Minimum

This combo lands in the 65th percentile of all tested CPU+GPU pairings for Minimum, ranking 2399th out of 3712 combinations. That places it firmly in the upper-middle tier of the database, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of all recorded systems. The data shows a system that is clearly capable of running the game smoothly at most common resolutions, with the primary limitation emerging only at 4K Ultra settings.

The ranking is heavily influenced by the CPU’s strong standing relative to other processors. The Intel Core i7-13700K sits in the 89th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46881. Its nearest rivals—the AMD Ryzen 9 5900 (46971, -0.2%), AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (47022, -0.3%), AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX (46654, +0.5%), and Intel Xeon w3-2535 (46653, +0.5%)—all fall within a 0.8% band, indicating that the 13700K is statistically indistinguishable from these alternatives in raw compute performance. The GPU, meanwhile, sits in the 65th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 19765, and its nearest rivals—NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19885, -0.6%), AMD FirePro D300 (19637, +0.7%), AMD FirePro W7000 (19905, -0.7%), and NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19602, +0.8%)—are likewise clustered tightly. This combination of a top-tier CPU with a mid-range GPU results in a system that is CPU-rich but GPU-bound in most gaming scenarios.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data from Minimum reveals a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 180.1 FPS on Low settings, 134.7 FPS on Medium, 113.4 FPS on High, and 87.1 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a 51.6% performance drop, indicating that the GPU is the primary bottleneck even at lower settings. The CPU’s massive headroom—evidenced by its 16 cores, 24 threads, and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30745—means it is never the limiting factor at 1080p; the GPU’s 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 2048 shading units are what govern frame rates.

Moving to 2560x1440, the pattern shifts slightly. The system delivers 111.5 FPS on Low, 87.3 FPS on Medium, 75.3 FPS on High, and 57 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra is now 48.9%, showing that the GPU is still the dominant constraint, but the relative cost of higher presets has diminished slightly. At 1440p, the GPU’s 128-bit memory bus and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth begin to show strain, yet the CPU’s single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2116) ensures that frame pacing remains consistent even when the GPU is under heavy load.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the unequivocal bottleneck. The system manages 60 FPS on Low, 46.8 FPS on Medium, 42 FPS on High, and 28.8 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from Low to Ultra is a 52% performance reduction, and the fact that even Medium cannot hold 60 FPS indicates that the RX 6650 XT’s 8 GB frame buffer and 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are simply insufficient for 4K at higher presets. The CPU’s role at 4K is reduced to maintaining a stable floor; its 3DMark max-threads score of 12412 and PassMark multi-thread score of 45887 suggest it could push far higher frame rates if paired with a stronger GPU.

The preset scaling across resolutions tells the same story. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 93 FPS, while at 1440p it is 54.5 FPS, and at 4K it is 31.2 FPS. This narrowing gap with increasing resolution confirms that the GPU is the limiting factor; the CPU’s contribution becomes proportionally smaller as pixel count rises. For players targeting high refresh rates at 1080p, the CPU ensures there is no artificial ceiling, but for 4K gaming, the GPU dictates everything.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearestRivals data for both components provides a clear picture of what else would behave similarly in Minimum. On the CPU side, the AMD Ryzen 9 5900 (46971 average score, -0.2% delta) is the closest match, offering virtually identical performance to the i7-13700K. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 (47022, -0.3%) is also within a rounding error, as are the AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX (46654, +0.5%) and Intel Xeon w3-2535 (46653, +0.5%). In practical terms, any of these processors would yield nearly identical frame rates in Minimum, since the game is not CPU-bound at the tested settings. The 13700K’s 89th percentile CPU ranking means all four rivals are also top-tier parts, and the differences between them would be imperceptible in gameplay.

On the GPU side, the situation is more nuanced. The NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19885, -0.6%) is the closest rival, though it is a compute-oriented card rather than a gaming part. The AMD FirePro D300 (19637, +0.7%) and AMD FirePro W7000 (19905, -0.7%) are professional workstation GPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19602, +0.8%) rounds out the group. All four sit within a 1.5% performance band of the RX 6650 XT, meaning they would deliver similar frame rates in Minimum at the same settings. However, it is importantly the RX 6650 XT’s 65th percentile GPU ranking indicates it outperforms the majority of graphics cards, and these rivals are not representative of typical gaming alternatives. Gamers would more likely encounter cards like the GeForce RTX 3060 or Radeon RX 6600 XT in this performance class, though those are not in the provided data.

For the purposes of this analysis, the key takeaway is that swapping the 13700K for any of its CPU rivals would change Minimum performance by less than 1%, and swapping the RX 6650 XT for any of its GPU rivals would similarly produce negligible differences. The system’s overall behavior is defined by the GPU’s mid-range capability and the CPU’s high-end headroom.

The Verdict

The data answers definitively: this PC can run Minimum at 60 FPS or above at every resolution tested, but only at specific preset levels. At 1920x1080, the system clears 60 FPS at all four presets—Low (180.1 FPS), Medium (134.7 FPS), High (113.4 FPS), and Ultra (87.1 FPS). This is a fully playable experience at maximum settings, with enough headroom for high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 2560x1440, the system remains above 60 FPS for Low (111.5 FPS), Medium (87.3 FPS), and High (75.3 FPS), but falls to 57 FPS on Ultra. This means 1440p High is the ceiling for a locked 60 FPS experience; Ultra requires dropping below the playable threshold by 3 FPS. The 1440p Low result of 111.5 FPS shows the system can handle competitive play at this resolution with reduced visual fidelity.

At 3840x2160, the situation tightens considerably. Only Low settings achieve 60 FPS (exactly 60 FPS), while Medium (46.8 FPS), High (42 FPS), and Ultra (28.8 FPS) all fall short of the 60 FPS threshold. The verdict is clear: 4K gaming is possible only at the lowest preset, and even then, the 60 FPS result is marginal with no room for fluctuation.

The overall verdict is that this system is a solid 1080p Ultra and 1440p High machine for Minimum. It can do 4K Low, but users should not expect higher presets at that resolution without accepting sub-60 FPS frame rates.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K with High settings?*

A: No. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 High is 42 FPS, which is well below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p that stays above 60 FPS?

A: High settings at 2560x1440 produce 75.3 FPS on average, making it the most demanding preset that clears the 60 FPS threshold at that resolution.

Q: How much performance headroom does the CPU have in this game?

A: The i7-13700K ranks in the 89th percentile among all CPUs with a PassMark multi-thread score of 45887, indicating it is never the limiting factor in Minimum at any tested resolution or preset.

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

A: The GPU is the bottleneck. Frame rates drop from 180.1 FPS on Low to 87.1 FPS on Ultra at 1920x1080, a 51.6% reduction that tracks GPU load rather than CPU capability.

Q: What happens if I use the nearest rival GPU, the NVIDIA Tesla K40m?

A: The Tesla K40m has an average score of 19885, which is 0.6% lower than the RX 6650 XT. In Minimum, this would result in frame rates approximately 0.6% lower—roughly 1 FPS difference at 1080p Ultra.

Q: Can the system maintain 60 FPS at 4K with any preset other than Low?

A: No. The only 4K preset that reaches 60 FPS is Low. Medium averages 46.8 FPS, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra averages 28.8 FPS.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, which delivers an average of 87.1 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that remains comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold, and it leaves 27.1 FPS of headroom for demanding scenes.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are High, with an average of 75.3 FPS. Ultra falls to 57 FPS, so High is the optimal choice for a locked 60 FPS experience at this resolution. The 15.3 FPS of headroom provides some buffer, though less than at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Low, which produces exactly 60 FPS on average. This is the only playable option at 4K, and the 0 FPS headroom means any performance dip could push it below the threshold. Players seeking a more consistent experience at 4K would need to accept lower frame rates or reduce resolution.