Minimum

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB delivers a mixed bag of results in Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014. The measured data shows that this combination is fully capable of clearing the 60 FPS threshold at 1920x1080 on multiple presets, but struggles at higher resolutions. At 2560x1440, only the Low preset remains playable, while 3840x2160 falls short across every tested setting. This benchmark analysis breaks down the exact frame rates, ranking position, and component roles to determine where this PC stands.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this CPU-GPU combo in Minimum spans three resolutions and four quality presets each, with average frame rates that reveal a clear performance curve. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. The Low preset produces an average of 117.9 FPS, which is the highest frame rate recorded across the entire test suite. Medium follows at 93.2 FPS, High at 79.9 FPS, and Ultra at 59.4 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 24.7 FPS, while the drop from Medium to High is 13.3 FPS. The step from High to Ultra is smaller at 20.5 FPS, but it pushes the average below the 60 FPS playable threshold, which is a notable miss for a 1080p resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades significantly. The Low preset averages 76.6 FPS, which remains comfortably above 60 FPS. Medium drops to 57.3 FPS, just under the threshold, while High falls to 51.7 FPS. Ultra is the weakest at 38.6 FPS. The scaling from 1920x1080 Low (117.9 FPS) to 2560x1440 Low (76.6 FPS) represents a 41.3 FPS reduction, or roughly 35% lower performance. For Medium, the drop is from 93.2 FPS to 57.3 FPS, a 35.9 FPS decrease. High goes from 79.9 FPS to 51.7 FPS, losing 28.2 FPS, and Ultra goes from 59.4 FPS to 38.6 FPS, a 20.8 FPS reduction.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly below the playable threshold. Low averages 42.1 FPS, which is the best 4K result. High averages 29.8 FPS, Medium averages 29.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 19.6 FPS. Notably, the High and Medium presets at 4K produce nearly identical averages, with a difference of just 0.4 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is hitting a rendering bottleneck that these preset changes do not alleviate. The jump from 2560x1440 Ultra (38.6 FPS) to 3840x2160 Low (42.1 FPS) is counterintuitive but reflects the different workload characteristics—lower settings at a higher resolution can sometimes yield better frame rates than higher settings at a lower resolution when the GPU is the limiting factor.

The data also shows that min and max FPS values were not recorded for any resolution or preset, so the analysis relies solely on average frame rates. This means that frame-time consistency and stutter behavior are not captured, and the verdicts are based purely on average performance. The playable threshold is defined as 60 FPS, and the measured averages indicate that this combo clears it at 1920x1080 for Low, Medium, and High, and at 2560x1440 for Low only.

How This Combo Ranks

In the global ranking of tested hardware combinations for Minimum, this Intel Core i3-12100F plus NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB setup sits at rank 3261 out of 3712 total combos. That places it in the 12th percentile of tested configurations, meaning roughly 88% of other combos deliver higher average frame rates in this game. The rank of 3261 is a low position, which is expected given the GPU’s modest specifications and the game’s ability to scale across a wide range of hardware.

The percentileVsAllCpus for the CPU is 68, indicating that the i3-12100F outperforms 68% of all tested CPUs in general benchmarks. The GPU percentileVsAllGpus is 50, meaning it sits at the median of all tested GPUs. However, the combo’s in-game rank is much lower than either component’s individual percentile would suggest. This discrepancy points to the specific demands of Minimum—likely a combination of CPU-bound scenes and GPU-limited rendering that penalizes this particular pairing more than synthetic benchmarks would indicate.

The comboRankInGame of 3261 out of 3712 is a broad measure, and it does not distinguish between resolutions or presets. At 1920x1080, the combo’s performance is respectable, with Ultra barely missing the threshold. At higher resolutions, the rank would likely be even lower, as the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck. The data does not include a per-resolution rank, but the measured FPS values at 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 show a clear decline that would push the combo further down the list relative to stronger GPUs.

For context, the CPU’s nearestRivals include the Intel Core 3 N355 with an average score of 13492, the Intel Core i5-9500 at 13452, the Intel Core 5 120UL at 13594, and the Intel Core i7-1250U at 13351. The deltaPct values are 0, 0.3, -0.7, and 1.1 respectively. These rivals are within a tight performance band, so swapping the i3-12100F for any of these CPUs would likely produce near-identical frame rates in Minimum, assuming the GPU remains unchanged. The GPU has no nearestRivals listed, so no direct comparisons are available for the RTX 3050 4 GB.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Based on the nearestRivals data for the CPU, several alternative processors would behave nearly identically to the Intel Core i3-12100F in Minimum when paired with the same RTX 3050 4 GB GPU. The Intel Core 3 N355 is the closest match, with an average benchmark score of 13492 and a deltaPct of 0, meaning it is statistically indistinguishable from the i3-12100F in synthetic tests. The Intel Core i5-9500 trails by 0.3%, with a score of 13452, so users switching to that older six-core chip would see essentially the same frame rates. The Intel Core 5 120UL is slightly faster at 13594, with a deltaPct of -0.7, indicating a marginal performance edge that would not translate into a meaningful FPS difference in this game. The Intel Core i7-1250U, with a score of 13351 and a deltaPct of 1.1, is the slowest of the group, but the 1.1% gap is negligible in real-world gaming.

For the GPU, the nearestRivals list is empty, so no direct performance equivalents are provided. However, the RTX 3050 4 GB’s specifications—2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores—place it in a specific performance tier. The memory configuration of 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth is a limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the data shows with the steep FPS drops at 2560x1440 and 3840x2160. A GPU with more memory or higher bandwidth would likely behave differently, but the FACT PACK does not include any rival GPU names or scores to compare against.

In practical terms, if a user were to pair the i3-12100F with a different GPU, the frame rates would scale based on that GPU’s performance, but no data is available for such combinations. Conversely, pairing the RTX 3050 4 GB with a faster CPU from the nearestRivals list would yield minimal gains, as the CPU’s benchmark scores are all within 1.1% of each other. The bottleneck in Minimum at higher resolutions is clearly the GPU, while at 1920x1080 the CPU is sufficient to drive the RTX 3050 4 GB to respectable frame rates.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Minimum? The answer depends entirely on the target resolution and preset. The verdictByResolution data is explicit: at 3840x2160, there are no playable settings, meaning no preset achieves an average of 60 FPS or higher. The best result at 4K is Low with 42.1 FPS, which is 17.9 FPS short of the threshold. At 2560x1440, only the Low preset is playable, with an average of 76.6 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS at 57.3, 51.7, and 38.6 FPS respectively.

At 1920x1080, the combo succeeds on three presets: High with 79.9 FPS, Low with 117.9 FPS, and Medium with 93.2 FPS. Ultra misses the threshold by a narrow margin at 59.4 FPS, which is just 0.6 FPS below the 60 FPS cutoff. This is a frustrating result, as a slight reduction in settings or a minor overclock would likely push it over the line, but the measured data shows it as unplayable by the strict standard.

The verdict is that this PC can run Minimum at 1920x1080 on High settings, which is the best playable preset at that resolution, and at 2560x1440 on Low settings. For 3840x2160, the hardware is insufficient, and users would need to lower the resolution or accept sub-60 FPS performance. The data indicates that 1920x1080 is the sweet spot for this combo, with headroom on Low and Medium presets, but Ultra remains just out of reach.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Intel Core i3-12100F and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB in Minimum shifts with resolution and preset. At 1920x1080, the CPU has enough headroom to keep the GPU fed, as evidenced by the large frame rate differences between presets. The jump from Low (117.9 FPS) to Medium (93.2 FPS) is 24.7 FPS, and from Medium to High (79.9 FPS) is another 13.3 FPS, indicating that the GPU is the primary scaling factor—each preset change alters the GPU workload significantly, and the CPU keeps up without becoming a constraint.

At 2560x1440, the GPU begins to dominate. The scaling from Low (76.6 FPS) to Medium (57.3 FPS) is a 19.3 FPS drop, and from Medium to High (51.7 FPS) is 5.6 FPS. The smaller differences between Medium, High, and Ultra suggest that the GPU is nearing its limits, and the CPU’s role diminishes. The drop from 1920x1080 Low to 2560x1440 Low is 41.3 FPS, which is a larger relative loss than the preset scaling within a single resolution. This indicates that the GPU’s pixel throughput and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors, not the CPU.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is the clear bottleneck. The frame rates are tightly clustered across presets—Low at 42.1 FPS, High at 29.8 FPS, Medium at 29.4 FPS, and Ultra at 19.6 FPS—with High and Medium differing by only 0.4 FPS. This suggests that the GPU is so heavily loaded that preset changes have minimal impact on performance. The CPU’s 4 cores and 8 threads are sufficient to handle the game’s logic at this resolution, but the RTX 3050 4 GB’s 192.0 GB/s bandwidth and 4 GB memory capacity are overwhelmed.

The scaling between resolutions also highlights the CPU’s role. From 1920x1080 High (79.9 FPS) to 2560x1440 High (51.7 FPS), the drop is 28.2 FPS, which is a 35% reduction. From 2560x1440 High to 3840x2160 High (29.8 FPS), the drop is 21.9 FPS, or 42%. The increasing percentage loss at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU is the limiting factor, while the CPU’s performance remains constant. The i3-12100F’s single-thread score of 893 in 3dmark and 1674 in Cinebench R23 suggests it can handle the game’s CPU demands, but the GPU simply lacks the raw power for 4K rendering.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the best settings are defined as the most demanding preset that maintains an average of 60 FPS or higher. At 3840x2160, no preset meets this criterion, so there is no best setting. The closest is Low at 42.1 FPS, but that is 17.9 FPS below the threshold, and the verdictByResolution confirms that playableSettings is empty for 4K.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are Low, with an average of 76.6 FPS. This is the only preset that clears 60 FPS, and it does so with a comfortable margin of 16.6 FPS. Medium is close at 57.3 FPS, but it falls short by 2.7 FPS, so it is not recommended if the user demands smooth gameplay. The data indicates that Low is the optimal choice for 1440p, providing the highest playable quality without sacrificing frame rate.

At 1920x1080, the best settings are High, with an average of 79.9 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that stays above 60 FPS, and it offers a 19.9 FPS margin over the threshold. Medium also works at 93.2 FPS, and Low delivers 117.9 FPS, but High provides the best visual quality while remaining playable. Ultra is excluded because its 59.4 FPS average is just 0.6 FPS below the threshold, making it a borderline case that fails the strict 60 FPS requirement.

The recommended configurations are therefore as follows: for 1920x1080, use High settings to get 79.9 FPS; for 2560x1440, use Low settings to get 76.6 FPS; for 3840x2160, no settings are viable, and users should consider a lower resolution or a more powerful GPU. The data shows that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, with enough headroom for High settings, while 1440p requires a significant settings reduction to remain playable.