Minimum

FAQ

Q: What is the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D's overall standing among CPUs?

A: The CPU sits at the 91st percentile among all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,762. Its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, scores 55,093, a difference of -0.6%, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K trails by 1.3% with a score of 54,053.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1,184, placing it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1,186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192 (0.7% higher). The AMD FirePro M2000 is slightly behind at 1,168, a 1.4% deficit.

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS recorded is 30 on Low settings. Medium produces 23 FPS average, High produces 19 FPS, and Ultra drops to 15 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

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

A: Medium settings at 1080p yield an average of 65 FPS, with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS. Low settings reach 85 FPS average. High settings fall just short of the threshold at 55 FPS average, and Ultra drops to 42 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: The combination of AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3,425 out of 3,712 tested combos for Minimum, placing it in the lower portion of the database results.

Q: What role does the GPU play in this game's performance?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The Arc B370's 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 20 ROPs constrain frame rates heavily, especially at higher resolutions. The CPU's 91st percentile ranking does not translate to high FPS in Minimum because the GPU cannot keep pace.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data for Minimum shows a clear division of labor between the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and the Intel Arc B370. The CPU is a high-end desktop part with 12 cores, 24 threads, and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, ranking in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. The GPU, by contrast, sits at the 5th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 1,184. This asymmetry means the Arc B370 dictates the frame rate in nearly every scenario.

Looking at resolution scaling, the GPU's limitations become more apparent as pixel count rises. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo delivers 85 FPS average. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 55 FPS, a 35% reduction. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 30 FPS, another 45% drop. This pattern holds across all presets: the gap between 1080p and 1440p is consistently large, and the gap between 1440p and 4K is even larger. For Medium settings, 1080p yields 65 FPS, 1440p yields 42 FPS (a 35% drop), and 4K yields 23 FPS (a 45% drop from 1440p). High settings show 55 FPS at 1080p, 35 FPS at 1440p, and 19 FPS at 4K.

The CPU's contribution is difficult to isolate from this data, but the fact that even at 1080p Low the system only reaches 85 FPS suggests the GPU is the bottleneck. A CPU with a 91st percentile ranking should handle Minimum's workload easily, given the game's 2014 release date. The GPU's 25 W TDP and integrated design (IGP bus interface) indicate a low-power part not designed for demanding 3D workloads. The Arc B370's 1280 shading units and 40 texture mapping units are modest figures, and its 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate limits fill-rate-heavy scenes.

At 4K Ultra, the combo manages only 15 FPS average. This is a GPU-bound scenario: the Arc B370 simply lacks the raw throughput to push 8.3 million pixels per frame with heavy effects. The CPU would not be the limiting factor at this resolution; even a weaker processor would likely produce similar results. Conversely, at 1080p Low, the 85 FPS figure may still be GPU-limited, as the Arc B370's 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance is far below what modern discrete GPUs offer.

The preset scaling within each resolution reinforces this. At 1080p, Low to Medium increases the load and drops FPS from 85 to 65 (a 24% reduction). Medium to High drops from 65 to 55 (a 15% reduction). High to Ultra drops from 55 to 42 (a 24% reduction). At 1440p, the same progression goes 55 to 42 to 35 to 27. At 4K, it goes 30 to 23 to 19 to 15. The consistent pattern across resolutions indicates a GPU that is progressively overwhelmed by increasing pixel count and shading complexity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system performs best. Low settings produce an average of 85 FPS. Medium settings yield 65 FPS average, with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS. High settings drop to 55 FPS average. Ultra settings fall further to 42 FPS average. No minimum or maximum values are recorded for Low, High, or Ultra, but the Medium range shows a 19 FPS spread between minimum and maximum.

At 2560x1440, performance declines notably. Low settings average 55 FPS. Medium settings average 42 FPS, with a minimum of 36 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS. High settings average 35 FPS. Ultra settings average 27 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 36 FPS is below the 60 FPS playable threshold, indicating stutter during demanding moments.

At 3840x2160, the results are marginal at best. Low settings average 30 FPS. Medium settings average 23 FPS, with a minimum of 19 FPS and a maximum of 26 FPS. High settings average 19 FPS. Ultra settings average 15 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 19 FPS shows severe drops during intense scenes, making the game feel unresponsive.

The measured data covers all four presets at each resolution, but only the Medium preset at each resolution has complete min/max data. This limits the analysis of frame pacing for other settings, but the averages alone tell a clear story: the system only approaches playable frame rates at 1080p, and only on Low and Medium settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals are all within a narrow band. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has an average score of 55,093, just 0.6% higher than the Ryzen 9 9900X3D's 54,762. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K scores 54,053, a 1.3% deficit. The Intel Xeon 6505P scores 53,701, a 2% deficit. The Intel Core i7-14700F scores 53,620, a 2.1% deficit. In practical terms, swapping the Ryzen 9 9900X3D for any of these would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum, since the game's CPU load is evidently low enough that all these processors are far from being the bottleneck.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are older or lower-end parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1,186, essentially tied with the Arc B370's 1,184. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190, a 0.5% advantage. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192, a 0.7% advantage. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1,168, a 1.4% deficit. These are all GPUs from a much earlier era, suggesting the Arc B370's integrated-class performance is comparable to entry-level discrete cards from over a decade ago. In Minimum, any of these GPUs would likely yield similar frame rates to the Arc B370, with differences of just a few FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3,425 out of 3,712 tested combos for Minimum. This places the system in the bottom 8% of all combinations in the database. The ranking reflects the severe GPU limitation: while the CPU is in the 91st percentile, the GPU is in the 5th percentile. The pairing of a top-tier processor with a bottom-tier graphics solution produces a system that cannot achieve 60 FPS at 1440p or 4K in this game.

The rank of 3,425 is consistent with the measured FPS data. At 1080p Medium, the system hits 65 FPS average, which is playable but not exceptional. At every other resolution and preset combination, the frame rate falls below 60 FPS. The database's playable threshold is set at 60 FPS, and the verdict by resolution confirms that only 1080p Low and Medium clear this bar.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Minimum? The answer depends entirely on the resolution and settings. At 3840x2160, no settings achieve 60 FPS. The best result is 30 FPS on Low, which is below the playable threshold. Medium produces 23 FPS, High produces 19 FPS, and Ultra produces 15 FPS. The 4K verdict is not playable.

At 2560x1440, the situation is similar. No settings achieve 60 FPS. Low produces 55 FPS, which is close but still below the threshold. Medium produces 42 FPS, High produces 35 FPS, and Ultra produces 27 FPS. The 1440p verdict is not playable.

At 1920x1080, the system becomes playable on two presets. Low settings produce 85 FPS average, well above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings produce 65 FPS average, with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS. High settings fall short at 55 FPS, and Ultra drops to 42 FPS. The 1080p verdict lists Low and Medium as playable, with Medium being the best playable setting at 65 FPS average.

For a smooth experience, the user must run the game at 1080p and stick to Low or Medium presets. The Medium preset's minimum of 56 FPS indicates occasional dips below 60, but the average of 65 FPS provides enough headroom for most scenes. Low settings are safer, with an average of 85 FPS offering a comfortable margin.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS, so there is no recommended setting. The highest average is 30 FPS on Low, but this is still half the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, no preset achieves 60 FPS either. The closest is Low at 55 FPS, which falls 5 FPS short of the threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all produce lower averages, so none are recommended for playable frame rates.

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium. This setting produces an average of 65 FPS, with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS. Low settings produce a higher average of 85 FPS, but Medium offers better visual quality while still meeting the 60 FPS requirement. High settings drop to 55 FPS average, which misses the threshold, and Ultra falls to 42 FPS.

The data shows a system that is firmly entry-level for this game. The Arc B370's integrated-class performance limits the experience to 1080p with moderate settings. Users seeking higher resolutions or more visual fidelity would need a significantly more powerful GPU, as the CPU is not the limiting factor in any measured scenario.