Minimum

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, at 4K the system runs the game above 60 FPS on High, Medium, and Low settings. The High preset produces an average of 64.1 FPS, while Medium reaches 74.2 FPS and Low reaches 98.3 FPS. The Ultra preset falls below the 60 FPS threshold, averaging 48.6 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p gaming?

A: At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 86.8 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold. This makes Ultra the most demanding setting that still maintains smooth performance at this resolution.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F has an average benchmark score of 17177. It sits 0.3% above the AMD EPYC 7H12, 0.6% above the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U, and 0.4% below the Intel Core i5-12450H. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is 0.6% ahead of the i5-11400F.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its closest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT has an average benchmark score of 13543. It is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 7770M, 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570, 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA P106-090, and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 555.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 1080p with Low settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system delivers an average of 279.7 FPS. This is the highest frame rate recorded across all tested resolutions and settings for this game.

Q: Does the system achieve 60 FPS on all presets at 1080p?

A: Yes, every preset at 1920x1080 exceeds the 60 FPS playable threshold. The Ultra preset averages 133.6 FPS, High averages 177.2 FPS, and Medium averages 212.3 FPS.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The database places the Intel Core i5-11400F in a tight cluster of CPUs with nearly identical average benchmark scores. The closest match is the AMD EPYC 7H12, which scores 17120, a mere 0.3% behind the i5-11400F's 17177. The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U scores 17074, also 0.3% behind when rounded, and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G scores 17278, which is 0.6% ahead. The Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17239, putting it 0.4% ahead. For gaming workloads, any of these processors would deliver essentially indistinguishable performance in this title, though the i5-11400F's 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz are the specific configuration being measured.

On the graphics side, the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT holds an average benchmark score of 13543, and its nearest rivals are surprisingly close. The AMD Radeon HD 7770M scores 13536, a 0.1% difference. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 scores 13515, a 0.2% gap. The NVIDIA P106-090 scores 13470, trailing by 0.5%, while the AMD Radeon Pro 555 scores 13407, behind by 1%. These deltas are small enough that in real-world gaming, differences between these GPUs would likely be within measurement noise. The RX 9070 XT's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus and its RDNA 4.0 architecture set it apart architecturally, but the aggregate benchmark data suggests comparable overall capability to these older cards in this particular database.

For the game Minimum, a user seeking similar performance could consider pairing any of the rival CPUs with any of the rival GPUs and expect broadly similar results. The CPU percentile of 71 against all CPUs and GPU percentile of 55 against all GPUs indicate this combo sits above average on the processor side and roughly mid-pack on the graphics side.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data covers three resolutions and four quality presets, for a total of twelve measured configurations. All measurements are average frame rates; minimum and maximum values were not recorded for this game.

At 1920x1080, the system produces its highest frame rates. Low settings average 279.7 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings average 212.3 FPS, still a massive margin above playable. High settings come in at 177.2 FPS, and even the most demanding Ultra preset averages 133.6 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a drop of 146.1 FPS, meaning Ultra delivers about 47.8% of the Low preset's frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the pattern continues but with lower absolute numbers. Low settings average 177.7 FPS, Medium averages 137.2 FPS, High averages 114.8 FPS, and Ultra averages 86.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 90.9 FPS, with Ultra running at about 48.8% of Low's performance. The transition from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 36% of the frame rate at each preset, indicating a substantial pixel-count sensitivity.

At 3840x2160, frame rates drop further. Low averages 98.3 FPS, which remains comfortably above 60 FPS. Medium averages 74.2 FPS, still playable. High averages 64.1 FPS, just barely clearing the threshold. Ultra averages 48.6 FPS, falling below the playable line. The spread from Low to Ultra at 4K is 49.7 FPS, and Ultra runs at about 49.4% of Low's performance. Moving from 1440p to 4K reduces frame rates by roughly 44% to 45% depending on the preset, showing that the GPU becomes increasingly stressed as resolution climbs.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: each resolution step upward costs a significant portion of performance, and each preset step upward at a fixed resolution also reduces frame rates. The system is never GPU-bound to the point of unplayability except at the 4K Ultra combination.

The Verdict

The question posed is whether this PC can run Minimum, and the answer from the database is a clear yes across most configurations. The playable threshold is defined as 60 FPS, and the system clears that bar in eleven of the twelve measured scenarios.

At 1920x1080, all four presets are playable. The Ultra preset averages 133.6 FPS, which is more than double the threshold. This resolution offers complete freedom to use any settings without concern.

At 2560x1440, again all four presets are playable. Ultra averages 86.8 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. Users at this resolution can max out the game's settings.

At 3840x2160, three of the four presets are playable. High averages 64.1 FPS, Medium averages 74.2 FPS, and Low averages 98.3 FPS. Ultra is the only configuration that drops below the threshold, averaging 48.6 FPS. Players wanting 4K Ultra would need to accept sub-60 FPS performance or reduce settings to High.

The overall verdict is that this system is more than capable of running Minimum smoothly. The only scenario that fails the 60 FPS requirement is the most demanding combination of 4K resolution and Ultra quality. For the vast majority of gaming setups, this hardware combination provides an excellent experience with substantial headroom.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured data allows for an analysis of which component matters more at each resolution. The CPU, an Intel Core i5-11400F with 6 cores and 12 threads, shows strong single-threaded and multi-threaded performance in its benchmark scores. The GPU, an AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT with 4096 shading units and 16 GB of memory, carries the bulk of the rendering workload.

At 1080p, the frame rates are extremely high, reaching 279.7 FPS on Low settings. Such high frame rates typically indicate that the CPU is keeping up with the GPU's output, but the dramatic scaling between presets suggests the GPU still plays a major role. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 146.1 FPS, a 52.2% reduction. If the CPU were the sole bottleneck, preset changes would have a smaller impact on frame rates.

At 1440p, the scaling between presets becomes more pronounced in absolute terms but similar in percentage. Low to Ultra drops from 177.7 FPS to 86.8 FPS, a 51.2% reduction. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p reduces frame rates by about 36% across presets, which points to the GPU being increasingly responsible for the workload as pixel count grows.

At 4K, the GPU's dominance becomes clear. The 4K Low preset averages 98.3 FPS, while 4K Ultra averages 48.6 FPS. The resolution jump from 1440p to 4K costs roughly 44% to 45% of performance. This substantial drop with resolution indicates that the RX 9070 XT is the primary limiter at higher resolutions. The CPU, while important for maintaining high frame rates at 1080p, has enough headroom to avoid becoming the bottleneck at 4K.

The data implies that the CPU matters most at 1080p, where frame rates are high enough that processor throughput could constrain performance. The GPU matters increasingly as resolution rises, with 4K being almost entirely GPU-limited. For this game, the i5-11400F provides ample processing power, and the RX 9070 XT determines the playable settings at each resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

The database tracks 3712 tested combinations for Minimum, and this specific pairing of Intel Core i5-11400F with AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks at position 928. This places the combo in the top 25% of all tested configurations, a strong showing for a mainstream processor paired with a high-end graphics card.

The ranking reflects the combined capability of both components. The CPU's 71st percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates solid processor performance, while the GPU's 55th percentile among all GPUs is more modest. The combination of a well-above-average CPU with a mid-pack GPU results in a system that outperforms most tested combos in this game.

Given that the game Minimum is a Third-Person Shooter from 2014, the relatively modest GPU percentile does not prevent excellent frame rates. The game's age and optimization mean that even mid-pack GPUs can deliver high performance. The combo's rank of 928 out of 3712 means that 2784 other combinations perform worse, while 927 perform better.

For context, the nearest CPU rivals include the AMD EPYC 7H12, Intel Core i5-12450H, AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G, and Intel Core Ultra 7 164U, all within 0.6% of the i5-11400F's average score. The nearest GPU rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7770M, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570, NVIDIA P106-090, and AMD Radeon Pro 555, all within 1% of the RX 9070 XT's average score. Systems using any of these alternative components would likely rank similarly in the database.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that maintains at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which averages 133.6 FPS. This gives a massive margin above the playable threshold, meaning users can enable the highest quality settings without any frame rate concerns.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, averaging 86.8 FPS. The margin above 60 FPS is 26.8 FPS, providing comfortable headroom for demanding scenes. Even if frame rates dip below the average during intense gameplay moments, the average suggests most of the experience will be smooth.

At 3840x2160, the best settings that maintain playable performance are High, averaging 64.1 FPS. This is just 4.1 FPS above the threshold, leaving less margin for variance. Medium settings at 4K average 74.2 FPS, which offers a more comfortable buffer if consistent frame pacing is preferred. Low settings at 4K average 98.3 FPS for users who prioritize frame rate above all else. Ultra at 4K averages 48.6 FPS and should be avoided for 60 FPS play.

The recommended configuration for each resolution is clear: Ultra at 1080p, Ultra at 1440p, and High at 4K. These settings represent the best balance of visual quality and performance based on the recorded data. Users with variable refresh rate monitors may find the 4K Ultra at 48.6 FPS acceptable, but for standard 60 Hz displays, High is the appropriate choice at 4K.