Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination of Intel Core i7-14700K and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 in Minimum shows a wide spread of frame rates depending on resolution and quality preset. All twelve measured configurations produced average FPS values, with no minimum or maximum frame data recorded in the database.

At 3840x2160, the results are consistently below playable thresholds. The High preset averages 17.1 FPS, while Low improves to 29.1 FPS. Medium sits between them at 23 FPS, and Ultra drops to 13.4 FPS. These numbers place 4K entirely outside the range of comfortable gaming, with even the lowest preset failing to approach 30 FPS.

Dropping to 2560x1440 yields substantial gains. Low reaches 49.7 FPS, Medium delivers 41 FPS, and High averages 32.7 FPS. Ultra remains weak at 25.1 FPS. The jump from 4K to 1440p improves Low by roughly 20 frames, but no preset at this resolution clears the 60 FPS mark, so the entire 1440p row remains below the playable threshold.

At 1920x1080, the picture changes meaningfully. Low averages 80.8 FPS, Medium reaches 64.4 FPS, and High comes in at 55 FPS. Ultra falls back to 42.4 FPS. This is the only resolution where any preset exceeds 60 FPS, and notably it achieves this on both Low and Medium. The gap between Low and Medium is 16.4 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 9.4 FPS, suggesting that each step up in quality carries a distinct cost.

The scaling pattern across resolutions is steep. At Low settings, moving from 1080p to 1440p reduces performance from 80.8 FPS to 49.7 FPS, a drop of 31.1 FPS. Moving from 1440p to 2160p at Low further reduces from 49.7 FPS to 29.1 FPS. The same pattern holds at High settings: 55 FPS at 1080p, 32.7 FPS at 1440p, and 17.1 FPS at 4K. The GTX 1650 appears to be the dominant constraint, as the resolution scaling is severe and consistent.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data points to the GPU as the decisive factor in this pairing. The Intel Core i7-14700K is a high-end 20-core, 28-thread processor with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 33440.5 and a single-core score of 2160. It ranks in the 94th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The GTX 1650, by contrast, sits in the 40th percentile among all GPUs, with a Passmark G3D score of 7880 and a DirectX 11 score of 58. The enormous gap in relative standing between the two components suggests the GPU is the bottleneck in nearly every scenario.

The resolution scaling confirms this. If the CPU were limiting performance, we would expect frame rates to remain relatively stable as resolution increases, since the CPU workload does not scale with pixel count the way the GPU workload does. Instead, we see a dramatic collapse in frame rates as resolution rises: at Medium settings, performance falls from 64.4 FPS at 1080p to 41 FPS at 1440p to 23 FPS at 4K. That pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound configuration.

The preset scaling also points to GPU dominance. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra changes the average FPS from 80.8 to 42.4, a reduction of nearly half. If the CPU were the limiting factor, changing graphical quality would have a smaller impact. The 20-core, 28-thread i7-14700K is clearly not the constraint in a game like Minimum, which is a 2014 title that would not stress modern multi-core processors heavily. The GTX 1650's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 128.1 GB/s bandwidth is a more plausible limiting factor at higher resolutions and quality settings.

The one scenario where the CPU might matter more is at 1080p Low, where the GPU has less work to do and the frame rate reaches 80.8 FPS. Even here, the CPU's high single-thread performance, evidenced by a Geekbench single-core score of 2569, is more than sufficient. The recorded data does not include CPU utilization metrics, but the FPS pattern strongly indicates that the GTX 1650 is the component that determines whether this system can play Minimum at acceptable frame rates.

FAQ

Q: Can this combination run Minimum at 60 FPS on a 4K monitor?

A: No. The best recorded result at 3840x2160 is 29.1 FPS on Low settings. High averages 17.1 FPS, Medium averages 23 FPS, and Ultra averages 13.4 FPS. None of these approach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the highest quality preset that stays above 60 FPS at 1080p?

A: Medium, which averages 64.4 FPS. Low averages 80.8 FPS and is also above the threshold. High drops to 55 FPS and Ultra falls to 42.4 FPS, so neither is playable by the 60 FPS standard.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p at the same settings?

A: At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 80.8 to 49.7, a loss of 31.1 FPS. At Medium, it drops from 64.4 to 41, a loss of 23.4 FPS. At High, it drops from 55 to 32.7, a loss of 22.3 FPS. At Ultra, it drops from 42.4 to 25.1, a loss of 17.3 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU. The GTX 1650 ranks in the 40th percentile among all GPUs, while the i7-14700K ranks in the 94th percentile among all CPUs. The severe frame rate drops with increasing resolution and quality settings are consistent with GPU-limited performance.

Q: What is the best 1440p preset available for this combination?

A: None are playable. The highest average FPS at 2560x1440 is 49.7 on Low, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 41 FPS, High averages 32.7 FPS, and Ultra averages 25.1 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested combinations in Minimum?

A: It ranks 3538 out of 3712 tested combos, placing it in the bottom portion of the database. This is consistent with the GPU's low percentile ranking relative to all GPUs.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the CPU and GPU provide useful context for what other hardware would behave similarly in this configuration.

The Intel Core i7-14700K has an average benchmark score of 69355. Its nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 9115, which scores 69288, a difference of 0.1 percent. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X scores 69515, putting it 0.2 percent ahead of the i7-14700K. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX scores 69875, 0.7 percent ahead, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F scores 69996, 0.9 percent ahead. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical performance in Minimum, since the game is not CPU-bound at the resolutions tested. The i7-14700K's 94th percentile ranking among all CPUs means it is far more capable than the game requires.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472. Its nearest rivals are close in score. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447, 0.3 percent behind. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441, 0.4 percent behind. The AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425, 0.6 percent behind. The Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, 1 percent ahead. These deltas are small enough that swapping the GTX 1650 for any of these alternatives would produce similar frame rates in Minimum. The GPU's 40th percentile ranking among all GPUs explains why the system struggles at higher resolutions.

The combination of a top-tier CPU with a bottom-mid-tier GPU means that alternative systems with a similar GPU but a much weaker CPU would likely produce the same FPS numbers in this game. The database's measured results reflect the GPU's limitations, not the CPU's capabilities.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database's ranking for Minimum, this combination of Intel Core i7-14700K and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 places 3538 out of 3712 tested combos. That places it in the 95th percentile from the bottom, meaning roughly 95 percent of tested combinations perform better in this title. The rank is consistent with the measured FPS data: the system cannot maintain 60 FPS at 1440p or 4K, and only achieves playable frame rates at 1080p on Low and Medium presets.

The rank reflects the GPU's 40th percentile standing among all GPUs. The CPU's 94th percentile ranking is effectively neutralized by the GPU's weakness in a GPU-bound title. A system with a weaker CPU but a stronger GPU would likely rank higher in Minimum, since the game's performance scales primarily with pixel count and quality settings rather than processor capability.

The bottom-line picture from the ranking is clear: this is not a combination designed for high-refresh or high-resolution gaming in Minimum. It is a pairing that can handle 1080p at moderate settings, but nothing more demanding. The 174 combos ranked below this one likely feature even weaker GPUs or severely outdated hardware.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Minimum? The answer depends entirely on resolution and settings. According to the verdict data, the system is playable only at 1920x1080, and only on Low and Medium presets. At this resolution, Low averages 80.8 FPS and Medium averages 64.4 FPS, both exceeding the 60 FPS playable threshold. High falls short at 55 FPS, and Ultra averages 42.4 FPS.

At 2560x1440, no settings are playable. The best result is 49.7 FPS on Low, which misses the 60 FPS threshold by 10.3 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind, with averages of 41, 32.7, and 25.1 FPS respectively. At 3840x2160, the situation is worse. Low averages 29.1 FPS, Medium averages 23 FPS, High averages 17.1 FPS, and Ultra averages 13.4 FPS. None of these come close to 60 FPS.

The verdict is straightforward: this system can run Minimum at 1080p with moderate quality settings, but it cannot deliver a playable experience at higher resolutions. Users with 1440p or 4K displays would need to lower resolution or upgrade the GPU. The CPU is not the limiting factor; the GTX 1650's 40th percentile performance ranking is.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average FPS of 64.4. Low also qualifies at 80.8 FPS, but Medium offers higher visual quality while still clearing the playable threshold by 4.4 FPS. High at 55 FPS and Ultra at 42.4 FPS are not options for a 60 FPS target.

For 2560x1440, there is no preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. The best available result is Low at 49.7 FPS, which is below the threshold. Medium at 41 FPS, High at 32.7 FPS, and Ultra at 25.1 FPS are progressively worse. Users at this resolution would need to accept sub-60 FPS performance or reduce resolution to 1080p.

For 3840x2160, the situation is similarly unplayable. Low at 29.1 FPS is the best result, followed by Medium at 23 FPS, High at 17.1 FPS, and Ultra at 13.4 FPS. No 4K preset reaches even half of the 60 FPS threshold. The recorded data indicates that this GPU is not suitable for 4K gaming in Minimum, regardless of quality settings.