Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Minimum with the Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT shows a clear performance curve across the three tested resolutions. All measurements are average FPS values; the database does not contain min or max frame data for this configuration, so the analysis relies on averages only.

At 1920x1080, the system is overwhelmingly fast. On Low settings the average reaches 213.2 FPS, which is more than triple the 60 FPS playability threshold. Medium settings produce 165 FPS on average, High settings drop to 136.8 FPS, and the most demanding Ultra preset still holds 106.3 FPS. This means even at the maximum quality level, the frame rate stays comfortably above the threshold with roughly 77% headroom over 60 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the scaling is predictable but still strong. Low settings deliver 135.5 FPS, Medium comes in at 105.5 FPS, and High manages 85.8 FPS. Ultra is the first preset to approach the 60 FPS line, with an average of 69.4 FPS. That is still above playable, but the margin has narrowed to about 15%. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 66.1 FPS, indicating that the GPU is being pushed harder as pixel count grows.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes substantially. Ultra drops to 36.6 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold by a large margin. High settings recover to 49.1 FPS, still short of playable. Medium reaches 55.4 FPS, barely under the line. Only Low settings clear the bar, with an average of 76.6 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra here is exactly 40 FPS, showing that the highest preset is roughly half the speed of the lowest at 4K.

The data shows no min or max FPS values recorded, so frame pacing and 1% lows cannot be assessed. For a third-person shooter, consistent frame delivery matters, and the averages suggest that lower presets provide enough headroom to absorb occasional dips, while the 4K Ultra figure of 36.6 FPS leaves little room for stability.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings?*

A: Yes. The recorded average FPS at 1080p Ultra is 106.3, which is well above the 60 FPS playability threshold. The system has roughly 76% more performance than needed at this setting.

Q: What is the best preset at 2560x1440?

A: Ultra is playable at 1440p with an average of 69.4 FPS. The verdict data lists High, Low, Medium, and Ultra all as playable settings, with Ultra being the most demanding option that still clears 60 FPS.

Q: Is 4K playable with this hardware?

A: Only at Low settings. The 3840x2160 Low preset averages 76.6 FPS. Medium averages 55.4 FPS, High averages 49.1 FPS, and Ultra averages 36.6 FPS, all of which fall below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How much performance is lost going from 1080p to 1440p at the same preset?

A: At Ultra, the average drops from 106.3 FPS at 1080p to 69.4 FPS at 1440p, a loss of 36.9 FPS. At Low, it drops from 213.2 FPS to 135.5 FPS, a loss of 77.7 FPS. The relative reduction is larger at lower presets, which indicates the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

Q: Does the RX 6750 XT outperform its nearest rivals in this game?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 26011, and its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R9 M395X, scores 25891, a delta of 0.5%. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile scores 25740, which is 1.1% behind. These are small differences, so in-game performance would be nearly identical among these cards.

Q: What is the CPU's performance position relative to other processors?

A: The i5-10400F sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 14185. Its closest rival, the AMD EPYC 7552, scores 14115 (0.5% lower), while the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232 (0.3% higher). The CPU is a mid-pack performer, not a bottleneck for this GPU at most settings.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals how the workload shifts between the Intel Core i5-10400F and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT as resolution and settings change. At 1920x1080, the system produces very high frame rates across all presets, with Low hitting 213.2 FPS and Ultra still managing 106.3 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 106.9 FPS at 1080p. This wide gap suggests the GPU is doing the heavy lifting, since lowering graphical settings directly translates into large frame rate gains. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, can feed the GPU fast enough at these lower resolutions.

At 2560x1440, the spread between Low and Ultra narrows to 66.1 FPS (135.5 down to 69.4). The percentage reduction from Low to Ultra is about 49%, which is smaller than the 50% reduction seen at 1080p. This indicates the GPU is becoming more saturated as pixel count increases, but the CPU still keeps up. The i5-10400F's single-thread performance, reflected in its 3DMark single-thread score of 688 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1451, is sufficient to avoid becoming the primary constraint.

At 3840x2160, the picture reverses. The spread from Low to Ultra is 40 FPS (76.6 down to 36.6), which is a 52% drop. However, the absolute FPS values are much lower. The GPU is now the dominant factor: even at Low settings, the 4K resolution demands enough pixel throughput that the RX 6750 XT cannot reach the frame rates seen at lower resolutions. The CPU's role diminishes because the GPU is spending more time on rasterization and less time waiting for draw calls.

The scaling between resolutions at the same preset tells the story more clearly. At Ultra, going from 1080p to 1440p reduces FPS by 34.7%, and from 1440p to 4K reduces it by another 47.4%. At Low, the corresponding reductions are 36.4% and 43.4%. These percentages are similar, which means the workload scales roughly linearly with pixel count. The GPU, with its 2560 shading units and 160 texture mapping units, is the limiting factor at 4K, while the CPU's 12 threads and 12 MB shared L3 cache provide enough headroom for the lower resolutions.

The verdict data confirms this split. At 1080p and 1440p, all four presets are listed as playable, so the CPU is not holding back any setting. At 4K, only Low is playable, which suggests that the GPU cannot handle the higher presets regardless of CPU performance. The i5-10400F's 68th percentile ranking among CPUs, with an average score of 14185, is adequate for this game. The RX 6750 XT's 71st percentile ranking among GPUs, with an average score of 26011, is also solid, but the 4K results show its limits.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Minimum? The answer depends on the target resolution and settings, and the verdict data provides clear guidance.

At 1920x1080, the system runs the game at every preset with a wide margin. Ultra averages 106.3 FPS, which is 77% above the 60 FPS threshold. High hits 136.8 FPS, Medium reaches 165 FPS, and Low tops out at 213.2 FPS. Any setting is playable, and even the most demanding option leaves substantial headroom for frame drops. This is the resolution where the hardware shines.

At 2560x1440, all four presets are also playable. Ultra averages 69.4 FPS, which is above the threshold but with less margin than at 1080p. High delivers 85.8 FPS, Medium 105.5 FPS, and Low 135.5 FPS. The verdict lists High, Low, Medium, and Ultra all as playable settings. If the monitor is 1440p, the user can choose Ultra and stay above 60 FPS, though the margin is modest.

At 3840x2160, the situation is restrictive. Only Low settings are playable, with an average of 76.6 FPS. Medium falls to 55.4 FPS, which is 4.6 FPS short of the threshold. High drops to 49.1 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 36.6 FPS. For 4K gaming, the user must accept Low quality to maintain a smooth experience. The database records these results as measured data, so they reflect real-world performance for this specific combination.

The CPU and GPU are both above the 60th percentile in their respective categories, and the combo ranks 1786 out of 3712 tested combinations. This places the system in the upper half of all tested hardware pairs. For a game released in 2014, this hardware is more than capable at mainstream resolutions, but 4K Ultra is out of reach.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides context for what other hardware would behave similarly to this pairing.

For the Intel Core i5-10400F, the closest alternatives are all within 0.6% of its average benchmark score of 14185. The Intel Xeon 6756E scores 14163, which is 0.2% lower. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, 0.5% lower. The Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, 0.3% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, 0.6% higher. These deltas are negligible, so any of these processors would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum. The Xeon and EPYC are server parts, but their compute performance aligns closely with the i5-10400F. The Ryzen 3 7320C is a lower-end mobile chip, yet its benchmark score suggests it would not bottleneck the RX 6750 XT differently.

For the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT, the nearest rivals are equally close. The AMD Radeon R9 M395X scores 25891, which is 0.5% lower than the RX 6750 XT's 26011. The AMD FirePro W7100 scores 25856, 0.6% lower. The AMD FirePro D700 scores 25842, 0.7% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile scores 25740, 1.1% lower. These are all within a small margin, so swapping the GPU for any of these would yield nearly the same FPS in this game. The R9 M395X and FirePro cards are older workstation parts, but their average scores put them in the same performance class. The RTX 3080 Ti Mobile is a laptop GPU, yet its score indicates it would perform similarly.

The practical takeaway is that the i5-10400F and RX 6750 XT sit in a dense performance cluster. Users with any of these rival components can expect the same playability verdicts: 1080p and 1440p at all presets, and 4K only at Low settings. The deltas are too small to change the outcome at any resolution or preset.

Best Settings per Resolution

The database provides a clear recommendation for the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at each resolution.

At 1920x1080, the best setting is Ultra. The average FPS at Ultra is 106.3, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold. This is the highest quality preset available, and it runs comfortably. There is no need to compromise at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the best setting is also Ultra. The average FPS at Ultra is 69.4, which clears the threshold by 9.4 FPS. This is playable, but the margin is smaller than at 1080p. If the user wants more headroom, High settings at 85.8 FPS would be a safer choice, but Ultra meets the playability bar.

At 3840x2160, the best setting is Low. The average FPS at Low is 76.6, which is above the threshold. Medium at 55.4 FPS is not playable, so Low is the only option that meets the 60 FPS requirement. This means sacrificing most graphical features at 4K, but the frame rate is smooth.

These recommendations come directly from the verdict data. The playable settings list at 1080p and 1440p includes all four presets, so Ultra is the obvious pick. At 4K, only Low is listed as playable, so that is the default choice. For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, the 1440p Ultra option offers a balance, while 4K users must accept Low to stay above the threshold.