Minimum

The Intel Core i5-12400 and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT form a balanced mid-range pairing for Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. The CPU sits at the 72nd percentile among all processors, while the GPU lands at the 70th percentile among all graphics cards. In practical terms, this combo delivers smooth gameplay at 1080p and 1440p, but it cannot maintain playable frame rates at 4K, regardless of settings. The data shows a clear ceiling: 4K Ultra drops to 29 FPS average, while 1080p Ultra holds 83 FPS average. This is a system that respects the game’s age but doesn’t brute-force through resolution demands.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU’s nearest rivals in aggregate benchmark score are close enough that swapping between them would produce nearly identical in-game behavior. The AMD EPYC 7643 scores 18,697 versus the i5-12400’s 18,683, a delta of -0.1%, meaning the server-class chip is effectively a wash for this game. The Intel Core i7-1355U scores 18,730 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 scores 18,811 (0.7% ahead). On the slower side, the Intel Core i3-14100F scores 18,519, which is 0.9% behind. None of these differences would manifest as a noticeable frame-rate gap in Minimum; the game is far more GPU-bound at most settings, as the FPS scaling shows.

For the GPU, the RX 6600 XT’s nearest rivals are a mixed bag. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 scores 24,277, just 0.7% below the Radeon’s 24,442. The Intel Arc A350M scores 24,647 (0.8% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti scores 24,236 (0.8% lower). Interestingly, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER scores 24,170, which is 1.1% behind the RX 6600 XT in this aggregate metric. That means a much older flagship GPU like the GTX 780 Ti or even a higher-tier RTX 2080 SUPER would behave comparably in Minimum’s workloads. If a builder already owns any of these cards, the frame-rate experience would be within a couple of percent of the RX 6600 XT.

The practical takeaway: the i5-12400 has enough single-thread and multi-thread headroom that any of its nearest rivals would not bottleneck the RX 6600 XT at 1080p or 1440p. Conversely, the GPU’s nearest rivals all sit within 1.1% of its aggregate score, so choosing any of them would yield nearly identical FPS at the same resolution and settings. The bottleneck in this pairing is almost always the GPU at higher resolutions, which the measured FPS confirms.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 3,712 tested combos for Minimum, this CPU-GPU pairing ranks 2,635th. That places it in the lower third of all combinations, but percentile ranking alone is misleading because the database includes many high-end multi-GPU and workstation setups that are irrelevant for a 2014 shooter. The rank reflects the sheer number of combos tested, not the playability of this specific pair. At 1080p, the combo delivers 83 FPS average on Ultra, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 1440p, it delivers 70 FPS average on High, again above the threshold. The rank is dragged down by 4K performance, where no settings achieve 60 FPS.

Context matters: the combo ranks 2,635th out of 3,712, meaning 1,077 combos perform worse. For a mainstream desktop CPU from 2022 and a mid-range GPU from 2021, this is a reasonable position. The data shows that the combo’s weakness is purely at 4K, where even Low settings only reach 59 FPS average — just one frame short of the playable threshold. Across all tested resolutions and settings, the combo’s average FPS ranges from 29 (4K Ultra) to 170 (1080p Low). The rank is consistent with a system that excels at 1080p, is competent at 1440p, and fails at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the RX 6600 XT and i5-12400 deliver strong results across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 170 FPS, which is more than double the 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings average 130 FPS, with a minimum of 111 FPS and a maximum of 150 FPS. High settings average 109 FPS. Ultra settings average 83 FPS. Every preset at 1080p clears the playable threshold by a wide margin; even the minimum FPS at Medium (111) is nearly double the threshold.

At 2560x1440, performance drops but remains playable on three of four presets. Low settings average 110 FPS. Medium settings average 84 FPS, with a minimum of 71 FPS and a maximum of 97 FPS. High settings average 70 FPS. Ultra settings fall to 54 FPS average, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. The transition from Medium to High costs 14 FPS on average, while the jump from High to Ultra costs another 16 FPS. The minimum FPS at Medium (71) still clears the threshold, but Ultra’s average of 54 suggests frame dips would be noticeable.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles. Low settings average 59 FPS — exactly one frame below the playable threshold. Medium settings average 45 FPS, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 52 FPS. High settings average 38 FPS. Ultra settings average 29 FPS. No preset at 4K reaches 60 FPS average. The scaling from 1080p to 4K is harsh: at High settings, the average FPS drops from 109 to 38, a 65% reduction. At Low settings, the drop is from 170 to 59, a 65% reduction as well. The GPU’s 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are likely the limiting factors at 4K, though the data doesn’t isolate memory usage.

The measured FPS data includes min/max values only for Medium settings at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the range is 111 to 150 FPS, indicating stable frame pacing. At 1440p Medium, the range is 71 to 97 FPS, still consistent. At 4K Medium, the range is 38 to 52 FPS, which shows tight variance but at an unplayable level. The absence of min/max data for other presets suggests the testing methodology captured only average FPS for those settings.

The Verdict

Using the verdictByResolution data, the answer is clear: this PC runs Minimum playably at 1080p and 1440p, but not at 4K. At 1920x1080, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with Ultra being the best visual setting that still averages 83 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low, Medium, and High are playable; High is the best setting with an average of 70 FPS. At 3840x2160, no settings are playable — the best average is 59 FPS on Low, which is one frame short of the 60 FPS threshold.

For a 1080p monitor, this combo is overkill. Even Ultra settings leave 23 FPS of headroom above the threshold. For a 1440p monitor, High settings are the sweet spot, delivering 70 FPS average with no reported minimum dips below 60 (though min data isn’t provided for High). For a 4K monitor, the answer is a firm no — the user would need to lower resolution or upgrade the GPU. The 4K Low average of 59 FPS is tantalizingly close but below the threshold, so a slight settings tweak or resolution scale would be required, but that’s outside the measured data.

The playable threshold is defined as 60 FPS. The verdict data lists playableSettings for each resolution, and the pattern is consistent: 1080p is fully playable, 1440p is playable except for Ultra, and 4K is unplayable across the board. The best settings (highest preset that clears 60 FPS) are Ultra at 1080p (83 FPS) and High at 1440p (70 FPS). At 4K, there is no best setting because none meet the threshold.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals how the workload shifts between CPU and GPU as resolution changes. At 1080p, the CPU has ample headroom. The i5-12400’s 6 cores and 12 threads, boosted to 4.40 GHz, handle the game’s logic easily. The GPU becomes the primary driver of frame rate: moving from Low to Ultra at 1080p drops the average from 170 to 83 FPS, a 51% reduction. This scaling is almost entirely GPU-side, as the CPU’s workload doesn’t change with resolution.

At 1440p, the GPU’s role intensifies. The average FPS at Low is 110, down from 170 at 1080p Low — a 35% drop. At High, the drop is from 109 to 70, a 36% reduction. The CPU is less relevant here because the i5-12400 can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them at higher resolutions. The fact that 1440p Ultra averages 54 FPS, just 6 FPS below the threshold, suggests the GPU is the sole bottleneck; the CPU’s benchmark scores (e.g., 15,989 in Cinebench R23 multi-core) are far above what a 2014 game requires.

At 4K, the GPU is almost entirely the limiting factor. The average FPS across presets ranges from 29 to 59, and the CPU’s role is negligible. The i5-12400’s single-thread score of 2,257 in Cinebench R23 is more than sufficient for Minimum’s engine. The GPU’s 10.60 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are simply not enough to push 4K past 60 FPS, even on Low. The scaling from 1440p High (70 FPS) to 4K High (38 FPS) is a 46% drop, which aligns with the pixel count increase of roughly 2.25x (though the drop is less severe due to diminishing returns).

The preset scaling tells the same story. At every resolution, the gap between Low and Ultra is roughly 50-60% of the Low value. At 1080p, the gap is 87 FPS (170 to 83). At 1440p, the gap is 56 FPS (110 to 54). At 4K, the gap is 30 FPS (59 to 29). This consistent pattern indicates that the GPU’s shading units (2048), TMUs (128), and ROPs (64) are the primary determinants of frame rate. The CPU’s 3DMark scores (e.g., 5,873 in 16-thread test) are not a factor in this game’s performance.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 60 FPS on a 1080p monitor?

A: Yes. All presets at 1920x1080 clear 60 FPS. Low averages 170 FPS, Medium 130 FPS, High 109 FPS, and Ultra 83 FPS.

Q: What is the best settings preset at 1440p?

A: High is the best playable preset at 2560x1440, averaging 70 FPS. Ultra averages 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 4K playable with this combo?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the best average is 59 FPS on Low settings, which is one frame below the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 45 FPS, High 38 FPS, and Ultra 29 FPS.

Q: How does the RX 6600 XT compare to its nearest rival GPU?

A: The RX 6600 XT scores 24,442 in aggregate benchmarks. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 is 0.7% lower, the Intel Arc A350M is 0.8% higher, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is 1.1% lower.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game at 1080p?

A: The GPU is the primary factor. At 1080p, lowering settings from Ultra to Low increases the average FPS from 83 to 170, a 105% improvement. The CPU’s performance is sufficient at all settings.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested systems?

A: This CPU-GPU pairing ranks 2,635th out of 3,712 tested combos for Minimum. This places it in the lower third, but it still achieves playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p on most presets.