the system averages 82.5 FPS. At 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 51.8 FPS, a reduction of approximately 37 percent. At 3840x2160 Low, it falls to 30.8 FPS, a reduction of approximately 63 percent from the 1080p result. This dramatic scaling with pixel count is the classic signature of GPU-bound rendering.

The CPU's role is secondary in this title. The Ryzen 9 5950X provides 16 cores and 32 threads with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, and its synthetic benchmarks place it in the 91st percentile among all CPUs. However, Minimum is a 2014 title that likely does not utilize the full multi-threaded capacity of a modern 16-core processor. The frame rates at 1080p, even at the highest preset, remain well below what this CPU could theoretically support if paired with a stronger GPU.

The scaling between presets at a fixed resolution further confirms the GPU bottleneck. At 1920x1080, the difference between Low and Ultra is 43.3 FPS, a massive gap that reflects the GPU's inability to handle increased shading complexity, texture filtering, and post-processing effects. At 2560x1440, the same preset range spans 23.3 FPS, and at 3840x2160 it spans 14.5 FPS. The shrinking absolute differences at higher resolutions indicate that the GPU is saturated even at Low settings, leaving less headroom for quality improvements to affect performance.

At 3840x2160, even Low settings only achieve 30.8 FPS, which means the GPU is operating near its absolute limit regardless of quality settings. The CPU has no involvement in this bottleneck; even a much weaker processor would likely produce similar frame rates at 4K. Conversely, at 1920x1080 Low, the 82.5 FPS result approaches the range where a less capable CPU might start to become relevant, but the Ryzen 9 5950X has ample single-thread and multi-thread performance to avoid any CPU-side limitation.

In summary, the GPU is the sole performance determinant for this game at all resolutions and presets tested. The CPU's substantial capabilities are largely idle, and users considering upgrades should prioritize the graphics card first, as any GPU improvement would directly translate to higher frame rates across all resolutions.