Minimum

Minimum is a third-person shooter from 2014 that still demands a careful look at hardware balance. The recorded data for this combination of an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER shows a system that is heavily capable at standard resolutions, but the 4K picture is more nuanced. The database includes measured average FPS at three resolutions and four quality presets, and the results reveal where the GPU becomes the limiting factor and where the CPU has plenty of headroom.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combination produces frame rates well above the 60 FPS playable threshold at every preset. Low settings average 186.9 FPS, which is the highest recorded number in the entire dataset. Medium settings drop to 145.1 FPS, still a massive margin over the threshold. High settings average 122.9 FPS, and Ultra settings average 92.5 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a total reduction of 94.4 FPS, meaning the most demanding preset still leaves roughly 32.5 FPS of headroom above the 60 FPS line. The data indicates that at 1080p, no setting is problematic for this hardware.

Stepping up to 2560x1440, the measured averages remain strong but the gap between presets widens in relative terms. Low settings average 124.2 FPS, Medium averages 96 FPS, and High averages 78.5 FPS. Ultra is the only preset that falls below 60 FPS, with an average of 57.1 FPS. That is a shortfall of 2.9 FPS, which is marginal but still a failure to meet the playable threshold. The transition from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra costs 35.4 FPS, while the same resolution change at Low costs 62.7 FPS. This suggests that at higher presets, the GPU workload scaling is less punishing per pixel, while lower presets are more sensitive to resolution increases because the GPU is less bound by shading effects and more by raw pixel throughput.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes dramatically. Low settings average 62.4 FPS, which barely clears the 60 FPS threshold by 2.4 FPS. Medium drops to 50.5 FPS, High drops to 40 FPS, and Ultra averages 33.4 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 29 FPS, which is a smaller absolute gap than at 1080p (94.4 FPS) or 1440p (67.1 FPS), but the relative performance is far worse because every preset except Low sits below the threshold. The 4K data shows a clear ceiling: the GPU cannot sustain 60 FPS at Medium and above, and even Low is only just above the line.

The recorded data contains no min or max FPS values, only averages, so the analysis cannot address frame time consistency or stutter behavior. The averages alone, however, provide a clear hierarchy: 1080p is fully playable at all presets, 1440p is playable up to High, and 4K is playable only at Low.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1080p Ultra is 92.5, which is 32.5 FPS above the 60 FPS playable threshold. It is the highest preset tested at that resolution and it clears the threshold comfortably.

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

A: High settings, with an average of 78.5 FPS. Medium averages 96 FPS and Low averages 124.2 FPS, but High is the most demanding preset that stays above 60 FPS. Ultra falls below the threshold at 57.1 FPS.

Q: Is 4K playable on this hardware?

A: Only at Low settings, where the average is 62.4 FPS. Medium (50.5 FPS), High (40 FPS), and Ultra (33.4 FPS) all fail to reach the 60 FPS threshold. The margin at Low is thin, just 2.4 FPS.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same preset?

A: At Low settings, the average drops from 186.9 FPS at 1080p to 62.4 FPS at 4K, a loss of 124.5 FPS. At Ultra, the drop is from 92.5 FPS to 33.4 FPS, a loss of 59.1 FPS. The absolute loss is larger at Low, but the percentage loss is larger at Ultra.

Q: Does the RTX 2070 SUPER bottleneck the Ryzen 9 5950X in this game?

A: The data indicates a GPU bottleneck at higher resolutions and presets. At 4K Ultra, the average is 33.4 FPS, and at 1440p Ultra it is 57.1 FPS, while the CPU is a high-end 16-core part. The FPS scaling with resolution and preset suggests the GPU is the limiting factor in these scenarios.

Q: What is the combo rank for this CPU and GPU pairing in Minimum?

A: The combination ranks 2135 out of 3712 tested combos in the game. That places it in the upper-middle portion of the database, not near the top but well above the median.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS scaling across resolutions makes the division of labor clear. At 1920x1080, the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU at every preset. The jump from Low to Ultra at 1080p reduces the average from 186.9 to 92.5 FPS, a drop of 94.4 FPS, which is entirely attributable to GPU workload increasing with preset complexity. The Ryzen 9 5950X, with 16 cores and 32 threads, is not the constraint here.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with smaller absolute numbers. Low averages 124.2 FPS, Medium 96 FPS, High 78.5 FPS, and Ultra 57.1 FPS. The step from High to Ultra is the only one that crosses below the threshold, and it costs 21.4 FPS. This is a larger drop than the step from Medium to High (17.5 FPS) or Low to Medium (28.2 FPS). The increasing cost of Ultra at 1440p points to the GPU being pushed harder by the combination of resolution and shader effects.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the dominant factor. Low averages 62.4 FPS, Medium 50.5 FPS, High 40 FPS, and Ultra 33.4 FPS. The differences between presets are 11.9 FPS (Low to Medium), 10.5 FPS (Medium to High), and 6.6 FPS (High to Ultra). The shrinking absolute deltas at higher presets suggest that the GPU is running out of pixel throughput and shading resources, so each additional setting tier has less impact because the GPU is already saturated. The CPU, by contrast, is barely stressed at 4K given that even Low settings produce only 62.4 FPS.

The resolution scaling itself is informative. At Low settings, moving from 1080p to 1440p costs 62.7 FPS, and moving from 1440p to 4K costs 61.8 FPS. At Ultra, the same transitions cost 35.4 FPS and 23.7 FPS. The fact that lower presets lose more absolute FPS across resolution increases means the GPU is more pixel-bound when effects are lighter. Higher presets have already loaded the GPU with shading work, so the additional pixel load has a smaller relative impact. This behavior is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario at all resolutions, with the CPU only mattering at the very highest frame rates, such as 1080p Low where 186.9 FPS is recorded.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database, this pairing of AMD Ryzen 9 5950X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks 2135 out of 3712 tested combinations for Minimum. That is a percentile position of roughly 57.5, meaning it sits slightly above the middle of all tested systems. The rank is not a reflection of the CPU, which is a top-tier part, but rather the GPU, which is older and less powerful relative to newer cards.

The CPU alone sits in the 91st percentile among all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 51947. Its nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX (52073, 0.2% higher), AMD EPYC 8124P (52121, 0.3% higher), Intel Core i9-13900F (51730, 0.4% lower), and Intel Core i7-14700 (52301, 0.7% higher). The 5950X is effectively within 1% of these parts in aggregate CPU performance, which means the CPU is not what holds this combo back.

The GPU, however, sits in the 65th percentile among all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20282. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20480, 1% higher), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20534, 1.2% higher), Intel Arc B570 (20556, 1.3% higher), and Intel Arc A750 (20582, 1.5% higher). The RTX 2070 SUPER is within 1.5% of these cards in aggregate GPU performance, so any of them would likely deliver similar FPS in Minimum. The combo rank of 2135 reflects this GPU tier: capable but not top-tier, and the 4K results confirm it.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Minimum? The answer depends entirely on resolution and preset. At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS threshold at every preset, including Ultra at 92.5 FPS. At 2560x1440, it clears 60 FPS at Low, Medium, and High, with High being the best playable preset at 78.5 FPS. At 3840x2160, only Low settings clear the threshold, and barely so, with an average of 62.4 FPS.

The verdictByResolution data is explicit: at 4K, the playable settings list contains only Low; at 1440p, the list contains High, Low, and Medium; at 1080p, the list contains all four presets. The system is fully playable at 1080p, largely playable at 1440p with a single exception (Ultra at 57.1 FPS), and only marginally playable at 4K with the lowest preset.

For a game from 2014, this hardware is more than sufficient for standard 1080p gaming. The 1440p results are strong for a GPU of this tier. The 4K situation is the only area where the hardware shows its age, and even there, Low settings provide a playable experience, albeit with a thin 2.4 FPS margin.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the best setting that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 62.4 FPS. Medium is not playable, at 50.5 FPS, so Low is the only option for a 60 FPS target.

At 2560x1440, the best setting is High, with an average of 78.5 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that clears the threshold. Ultra falls short at 57.1 FPS, so High is the recommended ceiling.

At 1920x1080, the best setting is Ultra, with an average of 92.5 FPS. Every preset clears 60 FPS, so the highest quality option is the natural choice. The margin over the threshold at Ultra is 32.5 FPS, which provides a comfortable buffer for scene complexity.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU each have nearby rivals in the database that would behave similarly in this game. On the CPU side, the Ryzen 9 5950X has an average benchmark score of 51947, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.7% of that score. The Intel Core i9-13900F is 0.4% lower, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX is 0.2% higher, the AMD EPYC 8124P is 0.3% higher, and the Intel Core i7-14700 is 0.7% higher. Any of these processors would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum, especially at 4K where the GPU is the bottleneck.

On the GPU side, the RTX 2070 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 20282, and its nearest rivals are all within 1.5% of that score. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M is 1% higher, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile is 1.2% higher, the Intel Arc B570 is 1.3% higher, and the Intel Arc A750 is 1.5% higher. In practice, swapping the RTX 2070 SUPER for any of these cards would shift the measured FPS by only a few frames. At 1080p Low, where the system records 186.9 FPS, a 1.5% difference is roughly 2.8 FPS, which is imperceptible. At 4K Ultra, where the average is 33.4 FPS, a 1.5% difference is roughly 0.5 FPS, which is also imperceptible.

The practical takeaway from the rival data is that this combo sits in a performance cluster. The CPU is surrounded by parts within 0.7% and the GPU by parts within 1.5%, so the measured FPS in Minimum would be nearly identical across any of these configurations. The 4K Low result of 62.4 FPS, the 1440p High result of 78.5 FPS, and the 1080p Ultra result of 92.5 FPS are representative of this entire cluster, not just this specific pairing.