Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination of Intel Core i7-12700KF and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 in Minimum shows a clear performance ceiling that varies sharply by resolution. At 4K, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates under any setting, with average FPS figures that fall far below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 3840x2160, the High preset delivers an average of 18 FPS. Dropping to Medium raises the average to 22 FPS, with recorded minimums of 18 FPS and maximums of 25 FPS. The Low preset improves the average to 28 FPS, but this remains well below the playability target. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, producing an average of only 14 FPS. None of these settings approach the 60 FPS threshold, and even the best case at Low is less than half of what is needed for smooth gameplay.

Moving down to 2560x1440, the situation improves but still does not reach playable levels. The High preset averages 34 FPS, while Medium averages 40 FPS with minimums of 34 FPS and maximums of 46 FPS. Low settings push the average to 52 FPS, which is closer to the target but still 8 FPS short of the 60 FPS mark. Ultra remains the weakest option at 26 FPS average. The recorded data shows that even at the lowest settings, this resolution cannot sustain a consistent 60 FPS experience.

At 1920x1080, the system finally crosses the playability threshold. The Low preset delivers an average of 81 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. Medium settings average 62 FPS, with minimums of 53 FPS and maximums of 72 FPS, which means the average clears the bar but occasional dips below 60 FPS occur. High settings drop to an average of 52 FPS, and Ultra falls to 40 FPS. The data clearly indicates that 1080p is the resolution where this hardware can deliver a playable experience, but only at Low or Medium presets.

FAQ

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1920x1080 for this combo?

A: The Medium preset is the most demanding setting that maintains an average FPS at or above 60. It records an average of 62 FPS, with minimums of 53 FPS and maximums of 72 FPS.

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 2560x1440?

A: No. The highest average FPS recorded at this resolution is 52 FPS on Low settings, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold. All other presets produce lower averages, with Ultra at 26 FPS, High at 34 FPS, and Medium at 40 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset perform at 3840x2160?

A: The Ultra preset at 4K delivers an average of 14 FPS, which is the lowest recorded figure across all tested configurations. This is far below any playable standard.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Medium at 1920x1080?

A: Low averages 81 FPS, while Medium averages 62 FPS. The difference is 19 FPS, and Medium also shows a minimum of 53 FPS compared to no recorded minimum for Low in the data.

Q: Are there any resolutions where the Ultra preset achieves 60 FPS?

A: No. The Ultra preset records averages of 14 FPS at 3840x2160, 26 FPS at 2560x1440, and 40 FPS at 1920x1080. None reach the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What does the data show about 4K performance at Low settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Low settings, the average FPS is 28. This is the best 4K result in the dataset, but it is still less than half of the 60 FPS target.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results for Minimum show a clear pattern where the GPU becomes the dominant bottleneck as resolution increases. The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a high-end desktop processor with 12 cores and 20 threads, and its recorded benchmark scores place it in the 85th percentile among all CPUs. The GTX 1650, by contrast, sits in the 40th percentile among all GPUs. This disparity explains why the system's performance scales so dramatically with resolution.

At 1920x1080, the GPU has less pixel work to do, and the CPU's strong single-thread and multi-thread capabilities can help maintain higher frame rates. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p shows a 19 FPS drop (from 81 to 62), which indicates that the GPU is still the limiting factor when settings increase, but the overall headroom allows for playable averages. At this resolution, the CPU's role is more visible because the GPU can keep up with the rendering demands at lower presets.

As resolution increases to 2560x1440, the GPU's workload grows substantially. The average FPS at Low drops from 81 to 52, a 36% reduction, while Medium drops from 62 to 40. This scaling shows that the GTX 1650's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus width become restrictive. The CPU's performance remains constant, but the GPU cannot feed frames fast enough. The data shows that even the strongest CPU settings cannot compensate for the GPU's limitations at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is completely overwhelmed. The difference between Low (28 FPS) and Ultra (14 FPS) is only 14 FPS, and even the best case is far below playable. The CPU's role at this resolution is negligible because the GPU is so far behind that any CPU headroom is irrelevant. The recorded data shows that the GTX 1650's pixel fill rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s are simply insufficient for 4K rendering in this game.

The pattern across resolutions is consistent: the GPU dictates the performance ceiling, and the CPU only matters when the GPU has enough headroom to render frames quickly. At 1080p, the CPU's 3DMark single-thread score of 1043 and multi-thread score of 9983 help sustain the higher frame rates seen at Low and Medium. At higher resolutions, those CPU strengths are wasted because the GPU cannot translate them into additional frames.

How This Combo Ranks

The database places this combination at rank 3581 out of 3712 tested combos for Minimum. This places it in the bottom 3.5% of all configurations, which is consistent with the measured FPS data. The rank reflects the overall performance across all tested resolutions and presets, and it shows that this pairing is heavily constrained by the GPU.

The GTX 1650's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (0.3% slower), the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% slower), and the AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% slower). The Intel Arc A310 is 1% faster. These deltas are small, meaning the GTX 1650 sits in a cluster of low-to-mid-range GPUs that all struggle with demanding titles. The GPU's average benchmark score of 7472 and its 40th percentile ranking reinforce this position.

The CPU, by contrast, is a strong performer. The Intel Core i7-12700KF has an average benchmark score of 35365 and sits in the 85th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13700T (0.1% slower), the Intel Core i5-13600T (0.2% faster), and the Intel Core i7-12700K (0.2% faster). This shows that the CPU is not the reason for the low combo rank; it is the GPU that holds the system back.

The low combo rank is therefore a direct consequence of pairing a high-end CPU with a low-end GPU. The database's measurements show that the GTX 1650 cannot deliver playable frame rates at 1440p or 4K in Minimum, and its 1080p performance is only marginally adequate. The CPU would be capable of much higher frame rates if paired with a stronger GPU, but in this configuration, the GPU is the limiting factor.

The Verdict

The recorded data provides a definitive answer: this PC can run Minimum at 1920x1080, but only at Low or Medium settings. The verdict by resolution shows no playable settings at 2560x1440 or 3840x2160, meaning the system cannot achieve 60 FPS at those resolutions under any preset.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 81 FPS, which comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset averages 62 FPS, which also clears the bar, though the minimum of 53 FPS indicates occasional dips below the target. The High preset at 52 FPS and Ultra at 40 FPS fail to meet the playable standard. The best playable setting is Medium, with an average FPS of 62.

For users who prioritize a consistent 60 FPS experience, Low at 1080p is the safer choice due to its higher average and no recorded minimums below the threshold. Medium is viable for those willing to accept occasional frame drops. At 1440p and 4K, the system is not playable, and the data shows that even the lowest settings cannot reach the 60 FPS target.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves the 60 FPS threshold, so there is no recommended setting. The best average FPS recorded is 28 at Low, which is far below playable.

At 2560x1440, the same situation applies. No preset reaches 60 FPS, with the best average being 52 FPS at Low. The Medium preset averages 40 FPS, and High averages 34 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 62 FPS. The data records minimums of 53 FPS and maximums of 72 FPS for this setting. Low is also playable with an average of 81 FPS, but Medium provides the highest visual quality while still meeting the average FPS target. The High preset at 52 FPS and Ultra at 40 FPS are not recommended because they fall below the threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in the database are all within 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-12700KF's average benchmark score. The Intel Core i7-13700T scores 35403 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core i5-13600T scores 35305 (0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i7-12700K scores 35287 (0.2% higher). Any of these processors would behave nearly identically in Minimum when paired with the same GPU, since the CPU is not the bottleneck.

For the GPU, the closest alternatives are the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (0.3% slower), the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% slower), and the AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% slower). The Intel Arc A310 is 1% faster. These GPUs would produce very similar frame rates in Minimum, meaning the same resolution and preset limitations would apply. A user swapping the GTX 1650 for any of these would see essentially the same performance profile: playable at 1080p on Low or Medium, and unplayable at higher resolutions.

The combination of a high-end CPU with any of these low-end GPUs would not change the overall verdict, because the GPU's performance ceiling is the determining factor. The database shows that the GTX 1650's benchmark scores and percentile ranking place it in a group of GPUs that are all similarly constrained in this title.