Minimum

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that maintains at least 60 FPS is High. The recorded average is 61 FPS, which clears the playable threshold by a narrow margin. Medium also runs above 60 FPS with an average of 72 FPS, and Low reaches 95 FPS, but High is the visually superior option that still delivers smooth gameplay. Ultra drops to 46 FPS, so it falls below the 60 FPS target and should be avoided at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the situation tightens considerably. Only Low settings keep the frame rate at or above 60 FPS, with an average of exactly 61 FPS. Medium averages 47 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. For a 1440p display, the data indicates that users must accept Low presets to maintain playable performance. There is no headroom to raise quality without crossing below the 60 FPS line.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. Low averages 33 FPS, Medium averages 25 FPS, High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. The verdict data confirms that no playable settings exist at 4K. Even the lowest quality preset leaves the system far from the playable threshold, meaning this combination is not suitable for 4K gaming in Minimum.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results reveal a clear pattern: the GPU is the limiting factor across all resolutions. The Intel Arc B390 sits in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, which is exceptionally low. Its only recorded benchmark, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, yields a score of 1482. The nearest rivals for this GPU are all NVIDIA entry-level parts: the GeForce GT 520MX with a score of 1463, the GeForce 800M at 1460, the GeForce GT 625 OEM at 1446, and the GeForce GT 710 at 1443. These are all low-end or legacy mobile/desktop parts, and the Arc B390 outperforms them by only 1.3% to 2.7%. This means the GPU’s compute capability is minimal, and it will struggle with any modern 3D workload.

The CPU, in contrast, is a high-end part. The Intel Core i7-14700F ranks in the 91st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 53620. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6505P at 53701, the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 at 53469, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X at 53288, and the AMD EPYC 7313P at 53206. The i7-14700F is within 0.8% of these parts, meaning it delivers flagship-level processing power. With 20 cores, 28 threads, and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, this CPU is far more capable than what Minimum requires.

The scaling between resolutions and presets confirms the GPU bottleneck. At 1920x1080, dropping from High to Low increases average FPS from 61 to 95, a 56% improvement. At 2560x1440, the same preset drop improves from 39 to 61, a 56% gain. At 3840x2160, Low reaches 33 FPS versus 21 FPS on High, a 57% increase. These consistent gains across resolutions indicate that the GPU’s fill rate and shading capacity are the primary constraints. The CPU’s role is minimal because even at 4K, the frame rates are so low that the processor is never saturated.

Resolution scaling also shows the GPU’s weakness. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings drops the average from 95 to 61 FPS, a 36% reduction. Moving from 1440p to 4K at Low drops from 61 to 33 FPS, a further 46% reduction. These steep declines are typical of a GPU with limited pixel throughput and texture processing. The Arc B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. These specifications are modest, and they directly explain why higher resolutions degrade performance so quickly.

The CPU’s high scores in Cinebench R23 (35122 multi-core, 4958 single-core) and Geekbench (19620 multi-core, 2429 single-core) suggest that it could handle far more demanding games. However, the GPU cannot keep pace. In Minimum, at 1080p High, the system averages 61 FPS, which is playable. But the margin is only 1 FPS above the threshold, and any GPU-heavy scene could push it below 60. The CPU is not the issue; the data shows that the Arc B390 is the limiting component in every configuration.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 1920x1080 on High settings?

A: Yes, the recorded average FPS at 1080p High is 61, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium also runs at 72 FPS, and Low at 95 FPS. Ultra, however, averages only 46 FPS and is not playable.

Q: What is the best setting for 1440p in Minimum?

A: Low is the only preset that reaches 60 FPS at 2560x1440, with an average of exactly 61 FPS. Medium averages 47 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS, all below the playable threshold.

Q: Is 4K gaming possible with the Intel Core i7-14700F and Intel Arc B390?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the best recorded average is 33 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 25 FPS, High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. No preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold, so 4K is not playable with this combination.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX at 1463, which is 1.3% slower. The GeForce 800M is 1.5% slower, the GeForce GT 625 OEM is 2.5% slower, and the GeForce GT 710 is 2.7% slower. These are all low-end parts, and the Arc B390 is only marginally faster.

Q: Is the CPU strong enough for Minimum?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F is far more powerful than needed. It ranks in the 91st percentile among all CPUs and scores 35122 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X, is only 0.6% faster. The CPU is never the bottleneck in this game; the GPU is.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p Medium?

A: The recorded average is 72 FPS, with a minimum of 62 FPS and a maximum of 83 FPS. This is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold, making Medium a safe choice for smooth gameplay at 1080p.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the Intel Core i7-14700F’s nearest rivals are all close in raw processing power. The Intel Xeon 6505P scores 53701, which is 0.2% higher, essentially identical performance. The Intel Xeon Phi 7290 scores 53469, 0.3% lower, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X scores 53288, 0.6% lower. The AMD EPYC 7313P scores 53206, 0.8% lower. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would deliver the same frame rates in Minimum because the game is not CPU-bound. A user upgrading from the i7-14700F to a Ryzen 9 7900X would see no measurable difference in this title, and the same applies to the Xeon parts, though those are workstation-oriented.

For the GPU, the situation is different. The Intel Arc B390 is only marginally ahead of its nearest rivals. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX is 1.3% slower, the GeForce 800M is 1.5% slower, the GeForce GT 625 OEM is 2.5% slower, and the GeForce GT 710 is 2.7% slower. These deltas are tiny, meaning that swapping the Arc B390 for any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum. The GT 520MX is a legacy mobile part, the GeForce 800M is an old laptop GPU, and the GT 625 OEM and GT 710 are entry-level desktop cards. None of them would meaningfully change the playability picture: at 1080p High, the Arc B390 hits 61 FPS, and a GT 710 would likely land within a few FPS of that figure, potentially dipping below 60. At 1440p, only Low would remain playable, and at 4K, no settings would work.

The practical takeaway is that the GPU sits at the bottom of the performance hierarchy. The nearest rivals are all ancient or ultra-low-end parts, and the Arc B390 barely distinguishes itself. If a user has any of these GPUs, the experience in Minimum would be similar: playable at 1080p with reduced settings, marginal at 1440p on Low, and not viable at 4K. The CPU, by contrast, has headroom that none of these games can exploit.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full set of measurements is as follows. Low settings produce an average of 95 FPS, with no min or max recorded. Medium averages 72 FPS, with a minimum of 62 FPS and a maximum of 83 FPS. High averages 61 FPS, again with no min or max recorded. Ultra averages 46 FPS. The Medium numbers are the only ones with full min/max data, and they show that even the minimum stays above the 60 FPS threshold. High is playable but with only a 1 FPS margin on average, so frame drops could occur in busy scenes. Ultra is clearly below the playable line.

At 2560x1440, the measurements are as follows. Low averages 61 FPS, exactly at the playable threshold. Medium averages 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS. High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The Medium min/max data reveals that even the maximum of 54 FPS falls short of 60, so Medium is not playable at 1440p. Low is the only viable preset, and its average of 61 FPS leaves almost no room for variance.

At 3840x2160, the data is uniformly poor. Low averages 33 FPS. Medium averages 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS. High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. The Medium numbers show that even the maximum frame rate is below 30 FPS, which is far from the 60 FPS target. No preset at 4K comes close to playability. The gap between the best 4K average (33 FPS on Low) and the playable threshold is 27 FPS, a massive shortfall.

The overall combo rank in game is 3299 out of 3712 combinations, placing this system in the bottom 11% of tested configurations for Minimum. This ranking aligns with the GPU’s low percentile and the poor high-resolution results.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Minimum? The answer depends entirely on the resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the system is playable on High, Medium, and Low presets. The best playable setting is High, with an average of 61 FPS. Medium offers more headroom at 72 FPS, and Low reaches 95 FPS. Ultra is not playable because it drops to 46 FPS. So for 1080p, this is a usable gaming system, but only just, and users should stick to High or Medium for a stable experience.

At 2560x1440, only Low settings clear the 60 FPS bar, with an average of 61 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below the threshold. This means 1440p gaming is technically possible, but only with the lowest quality preset. The visual compromise is severe, and any demanding scene could push the frame rate under 60. For most users, this would not be a satisfying 1440p experience.

At 3840x2160, the system cannot run Minimum at any preset. The best average is 33 FPS on Low, which is less than half of the 60 FPS target. The verdict data explicitly lists no playable settings at this resolution. Therefore, 4K is out of the question for this hardware combination.

The GPU is the decisive factor. The Intel Arc B390’s 3DMark score of 1482 places it in the 9th percentile, and its nearest rivals are all legacy or entry-level GPUs. The CPU, by contrast, is a high-end part that ranks in the 91st percentile. The data shows that the i7-14700F is never the limiting factor; the Arc B390 simply lacks the raw throughput to push higher frame rates at demanding resolutions. For 1080p gaming with medium-to-high settings, this system works. For 1440p, it requires Low settings. For 4K, it fails entirely. This is a system that can play Minimum, but only with careful attention to resolution and quality settings.