Minimum

The Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 combination delivers a clear performance profile for Minimum, a Third-Person Shooter from 2014. The recorded data shows a system that is highly capable at 1080p, acceptable at 1440p with settings adjustments, and not suitable for 4K gaming. The analysis below breaks down the measured performance, compares the components to their nearest rivals, and identifies the optimal settings for each resolution.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU in this system each sit within a tightly clustered group of alternatives based on their average benchmark scores in the database.

The Intel Core i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185, placing it in the 68th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are remarkably close in performance. The Intel Xeon 6756E scores 14163, a delta of 0.2 percent. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, a 0.5 percent delta. On the other side, the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, which is 0.3 percent higher, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, 0.6 percent higher. The differences between these processors are negligible, meaning any of these alternatives would provide effectively identical CPU-bound performance in Minimum. The i5-10400F offers 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, but the benchmark data suggests that the gaming experience would be indistinguishable from any of these rival chips.

For the GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 has an average benchmark score of 9780, placing it in the 47th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are equally close. The AMD FirePro W5000 scores 9803, a 0.2 percent delta. The NVIDIA Quadro M2000M scores 9832, which is 0.5 percent higher. The NVIDIA Tesla M10 scores 9724, a 0.6 percent delta below, and the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 scores 9716, a 0.7 percent delta below. These deltas are all under one percent, so swapping the GTX 1070 for any of these alternatives would not meaningfully change frame rates. The GTX 1070 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a substantial configuration for a 2016 GPU, but its direct rivals in the database are similarly equipped in terms of overall compute capability.

The implication of these rival clusters is that the system's performance is not an outlier. Any of the four CPUs listed would pair with any of the four GPUs listed to produce nearly the same results in Minimum. The data suggests the bottleneck behavior and frame pacing would be consistent across all these combinations.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals how the workload shifts between CPU and GPU as resolution changes. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves 140 FPS. At 2560x1440 with Low settings, it drops to 90 FPS. At 3840x2160 with Low settings, it falls to 49 FPS. The progression from 1080p to 1440p is a 36 percent reduction in frame rate, and from 1440p to 4K it is a 46 percent reduction. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU becomes progressively more dominant as resolution increases.

The CPU's role is most visible at 1080p. The i5-10400F has a passmark single-thread score of 2541 and a passmark multithread score of 12115. At 1080p Low, the frame rate of 140 FPS approaches what the CPU can feed to the GPU. The 3dmark 2-thread score of 1350 and 4-thread score of 2560 suggest that the processor has ample headroom for a game from 2014, which likely does not utilize all 12 threads heavily. The L3 cache is 12 MB shared, and the memory bandwidth is 42.7 GB/s over dual-channel DDR4, which is sufficient for this workload.

At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. The GTX 1070's pixel rate of 107.7 GPixel/s and texture rate of 202.0 GTexel/s are simply not enough to maintain high frame rates at 3840x2160. The FP32 throughput of 6.463 TFLOPS becomes the ceiling. At 4K Ultra, the system averages 24 FPS, which is unplayable by any standard. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 25 FPS (49 vs 24), showing that the GPU is saturated regardless of settings.

The medium settings data provides the clearest look at scaling. At 1080p Medium, the average is 107 FPS with a minimum of 91 and maximum of 123. At 1440p Medium, it is 69 FPS with a minimum of 59 and maximum of 79. At 4K Medium, it is 37 FPS with a minimum of 32 and maximum of 43. The frame time variance also increases with resolution, as evidenced by the widening gap between minimum and maximum at 4K.

The role split is therefore straightforward: at 1080p, the CPU contributes meaningfully, but the GPU still does the heavy lifting; at 1440p, the GPU is clearly the primary constraint; at 4K, the GPU is completely overwhelmed and no CPU improvement would help.

Best Settings per Resolution

The database records the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS for each resolution.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 68 FPS. This is the most demanding setting available, and it clears the 60 FPS threshold comfortably. The High preset runs at 90 FPS, Medium at 107 FPS, and Low at 140 FPS, but Ultra is the best choice since it maintains 68 FPS while providing the maximum visual quality. The verdict data confirms that all four presets are playable at 1080p, with Ultra being the best.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the best choice, averaging 69 FPS. The minimum recorded at Medium is 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold, but the average is solidly above it. High runs at 58 FPS, which is below the threshold, and Ultra runs at 44 FPS. Low runs at 90 FPS but offers reduced visual fidelity. The best settings are Medium, as it is the most demanding preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The High preset averages 31 FPS, Medium averages 37 FPS, Low averages 49 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The verdict data lists no playable settings for 4K. The best settings field is null, meaning there is no recommended configuration for this resolution.

The Verdict

This PC can run Minimum, but the experience depends entirely on the chosen resolution.

At 1920x1080, the system runs the game at Ultra settings with an average of 68 FPS. All four presets clear the 60 FPS threshold, making 1080p the fully playable resolution for this combination. The CPU and GPU work well together here, with the i5-10400F providing enough single-thread performance and the GTX 1070 delivering sufficient pixel throughput.

At 2560x1440, the system is partially playable. Low and Medium settings clear 60 FPS, with Medium averaging 69 FPS. High and Ultra do not, with High at 58 FPS and Ultra at 44 FPS. The best playable setting is Medium. This is a usable resolution for the game, but visual quality must be moderated.

At 3840x2160, the system cannot maintain 60 FPS at any setting. The highest average is 49 FPS at Low, which is below the threshold. The verdict data confirms that no playable settings exist for 4K. The GTX 1070 lacks the raw fill rate and memory bandwidth for 4K gaming in this title.

The overall assessment is that this is a solid 1080p machine for Minimum, a capable 1440p machine with reduced settings, and an unsuitable 4K machine. The 6.463 TFLOPS of GPU compute and 256.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth are enough for 1080p Ultra and 1440p Medium, but not for 4K.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 60 FPS on 1920x1080?

A: Yes. All four presets clear 60 FPS at 1080p. The Ultra preset averages 68 FPS, High averages 90 FPS, Medium averages 107 FPS, and Low averages 140 FPS.

Q: What is the best setting for 2560x1440?

A: Medium is the best playable setting, averaging 69 FPS. High averages 58 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold, and Ultra averages 44 FPS.

Q: Is 4K playable with this hardware?

A: No. The highest average at 3840x2160 is 49 FPS at Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra averages 24 FPS, High averages 31 FPS, and Medium averages 37 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1070 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The GTX 1070 has an average benchmark score of 9780. Its nearest rival, the AMD FirePro W5000, scores 9803, a delta of 0.2 percent. The NVIDIA Quadro M2000M scores 9832, a 0.5 percent delta. Performance is effectively identical across these cards.

Q: How does the i5-10400F compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185. The Intel Xeon 6756E scores 14163, a delta of 0.2 percent, and the AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, a delta of 0.5 percent. These differences are negligible for gaming.

Q: What is the frame rate variance at Medium settings?

A: At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 91 FPS and the maximum is 123 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 59 FPS and the maximum is 79 FPS. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 32 FPS and the maximum is 43 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 ranks 3064 out of 3712 tested combinations in Minimum. This places the system in the lower portion of the database, specifically in the 17th percentile of all tested combos. The rank reflects that while the system is perfectly capable at 1080p, the large number of more powerful combinations in the database pushes it down the list.

The rank is heavily influenced by the GPU's position in the 47th percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 1070 is a mid-range card from 2016, and the database contains many newer and more powerful GPUs that achieve higher frame rates in this game. The CPU's 68th percentile ranking is more respectable, but the overall combo rank is determined by the weaker component in the gaming workload.

For context, the system is neither at the bottom nor the top. The 648 combinations ranked below it likely feature older or weaker hardware, while the 3063 combinations above it include more recent GPUs with higher compute throughput. The data suggests that this combo is a baseline for 1080p gaming from the mid-2010s era.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete set of measured frame rates for this combination is as follows.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 24 FPS. The High preset averages 31 FPS. The Medium preset averages 37 FPS, with a minimum of 32 and a maximum of 43. The Low preset averages 49 FPS. No 4K preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 44 FPS. The High preset averages 58 FPS. The Medium preset averages 69 FPS, with a minimum of 59 and a maximum of 79. The Low preset averages 90 FPS. Medium is the best playable setting, with High just missing the threshold.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 68 FPS. The High preset averages 90 FPS. The Medium preset averages 107 FPS, with a minimum of 91 and a maximum of 123. The Low preset averages 140 FPS. All presets are playable, with Ultra providing the best visual quality at a stable 68 FPS average.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: each resolution step up from 1080p to 1440p to 4K reduces frame rates by roughly a third to a half, depending on the preset. The 1080p results show a system with headroom, the 1440p results show a balanced system, and the 4K results show a GPU-bound system that cannot cope with the pixel count. The minimum and maximum values, where recorded, indicate that frame pacing is stable at 1080p and 1440p, with the 4K Medium minimum of 32 FPS confirming the overall lack of playability at that resolution.