Minimum

This combo—the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile—sits at rank 2460 out of 3712 tested combinations for Minimum. That places it in the 66th percentile of all tested combos, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of the systems in the database for this specific title. The ranking reflects a balanced pairing where the CPU’s exceptional multi-threaded throughput (95th percentile among all CPUs) complements a GPU that is solidly mid-pack (67th percentile among all GPUs). In practical terms, this is not a top-tier enthusiast setup for Minimum, but it is far from a weak one; the data shows it clears the 60 FPS playable threshold at all three tested resolutions, though only at specific settings at 4K.

The CPU’s nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX, posts an average benchmark score just 0.1% higher, making them effectively interchangeable in CPU-bound scenarios. The GPU’s closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile, scores 1.3% higher on average, which is within run-to-run variance. This means the combo’s overall rank is driven more by the CPU’s strength than the GPU’s, as the RTX 5060 Mobile’s raw compute (9.684 TFLOPS FP32) is modest relative to its generation, yet adequate for a 2014-era title like Minimum.

How This Combo Ranks

At rank 2460 of 3712 combos, this system falls into the upper-middle tier of tested configurations for Minimum. The CPU alone sits at the 95th percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 67th percentile against all GPUs. The discrepancy suggests that the CPU is overqualified for the GPU’s workload in this game, but the overall combo rank is still respectable because Minimum’s engine responds well to strong single-threaded performance, which the Ryzen 9 8945HX delivers (6030 in Cinebench R23 single-core).

Compared to the nearest rival combos, the delta is minimal: the CPU’s top rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX, is within 0.1% in average score, and the GPU’s top rival, the RTX 4060 Mobile, is within 1.3%. This means that swapping either component for its nearest competitor would not meaningfully change the combo’s in-game ranking. The data indicates that the bottleneck in Minimum is almost always the GPU at higher resolutions, while at 1080p the CPU’s headroom becomes apparent—but the overall rank is pulled down by the GPU’s mid-pack percentile.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals a clear division of labor. At 1920x1080, the CPU’s strength dominates: Low settings hit 175 FPS, and even Ultra maintains 85 FPS, showing that the GPU is not the limiter at this resolution. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p is a 51% drop in FPS (175 to 85), which indicates the GPU is doing more work as settings rise, but the CPU can feed it adequately. At 2560x1440, the CPU’s role diminishes slightly: Low hits 113 FPS, dropping to 55 FPS at Ultra, a 51% reduction that mirrors the 1080p pattern, suggesting the GPU is now the primary constraint at higher settings.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the outright bottleneck. Low settings manage 61 FPS, but Medium drops to 46 FPS, and Ultra plunges to 30 FPS—a 51% drop from Low to Ultra. The CPU’s 16 cores and 32 threads are largely idle at 4K, as the GPU’s 8 GB of GDDR7 memory and 128-bit bus (384.0 GB/s bandwidth) are saturated. The data shows that resolution scaling is the dominant factor: moving from 1080p Low to 4K Low cuts FPS by 65% (175 to 61), which is entirely GPU-bound. In contrast, moving from 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra cuts FPS by 65% (85 to 30), confirming that the GPU’s role grows disproportionately with resolution, while the CPU’s contribution is most visible at 1080p where it enables the 175 FPS ceiling.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which delivers an average of 85 FPS. This is the clear choice for maximum visual fidelity without sacrificing playability, as the data shows no preset at this resolution falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is High, averaging 72 FPS. Ultra drops to 55 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold, so High is the optimal balance. The data records Medium at 86 FPS and Low at 113 FPS, but High offers the best visual quality while staying comfortably above 60.

For 3840x2160, only Low remains playable, with an average of 61 FPS. Medium falls to 46 FPS, High to 39 FPS, and Ultra to 30 FPS—all below the threshold. Thus, at 4K, the system is limited to Low settings for a stable 60 FPS experience, with the 61 FPS average indicating just a 1 FPS margin above the playable line.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX, which has an average benchmark score of 76155 versus the Ryzen 9 8945HX’s 76212—a delta of just 0.1%. In Minimum, this means the Intel chip would deliver nearly identical frame rates at any resolution, as the CPU is rarely the bottleneck beyond 1080p. The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX are 0.4% lower in score, while the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is 0.6% higher; all are within 1% of the 8945HX, so any of these would produce indistinguishable results in this game.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT scores 0.5% higher, the AMD Radeon RX 5700 scores 1.2% higher, and the AMD Radeon RX 6700S scores 1.3% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile scores 1.3% lower. In practical terms, swapping the RTX 5060 Mobile for any of these would shift FPS by less than 2%—for example, at 1440p High, the 72 FPS average would move to roughly 71-73 FPS, which is imperceptible. The data suggests that if a system with this CPU is paired with any of these GPUs, the in-game experience would be essentially identical, with the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM being the common limiting factor at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows the following averages: Low hits 175 FPS, Medium 134 FPS (with a min of 114 and max of 154), High 112 FPS, and Ultra 85 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 41 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 27 FPS, indicating diminishing returns as settings rise.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 113 FPS, Medium 86 FPS (min 73, max 99), High 72 FPS, and Ultra 55 FPS. The step from Medium to High is a 14 FPS drop, while High to Ultra is a 17 FPS drop—the CPU maintains headroom, but the GPU’s pixel rate (69.84 GPixel/s) becomes strained at Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 61 FPS, Medium 46 FPS (min 39, max 53), High 39 FPS, and Ultra 30 FPS. The min FPS of 39 at Medium shows significant frame time variance, suggesting the 8 GB VRAM buffer is near capacity, causing occasional stutters. The 61 FPS at Low is the only result at 4K that clears the 60 FPS threshold, and it does so by a single frame.

FAQ

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

A: Only at Low settings, which averages 61 FPS. Medium drops to 46 FPS, High to 39 FPS, and Ultra to 30 FPS, all below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best visual quality setting at 1440p that stays playable?

A: High settings average 72 FPS, which is the highest preset above 60 FPS. Ultra falls to 55 FPS, so it is not recommended for a consistent 60 FPS experience.

Q: How does the RTX 5060 Mobile compare to the RTX 4060 Mobile in this game?

A: The RTX 4060 Mobile has an average benchmark score 1.3% higher, so in Minimum the FPS difference would be negligible—less than 1 FPS at any resolution.

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

A: The CPU is the stronger component, allowing 175 FPS at Low settings. The GPU becomes the bottleneck only as settings rise, with Ultra dropping to 85 FPS, still well above the playable threshold.

Q: What is the frame time variance at 1440p Medium?

A: The min FPS is 73 and max is 99, giving an average of 86 FPS. The 26 FPS range indicates moderate variance, but it remains consistently above 60 FPS.

*Q: Does this combo rank in the top half of all tested systems for Minimum?*

A: Yes, at rank 2460 out of 3712 combos, it is in the 66th percentile, meaning it outperforms about two-thirds of tested configurations.

The Verdict

The data confirms that this PC can run Minimum successfully across all three tested resolutions, but the experience varies sharply by resolution. At 1920x1080, every preset—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—averages above 60 FPS, with Ultra at 85 FPS being the recommended choice for full visual fidelity. At 2560x1440, High settings at 72 FPS are the best balance, as Ultra falls to 55 FPS, just below the playable threshold. At 3840x2160, only Low settings at 61 FPS clear the 60 FPS line; Medium, High, and Ultra all fall short, making 4K playable only with significant visual compromises.

Given the CPU’s 95th percentile ranking and the GPU’s 67th percentile, the system is well-matched for 1080p and 1440p gaming in Minimum, but it struggles to maintain high settings at 4K. The 61 FPS at 4K Low is a single-frame margin, so users seeking a stable 4K experience would need to accept Low settings or reduce resolution. For the intended target of 1080p or 1440p, this combo delivers a smooth, playable experience at high quality, with the CPU providing ample headroom for any future GPU upgrade. The verdict is clear: capable at 1080p and 1440p, marginal at 4K.