Can I Run It?

Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips

Minimum
Third-Person Shooter 2014

Minimum

88%
Great Match Your system meets recommended requirements.

Performance

1080p (Full HD)

Low 1080p Measured
267 FPS
Ultra 1080p Measured
131 FPS

1440p (2K / QHD)

Low 1440p Measured
172 FPS
Ultra 1440p Measured
84 FPS

4K (Ultra HD)

Low 4K Measured
93 FPS
Ultra 4K Measured
45 FPS
5.8ms Frame Time
9ms Input Latency
4K Best Resolution

Requirements Check

Processor
Required 37,425
Your CPU 57,498
Graphics Card
Required 27,663
Your GPU 23,172

Recommendations

Upgrade Needed

Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.

Ray Tracing Ready

Your GPU supports ray tracing.

Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings

UltraHighMediumLow
4K Ultra HD 45 60 71 93
1440p QHD 84 110 132 172
1080p Full HD 131 171 204 267

Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.

Every measured configuration

1920x1080 High 171
1920x1080 Low 267
1920x1080 Medium 204
1920x1080 Ultra 131
2560x1440 High 110
2560x1440 Low 172
2560x1440 Medium 132
2560x1440 Ultra 84
3840x2160 High 60
3840x2160 Low 93
3840x2160 Medium 71
3840x2160 Ultra 45

Performance Analysis: Minimum on Your System

This PC configuration, pairing the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, delivers a highly capable experience in Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014. The data indicates that at 1080p and 1440p, the system provides exceptionally high frame rates across all tested presets, while 4K remains comfortably playable at High settings. The benchmark results place this combination in the 1051st position out of 3712 tested configurations, demonstrating above-average performance for this title.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates for this combination show a clear pattern of scalability across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest performance, with the Low preset achieving an average of 267 FPS. The Medium preset averages 204 FPS, with a minimum of 174 FPS and a maximum of 235 FPS. High settings produce an average of 171 FPS, while the most demanding Ultra preset still maintains an impressive average of 131 FPS. These results indicate that at 1080p, the system has substantial headroom above the 60 FPS playable threshold, with even the Ultra preset nearly doubling that target.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain very high but show the expected impact of increased resolution. The Low preset averages 172 FPS, while Medium produces 132 FPS on average, with a minimum of 112 FPS and a maximum of 151 FPS. High settings yield 110 FPS average, and Ultra settings still manage 84 FPS average. The transition from 1080p to 1440p reduces performance by roughly 35-40% across presets, yet every setting remains well above the 60 FPS threshold, demonstrating that the GPU has ample capacity at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the performance scales down further but remains playable. The Low preset averages 93 FPS, while Medium delivers 71 FPS average with a minimum of 60 FPS and a maximum of 82 FPS. High settings achieve exactly 60 FPS on average, which matches the playable threshold precisely. The Ultra preset drops to 45 FPS average, falling below the 60 FPS target. The data shows a significant performance cliff between Medium and Ultra at 4K, with the gap between these presets being approximately 37%, suggesting that the Ultra preset introduces rendering demands that this GPU cannot fully satisfy at this resolution.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Examining the nearest rivals for both components provides context for their performance characteristics. The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X has an average benchmark score of 57498, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs. Its closest performance equivalents include the AMD EPYC 9015, which scores 57555 with a negligible -0.1% difference, and the AMD EPYC 7313 at 57399 with a +0.2% difference. The Intel Core i9-14900 scores 58115, putting it 1.1% ahead, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M at 58323 is 1.4% ahead. These figures indicate that the Ryzen 9 9900X sits in a tight performance cluster where no rival exceeds a 1.4% advantage, meaning users could expect virtually identical CPU-bound behavior from any of these processors.

For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, the average benchmark score is 23172, placing it in the 68th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals show remarkably small performance deltas: the NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249 (-0.3%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 23250 (-0.3%), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M scores 23273 (-0.4%), and the AMD Radeon R9 M290X scores 23276 (-0.4%). These sub-1% differences mean that in practice, swapping the RTX 3080 for any of these alternatives would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum, although the architectural differences between these cards could manifest in specific game scenarios not captured by aggregate benchmarks.

CPU and GPU Roles

The performance scaling across resolutions reveals the distinct roles of the CPU and GPU in Minimum. At 1920x1080, the system achieves extremely high frame rates, with the Low preset reaching 267 FPS. This suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU is well-equipped to feed the GPU, and the RTX 3080 becomes the limiting factor only at higher settings. The Ryzen 9 9900X's strong multi-threaded performance, evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32172 and Passmark multithread score of 54643, ensures that even at high frame rates, the CPU does not become a bottleneck.

The transition from 1080p to 1440p shows a performance reduction of approximately 35-40% across all presets, which is typical of GPU-bound scaling. At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset still achieves 84 FPS average, indicating that the GPU retains significant headroom. The jump from 1440p to 4K produces a further reduction of roughly 45-50%, which is more pronounced than the 1080p-to-1440p drop. This increasing performance penalty at higher resolutions confirms that the RTX 3080 is the primary determinant of frame rates as resolution increases.

Preset scaling provides additional insight into component roles. At 4K, the difference between Low and Ultra is 48 FPS (from 93 to 45), while at 1080p, the same preset range spans 136 FPS (from 267 to 131). This widening gap at lower resolutions suggests that the CPU can support high frame rates across all presets, but the GPU becomes progressively more constrained as both resolution and settings increase. The Medium preset at 4K, with its 60 FPS minimum, represents the point where the GPU is working hardest while maintaining playability.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 4K resolution?*

A: Yes, at 4K the system achieves playable frame rates on Low (93 FPS average), Medium (71 FPS average), and High (60 FPS average) presets. The Ultra preset falls below the 60 FPS threshold with a 45 FPS average.

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

A: The Ultra preset at 2560x1440 delivers 84 FPS average, which is the highest quality setting that maintains a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. All four presets at this resolution exceed the playable threshold.

Q: How does the RTX 3080 compare to its nearest GPU alternatives?

A: The RTX 3080 has an average benchmark score of 23172, placing it in the 68th percentile. Its nearest rivals, including the NVIDIA P106-100 and AMD Radeon RX 6600M, all score within 0.4% of the RTX 3080, indicating essentially equivalent aggregate performance.

Q: Does the CPU limit performance at 1080p?

A: No, the Ryzen 9 9900X's strong multi-threaded scores, including a 32172 Cinebench R23 multicore result, allow it to support frame rates up to 267 FPS at 1080p Low settings. The CPU sits in the 92nd percentile of all processors.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 1080p Medium settings?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 produces an average of 204 FPS, with a minimum of 174 FPS and a maximum of 235 FPS, providing a very smooth experience with substantial headroom above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is the 4K Ultra preset viable for gameplay?

A: No, the 4K Ultra preset averages 45 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. For 4K gaming, the High preset at 60 FPS average is the highest viable option.

The Verdict

This PC can definitively run Minimum with excellent performance across most configurations. The verdict by resolution is clear: at 1920x1080, all four presets are playable, with the best being Ultra at 131 FPS average. At 2560x1440, all presets also clear the 60 FPS threshold, with Ultra as the best at 84 FPS average. At 3840x2160, the system delivers playable performance on Low (93 FPS), Medium (71 FPS), and High (60 FPS) presets, but Ultra falls short at 45 FPS average.

The system's overall ranking of 1051 out of 3712 combinations places it in the upper portion of tested configurations. The data confirms that this pairing excels at 1080p and 1440p, where it can drive high-refresh-rate monitors with ease. At 4K, the system remains competent but requires preset compromises to maintain smooth gameplay, with High settings representing the optimal balance between visual quality and performance.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, which achieves exactly 60 FPS average. While Medium also remains above 60 FPS with a 71 FPS average, High provides the superior visual experience while still meeting the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the best playable preset is Ultra, delivering 84 FPS average. This provides a significant visual upgrade over lower presets while maintaining a comfortable 40% margin above the 60 FPS target.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the best choice, achieving 131 FPS average. This allows gamers to experience the highest visual quality while still benefiting from frame rates that exceed 120 FPS, making it suitable for high-refresh-rate displays.