Minimum

The Intel Core i5-14600KF and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT combination presents a clear picture for running Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. The data shows a system that is heavily CPU-capable, with the processor ranking in the 90th percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 70th percentile against all GPUs. This imbalance becomes the defining characteristic of the performance profile, leading to a situation where the game's frame rate is dictated by the graphics card at higher resolutions but the processor's headroom allows for maximum settings at 1080p. This analysis examines the measured frames per second (FPS) data to determine exactly what settings and resolutions this combo can handle while maintaining a 60 FPS threshold.

FAQ

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

A: No, not at a playable level. The measured data shows that at 3840x2160, even the Low preset only achieves an average of 58.7 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdict data confirms that no settings at this resolution are considered playable.

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

A: The best playable settings preset at 2560x1440 is "High", which produces an average of 70.6 FPS. While the Low and Medium presets are also playable, High offers the highest visual fidelity while still staying above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is the Ultra preset viable at 1080p?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset achieves an average of 81.2 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold. This makes Ultra the best settings preset for this resolution, according to the verdict data.

Q: How much faster is the CPU compared to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600KF has an average benchmark score of 49394. Its closest competitor, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, has a score of 49228, which is a 0.3% difference. The data shows the i5-14600KF is slightly ahead of the Ryzen 9 7900 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245, but slightly behind the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 by 0.8%.

Q: How does the GPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT has an average benchmark score of 24442. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630, scores 24277, a 0.7% difference. The data indicates the RX 6600 XT is slightly ahead of the GTX 1630 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER, but slightly behind the Intel Arc A350M by 0.8%.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: The data shows a significant scaling range. At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 173 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 81.2 FPS. This represents a drop of 91.8 FPS when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the Intel Core i5-14600KF is positioned near several other processors that would offer a similar level of performance in this game. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is the closest match, with an average score just 0.3% lower, meaning the performance difference is practically negligible for gaming workloads. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G and Intel Core Ultra 5 245 are also within a 0.8% margin of the i5-14600KF's score. On the other side, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the only rival that edges out the i5-14600KF, but by a mere 0.8%. In practical terms, all of these processors would deliver nearly identical frame rates in Minimum, with the game's performance being primarily constrained by the GPU.

On the graphics side, the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT's performance is bracketed by a diverse set of rivals. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 is nearly identical, with a score only 0.7% lower, suggesting that users with either card would see similar frame rates. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is also surprisingly close, scoring 1.1% higher than the RX 6600 XT, despite its different position in the market. The Intel Arc A350M is the only rival that shows a slightly more significant lead, with a score 0.8% higher. When considering the overall system, the CPU's performance headroom is so vast that swapping the RX 6600 XT for any of these alternatives would likely yield only a 1-2 FPS difference at most settings, reinforcing that the GPU is the limiting factor.

Best Settings per Resolution

The data provides a clear hierarchy of playable settings based on the 60 FPS threshold. At 3840x2160, there is no playable preset, as the highest average FPS is 58.7 on the Low preset, which falls short of the mark. The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at this resolution is none, as all configurations fail to meet the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves. The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, which delivers an average of 70.6 FPS. This is the best choice for visual quality at this resolution, as it provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS target.

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings becomes available. The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which achieves an average of 81.2 FPS. This allows for the highest level of visual fidelity without compromising playability, as the frame rate remains well above the threshold.

The Verdict

The data clearly answers whether this PC can run Minimum: yes, but with specific limitations based on resolution. At 1920x1080, the system is fully capable, with all four tested presets (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra) exceeding the 60 FPS threshold. The best experience is at Ultra settings, which yields an average of 81.2 FPS. At 2560x1440, the system remains highly capable, with the Low, Medium, and High presets all clearing the 60 FPS bar. The best settings at this resolution are High, with an average of 70.6 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 54.3 FPS, which is not playable. The system fails to deliver a playable experience at 3840x2160, as even the Low preset's 58.7 FPS average is below the threshold. The overall verdict is that this combo is an excellent choice for 1080p and a strong choice for 1440p, but it is not suitable for 4K gaming in this title.

CPU and GPU Roles

The performance scaling across resolutions and presets reveals how the CPU and GPU share the workload in Minimum. The Intel Core i5-14600KF is an exceptionally powerful processor, ranking in the 90th percentile, and its benchmark scores are 0.3% to 0.8% higher than its nearest rivals. This suggests that the CPU is unlikely to be a bottleneck in this game, even at lower resolutions where CPU load is typically higher.

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT, while ranking in the 70th percentile, is the component that determines the frame rate ceiling. The data supports this conclusion. At 1920x1080, the difference between Low and Ultra presets is 91.8 FPS (from 173 to 81.2). This massive drop is almost entirely due to the GPU's rendering workload increasing with higher quality settings. As the resolution increases to 2560x1440, the GPU's load increases further, causing the Ultra preset to fall below 60 FPS. At 3840x2160, the GPU is completely overwhelmed, and no preset can reach the 60 FPS target.

The CPU's role becomes more apparent when looking at the frame rate headroom. At 1080p Low, the system produces 173 FPS, but the CPU could likely push even higher if the GPU were faster. The fact that the CPU is one of the highest-performing models available means that its contribution to the frame rate is consistent and never a limiting factor. In contrast, the GPU is the clear bottleneck at 4K and the primary driver of performance differences at lower resolutions. The scaling between settings at each resolution directly reflects GPU load, while the CPU's massive headroom ensures it never becomes the primary constraint.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Minimum, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-14600KF and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT holds a rank of 2540 out of 3712 total combos. This places it in the lower-middle portion of all tested systems. This ranking might seem low given the CPU's high percentile, but it is heavily influenced by the GPU's more modest 70th percentile standing. The rank indicates that while this system is certainly capable of playing the game at high settings in 1080p and 1440p, there are many other combinations that deliver higher overall frame rates. The ranking reflects the balanced performance of the two components, with the powerful CPU being held back by a mid-range GPU. It is a capable system, but not one that sits near the top of the performance charts for this game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data represents the exact average FPS measurements for each resolution and settings preset. Minimum and maximum FPS values were not recorded.

3840x2160

• Ultra: Average 30.9 FPS
• High: Average 35.8 FPS
• Medium: Average 44.2 FPS
• Low: Average 58.7 FPS

2560x1440

• Ultra: Average 54.3 FPS
• High: Average 70.6 FPS
• Medium: Average 84.8 FPS
• Low: Average 109.3 FPS

1920x1080

• Ultra: Average 81.2 FPS
• High: Average 111.5 FPS
• Medium: Average 132.9 FPS
• Low: Average 173 FPS

This data shows a consistent scaling pattern. At each resolution, the frame rate decreases as settings quality increases. The most significant drop occurs between the Low and Medium presets at 1080p, a difference of 40.1 FPS. The scaling is also non-linear across resolutions; for example, the High preset drops from 111.5 FPS at 1080p to 70.6 FPS at 1440p, a 36.6% reduction, and then to 35.8 FPS at 4K, a 49.3% reduction from the 1440p figure. This demonstrates the increasing burden on the GPU as pixel count grows.