Minimum

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the Intel Arc B390 presents a fascinating case study for running Minimum, a third-person shooter released in 2014. The recorded data shows a system that is highly resolution-dependent, with the GPU acting as the primary constraint at higher settings. This analysis breaks down the measured performance across three resolutions and four quality presets, providing a clear picture of what this combination can and cannot achieve.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combination delivers playable frame rates across most settings. The Low preset records an average of 95 FPS, which is the highest performance measured for this configuration at any resolution. Moving to the Medium preset, the average drops to 72 FPS, with a minimum of 62 FPS and a maximum of 83 FPS. The High preset still clears the 60 FPS threshold with an average of 61 FPS. The Ultra preset, however, falls below the playable threshold, recording an average of 46 FPS. This pattern indicates that at 1080p, the system has sufficient headroom for the lower three presets, but the demands of Ultra exceed what the hardware can sustain at a consistent 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance picture becomes more restrictive. The Low preset is the only option that maintains an average at or above 60 FPS, recording exactly 61 FPS. The Medium preset averages 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS. The High preset drops to 39 FPS average, and the Ultra preset falls further to 30 FPS average. The scaling between Low and Medium at this resolution is steep, a 14 FPS drop, which suggests that the additional visual effects in Medium place a significant load on the system. The gap between Medium and High is 8 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 9 FPS, showing a fairly consistent degradation as settings increase.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles across the board. The Low preset records an average of 33 FPS, which is the best result at this resolution. The Medium preset averages 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS. The High preset averages 21 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 16 FPS. None of these results approach the 60 FPS playable threshold. The frame rate drops are substantial when moving from 1440p to 4K, highlighting the GPU's limited capacity for pixel throughput at higher resolutions. The data shows a clear trend: as resolution increases, the average FPS falls by roughly 30 to 40 percent between each step, and the preset scaling becomes less impactful because the resolution itself is the dominant bottleneck.

The measured data also reveals that min and max FPS values are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the range is 62 to 83 FPS, which is a relatively narrow spread indicating stable frame pacing. At 1440p Medium, the range widens to 40 to 54 FPS, showing more variance under load. At 4K Medium, the range is 21 to 29 FPS, which suggests that even the peaks are far below playable levels.

FAQ

*Q: Can the Intel Core i5-12400F and Intel Arc B390 run Minimum at 60 FPS on 1920x1080?*

A: Yes, at 1080p the combination achieves 61 FPS on High, 72 FPS on Medium, and 95 FPS on Low. The Ultra preset falls short at 46 FPS.

Q: What is the best playable preset at 2560x1440?

A: The Low preset is the only option that clears the 60 FPS threshold at 1440p, recording an average of 61 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS.

Q: Is 4K resolution playable with this hardware?

A: No, the data shows no playable settings at 3840x2160. The best result is 33 FPS on Low, which is far below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at 1920x1080?

A: The Ultra preset averages 46 FPS, which is 15 FPS lower than the High preset's 61 FPS. This makes Ultra unplayable while High remains playable.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded for the Medium preset?

A: At 1080p, the Medium preset records a minimum of 62 FPS and a maximum of 83 FPS. At 1440p, it records a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS. At 4K, it records a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS.

Q: Does the combination perform better at Low settings in 4K than at Ultra in 1440p?

A: Yes, the 4K Low preset averages 33 FPS, which is slightly higher than the 1440p Ultra preset's 30 FPS. This indicates that resolution scaling has a more complex relationship with settings than a simple linear drop.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, with an average of 61 FPS. This is the highest quality setting that maintains playable performance at this resolution. The Medium preset also clears the threshold with 72 FPS, but High offers better visual quality while still meeting the playable standard.

At 2560x1440, the only preset that achieves the 60 FPS target is Low, with an average of 61 FPS. This is the recommended setting for this resolution, as all higher presets fall below the playable threshold. The Medium preset at 47 FPS, High at 39 FPS, and Ultra at 30 FPS all require a reduction in quality to reach playable performance.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold, so there is no best playable setting. The highest average recorded is 33 FPS on Low, which indicates that this resolution is not viable for smooth gameplay with this hardware combination.

Similar Performance Alternatives

On the CPU side, the Intel Core i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19039 and sits at the 73rd percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with an average score of 19047, which is effectively identical with a delta of 0 percent. The Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056, showing a delta of -0.1 percent, meaning it is marginally slower. The Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982, a delta of 0.3 percent in favor of the i5-12400F, and the AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18979, also a 0.3 percent delta. These four alternatives would behave nearly identically in CPU-bound scenarios, so swapping the i5-12400F for any of them would produce similar frame rates in Minimum when the CPU is the limiting factor.

On the GPU side, the Intel Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482 and sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX with a score of 1463, a delta of 1.3 percent, the NVIDIA GeForce 800M with a score of 1460, a delta of 1.5 percent, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM with a score of 1446, a delta of 2.5 percent, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 with a score of 1443, a delta of 2.7 percent. These GPUs are all within a few percentage points of the Arc B390, meaning they would produce very similar frame rates in GPU-bound scenarios. The data suggests that the Arc B390 is positioned at the low end of the GPU spectrum, and any of these alternatives would deliver comparable performance in Minimum.

When considering the combined system, the CPU is relatively strong compared to its peers, but the GPU is much weaker relative to its own peer group. This imbalance explains why the measured FPS drops so sharply as resolution increases, since the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher pixel counts.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database, this specific CPU and GPU combination ranks 3299 out of 3712 tested combos for Minimum. This places it in the lower 11 percent of all tested configurations. The rank reflects the GPU's limited performance, as the CPU is capable of much higher frame rates in isolation. The data indicates that the system is better suited for 1080p gaming at medium to high settings, rather than higher resolutions or maximum quality presets.

The ranking also shows that there are 413 other tested combinations that perform worse than this one. While the system is not at the very bottom, it is clearly far from the top. The 73rd percentile CPU ranking and 9th percentile GPU ranking combine to create a system that is heavily dependent on the game's settings and resolution to achieve playable performance.

The Verdict

The data shows that this PC can run Minimum at 1920x1080 with the High, Medium, or Low presets, all of which clear the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 61 FPS is the best quality option that remains playable. At 2560x1440, the system can run the game on Low with 61 FPS, but no other preset reaches the playable threshold. At 3840x2160, the system cannot achieve 60 FPS on any setting, with the best result being 33 FPS on Low.

For users targeting a smooth experience, 1080p is the primary resolution for this combination. The system handles the game well at medium settings, and even high settings are playable. At 1440p, the user must accept Low settings to maintain 60 FPS. At 4K, the system is not viable for this game, as all presets fall far below the playable threshold.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured data reveals a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU in Minimum. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 95 FPS on Low, which indicates that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at high frame rates. However, as settings increase to Medium and High, the FPS drops to 72 and 61 respectively. This drop is likely due to the GPU becoming more heavily utilized, but the CPU still has headroom since the frame rates remain above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the GPU's limitations become more apparent. The Low preset drops to 61 FPS from 95 FPS at 1080p, a 34 FPS decrease that is primarily attributable to the increased pixel count. The Medium preset drops to 47 FPS from 72 FPS, and the High preset drops to 39 FPS from 61 FPS. These reductions are proportionally larger than the resolution increase alone would suggest, indicating that the GPU is struggling with both resolution and settings.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is the dominant bottleneck. The Low preset averages 33 FPS, which is less than half of the 1080p Low result. The High preset averages 21 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 16 FPS. The CPU's performance at these settings is largely irrelevant because the GPU cannot render enough frames to utilize the CPU's capacity. The scaling between resolutions shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at 1440p and 4K, while the CPU has sufficient power to support the system at 1080p across all presets.

The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 49 FPS, from 95 to 46 FPS. At 1440p, the same gap is 31 FPS, from 61 to 30 FPS. At 4K, the gap is 17 FPS, from 33 to 16 FPS. This narrowing gap at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU is the primary constraint, as settings have less impact when the pixel workload is already overwhelming. The CPU's role is more significant at lower resolutions and settings, where it can push higher frame rates, but the GPU ultimately determines the playable envelope for this combination.