Minimum

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the AMD Radeon 760M integrated graphics delivers a fundamentally constrained experience in Minimum, according to the measured data. Across every resolution and preset combination tested, the average frame rate falls below the 60 FPS playability threshold. The strongest result is 58 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which is marginally short of the target. The data indicates that this combo cannot achieve a playable experience at any tested configuration, with performance degrading sharply as resolution increases.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent pattern: performance scales predictably with resolution and settings, but never reaches a playable level. At 1920x1080, the most favorable scenario, the Low preset produces an average of 58 FPS. The Medium preset averages 44 FPS, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 51 FPS. High settings drop the average to 37 FPS, while Ultra falls to 28 FPS. These numbers show that even at the lowest resolution, only the Low preset approaches the 60 FPS target, and it still misses by 2 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance gap widens considerably. The Low preset averages 37 FPS, which is a 21 FPS drop from the same settings at 1080p. Medium averages 29 FPS, with a minimum of 24 FPS and a maximum of 33 FPS. High settings produce an average of 24 FPS, and Ultra drops to 18 FPS. The data shows that the transition from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 35-40% of the frame rate at each preset, indicating a strong resolution dependency.

At 3840x2160, the results are largely unplayable by any standard. The Low preset averages only 20 FPS. Medium averages 15 FPS, with a minimum of 13 FPS and a maximum of 18 FPS. High settings drop to 13 FPS, and Ultra averages just 10 FPS. These figures represent a severe degradation from 1440p, with the 4K Low result being less than half the 1080p Low average. The absence of min/max data for several configurations suggests that the frame time variance is either negligible or too erratic to capture reliably.

The preset scaling at each resolution follows a consistent pattern. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium reduces the average by 14 FPS, from Medium to High by 7 FPS, and from High to Ultra by 9 FPS. At 1440p, the corresponding drops are 8 FPS, 5 FPS, and 6 FPS. At 4K, the drops are 5 FPS, 2 FPS, and 3 FPS. This demonstrates that the performance cost of higher settings diminishes as resolution increases, likely because the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher pixel counts.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo achieves in Minimum?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 58 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is 2 FPS short of the 60 FPS playability threshold, making it the closest result to playable but still below the target.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with this CPU and GPU combination?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the best average is 20 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 15 FPS, High averages 13 FPS, and Ultra averages 10 FPS. None of these approach the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the Medium preset perform at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 29, with a minimum of 24 and a maximum of 33. This represents a moderate frame rate that is consistent but far from playable.

Q: Which resolution and preset combination yields the most stable frame rate?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 shows the narrowest spread, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 51 FPS, producing an average of 44 FPS. This indicates relatively consistent frame delivery compared to other tested configurations.

Q: Does the Ultra preset ever exceed 30 FPS?

A: No. At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 28 FPS. At 2560x1440, it averages 18 FPS. At 3840x2160, it averages 10 FPS. The Ultra preset never reaches 30 FPS at any resolution.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: The difference is 30 FPS. Low averages 58 FPS, while Ultra averages 28 FPS. This represents a 52% reduction in average frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest preset.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU at different resolutions, though the overall outcome is dominated by GPU limitations. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a high-end mobile processor, with a 95th percentile ranking among all CPUs and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35314. This indicates substantial headroom for CPU-bound tasks. However, the AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated GPU that ranks in the 35th percentile among all GPUs, with a Passmark G3D score of 5310. This disparity suggests that the GPU is the primary bottleneck in most scenarios.

At 1920x1080, the scaling between presets reflects a GPU-bound workload. The drop from Low to Ultra is 30 FPS, which is substantial but not catastrophic. This indicates that the GPU is still able to process the lower resolution with relative efficiency, and the CPU is not limiting the frame rate. The fact that the 1080p Low average of 58 FPS is close to the 60 FPS threshold suggests that the system is near its practical limit at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the performance degradation becomes more pronounced. The 37 FPS average on Low is a significant drop from the 58 FPS at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is struggling with the increased pixel count. The CPU's capabilities are likely underutilized at this resolution, as the GPU cannot keep up with the render workload. The frame rate scaling between presets at 1440p is more linear, which is typical of GPU-bound scenarios where the GPU is saturated.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly overwhelmed. The 20 FPS average on Low is less than half the 1080p Low result, and the Ultra preset at 10 FPS is effectively unplayable. The CPU's role at this resolution is minimal, as the GPU is the sole limiting factor. The data suggests that the Radeon 760M's 512 shading units and 16 ROPs are insufficient for 4K rendering in Minimum, regardless of the CPU's capabilities.

The resolution scaling between 1080p and 1440p shows a 21 FPS drop on Low settings, while the scaling between 1440p and 4K shows a 17 FPS drop. This indicates that the GPU's performance degradation is not linear with pixel count, suggesting inefficiencies in the rendering pipeline at higher resolutions. The CPU's strong single-thread performance, evidenced by a Geekbench single-core score of 2464, does not compensate for the GPU's limitations at these resolutions.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 provide context for CPU performance. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX has an average benchmark score of 76513, which is 1.6% higher than the AI Max+ 395's score of 77740. The Intel Core i9-14900K scores 79097, which is 1.7% higher, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX scores 76212, which is 2% lower. These deltas are all within 2%, indicating that the AI Max+ 395 offers comparable CPU performance to these desktop-class processors, despite being a mobile chip.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon 760M's nearest rivals show a tight cluster of performance. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has an average score of 6001, which is 0.3% higher than the 760M's 6019. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M scores 6000, also 0.3% higher. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5996, which is 0.4% higher. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049, which is 0.5% lower. These results indicate that the 760M performs within a narrow band of these discrete GPUs, with all differences below 1%.

The combination of a top-tier CPU with a mid-range integrated GPU means that the system's gaming performance is effectively defined by the GPU. Users seeking similar frame rates in Minimum would find that any of the GPU rivals listed would produce comparable results, assuming the CPU does not become a bottleneck. However, the CPU's performance headroom is substantial, and the system is not CPU-limited in this game at any tested resolution.

The percentile rankings further contextualize this. The CPU's 95th percentile ranking places it among the top 5% of all processors, while the GPU's 35th percentile places it in the bottom third. This creates a significant performance asymmetry that is reflected in the measured frame rates. The system's gaming performance is far below what the CPU alone would suggest, confirming the GPU as the limiting factor.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and AMD Radeon 760M combination ranks 3701 out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the bottom 0.3% of all systems tested, indicating that it is one of the weakest configurations for this game. The rank is heavily influenced by the GPU's limitations, as the CPU's strong benchmark scores do not translate into playable frame rates.

This near-bottom ranking is consistent with the measured FPS data. The system fails to reach 60 FPS at any resolution or preset, with the best result being 58 FPS at 1080p Low. The combination of a high-end CPU with an entry-level integrated GPU creates a mismatch that is particularly detrimental in a game like Minimum, which appears to be GPU-intensive based on the scaling patterns.

The data suggests that the 760M's performance ceiling is the primary constraint. With a Passmark G3D score of 5310 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400, the GPU is positioned well below the threshold needed for smooth gameplay. The CPU's 95th percentile ranking is irrelevant in this context, as the GPU cannot deliver the necessary frame rates to utilize the CPU's processing power.

The 3701st rank out of 3712 combos means that only 11 tested configurations perform worse. This places the system in the lowest percentile of tested hardware for this game, making it unsuitable for any serious gaming use case. The verdict data confirms this, with no playable settings listed for any resolution.

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and AMD Radeon 760M combination cannot run Minimum at a playable level, based on the measured data. The verdictByResolution field shows no playable settings at any resolution, with the best average FPS being 58 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This falls short of the 60 FPS threshold by 2 FPS, making it the only configuration that approaches playability.

At 2560x1440, the best result is 37 FPS on Low settings, which is 23 FPS below the threshold. At 3840x2160, the best result is 20 FPS on Low settings, which is 40 FPS below the threshold. None of the tested presets at any resolution clear the 60 FPS bar, and the system is therefore not recommended for this game.

The data indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The 512 shading units and 16 ROPs of the Radeon 760M are insufficient for the demands of Minimum, even at 1080p. The CPU's strong performance cannot compensate for this limitation. Users seeking to play this game would need a more powerful GPU, as the current configuration does not provide a viable gaming experience.

For 1080p gaming, the system is close but not sufficient. The 58 FPS average on Low settings suggests that minor tweaks or a slight reduction in resolution could potentially reach the threshold, but the measured data does not support any configuration that achieves 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p averages 44 FPS, and the High preset averages 37 FPS, both well below the target. The system is best suited for less demanding titles or non-gaming workloads, as its CPU capabilities are substantial but underutilized in this game.