Minimum

Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB delivers a playable experience in Minimum only at 1080p and 1440p, with 4K remaining out of reach. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 60.5 FPS on the Ultra preset, barely crossing the 60 FPS playability threshold. At 2560x1440, the Medium preset hits exactly 61 FPS, making it the highest playable setting at that resolution. The data shows a clear scaling pattern: the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases, while the CPU’s strong multi-threaded performance keeps frame rates stable at lower resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this combo covers four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) across three resolutions. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are 119.2 FPS on Low, 91.2 FPS on Medium, 76.6 FPS on High, and 60.5 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra is 58.7 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset’s added visual demands reduce performance by nearly half compared to Low. The jump from Medium to High costs 14.6 FPS, while the step from High to Ultra costs 16.1 FPS, showing that each preset tier introduces a similar performance penalty at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the averages drop significantly. Low delivers 77.5 FPS, Medium produces 61 FPS, High falls to 49.3 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 35.9 FPS. The transition from 1080p to 1440p at the same preset costs roughly 40% of the frame rate: Low drops from 119.2 to 77.5 FPS, Medium from 91.2 to 61 FPS, High from 76.6 to 49.3 FPS, and Ultra from 60.5 to 35.9 FPS. This consistent reduction across all presets points to a GPU-bound scenario at 1440p, where the RTX 3050 4 GB’s 192.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 128-bit bus become the primary constraint.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly below the playability threshold. Low averages 44.9 FPS, Medium 31.8 FPS, High 28.6 FPS, and Ultra 21.8 FPS. The best 4K result, Low at 44.9 FPS, is still 15.1 FPS short of the 60 FPS target. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is severe: Low drops from 77.5 to 44.9 FPS, Medium from 61 to 31.8 FPS, High from 49.3 to 28.6 FPS, and Ultra from 35.9 to 21.8 FPS. This indicates that the 4 GB VRAM capacity and the GPU’s 7.127 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are insufficient for 4K rendering in this title, regardless of settings.

The data shows no min or max FPS values recorded for any configuration, so the analysis relies solely on average frame rates. The absence of frame time variance data means the verdict is based on sustained average performance rather than consistency. The 1080p Ultra result of 60.5 FPS is particularly notable because it sits just 0.5 FPS above the playable threshold, suggesting that any slight scene complexity increase could push it below 60 FPS in practice.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, all four presets are playable, with Ultra being the best setting that stays at or above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 60.5 FPS, which is 0.5 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold. High averages 76.6 FPS, Medium 91.2 FPS, and Low 119.2 FPS, all comfortably exceeding the target. The data indicates that the most demanding preset at this resolution, Ultra, still meets the playability criterion, making it the recommended choice for maximum visual quality without sacrificing frame rate.

At 2560x1440, only Low and Medium are playable. Medium averages 61 FPS, which is exactly 1 FPS above the threshold, making it the best playable setting at this resolution. Low averages 77.5 FPS, providing a more comfortable margin but with reduced visual fidelity. High (49.3 FPS) and Ultra (35.9 FPS) both fall short of the 60 FPS target, so they are not recommended for a playable experience. The Medium preset at 1440p represents a balanced trade-off, delivering 61 FPS while maintaining moderate visual quality.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves the 60 FPS threshold. The highest average is Low at 44.9 FPS, followed by Medium at 31.8 FPS, High at 28.6 FPS, and Ultra at 21.8 FPS. The verdictByResolution data confirms that there are no playable settings at 4K, with bestSettings set to null. Users targeting 4K would need to accept frame rates well below the playability threshold or consider different hardware.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 3252 out of 3712 tested combinations in Minimum, placing it in the bottom 12.4% of all tested hardware pairings. This percentile placement reflects the RTX 3050 4 GB’s position at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, combined with the i5-13400F’s 77th percentile ranking among all CPUs. The low combo rank suggests that while the CPU is above average, the GPU drags the overall performance down significantly, particularly at higher resolutions.

The rank of 3252 indicates that 460 other tested combos perform worse than this pairing, while 3251 perform better. Given that the CPU alone sits at the 77th percentile, the discrepancy between CPU performance and combo rank highlights how GPU-bound this configuration is in Minimum. The 4 GB VRAM capacity is likely a contributing factor, as modern titles at 1080p Ultra or 1440p Medium can exceed 4 GB of memory usage, causing texture streaming or asset loading issues that manifest as lower average frame rates.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU’s nearest rivals provide context for what other processors would deliver similar performance. The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS has an average score of 25284, which is identical to the i5-13400F’s 25292, representing a 0% delta. The Intel Core 5 120 scores 25362, which is 0.3% higher, while the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D scores 25365, also 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800H scores 25201, which is 0.4% lower. These four CPUs are all within a 0.7% performance band, meaning any of them would pair with the RTX 3050 4 GB to produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum.

The GPU has no nearestRivals listed in the FACT PACK, so there is no direct comparative data for alternative graphics cards. However, the GPU’s 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs indicates that roughly half of all tested GPUs perform better and half perform worse. This suggests that any GPU within a similar performance tier, such as other 30-series or 20-series cards with comparable specs, would behave similarly in this game. The lack of rival data means users cannot directly compare against specific models, but the percentile ranking provides a general reference point.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows a clear shift in bottleneck behavior across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the CPU’s strong multi-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22604) allows the GPU to operate at its full potential, as evidenced by the 119.2 FPS Low result. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p (119.2 to 60.5 FPS, a 49.2% reduction) is primarily driven by GPU workload, but the CPU keeps up with all presets, indicating that the i5-13400F is not the limiting factor at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the GPU becomes more dominant. The frame rate reduction from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across all presets (roughly 40% lower), which is typical of GPU-bound scenarios where the increased pixel count directly impacts the render time. The CPU’s role diminishes further, as the 77.5 FPS Low result at 1440p still leaves headroom for the CPU to feed the GPU. The Medium preset’s 61 FPS at 1440p, versus 91.2 FPS at 1080p, shows a 33.1% reduction that aligns with the resolution scaling.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is overwhelmingly the bottleneck. The 44.9 FPS Low result at 4K is only 37.7% of the 119.2 FPS Low result at 1080p, indicating that the GPU’s rendering capacity is exhausted well before the CPU becomes relevant. The 4 GB VRAM is likely a secondary constraint, as the Ultra preset at 4K (21.8 FPS) shows a 51.5% reduction from Low at the same resolution, suggesting that texture memory overflow is compounding the compute limitation. The CPU’s performance remains constant across resolutions, but the GPU’s ability to deliver frames drops sharply, confirming that the RTX 3050 4 GB is the primary determinant of playability at 1440p and above.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Minimum at 1080p with the highest settings?*

A: Yes. The Ultra preset at 1920x1080 averages 60.5 FPS, which is 0.5 FPS above the 60 FPS playability threshold. All four presets at 1080p are playable, with Low averaging 119.2 FPS, Medium 91.2 FPS, and High 76.6 FPS.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1440p?

A: Medium is the best playable setting at 2560x1440, averaging exactly 61 FPS. Low averages 77.5 FPS and is also playable, but High (49.3 FPS) and Ultra (35.9 FPS) fall below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 4K playable with this hardware?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average frame rate is 44.9 FPS on Low settings, which is 15.1 FPS below the 60 FPS target. Medium averages 31.8 FPS, High 28.6 FPS, and Ultra 21.8 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested hardware?

A: The combo ranks 3252 out of 3712 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 12.4% of all tested pairings. This low rank is primarily due to the GPU, which sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: Which component limits performance at 4K?

A: The GPU is the overwhelming bottleneck at 3840x2160. The frame rate drops from 44.9 FPS on Low to 21.8 FPS on Ultra, a 51.5% reduction, while the CPU’s performance remains constant. The 4 GB VRAM capacity and the GPU’s 7.127 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are insufficient for 4K rendering.

Q: What CPUs would perform similarly to the i5-13400F in this game?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS performs identically (0% delta), the Intel Core 5 120 and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D are 0.3% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H is 0.4% slower. Any of these processors would yield nearly identical frame rates when paired with the RTX 3050 4 GB.