Minimum

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which records an average of 92 FPS. This is the only resolution where every preset clears the 60 FPS playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the highest preset maintaining at least 60 FPS on average is High, delivering 78 FPS. The Ultra preset falls to 59 FPS, just one frame below the playable threshold, so it cannot be recommended for sustained 60 FPS play at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the only preset that stays above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 65 FPS. Medium drops to 50 FPS, High to 42 FPS, and Ultra to 32 FPS, making Low the sole viable option at 4K.

The pattern is clear: as resolution increases, the preset ceiling drops. At 1080p the system can run maximum settings comfortably, at 1440p it must settle for High, and at 4K it falls back to Low. The margin at 4K Low is thin, only 5 FPS above the 60 FPS mark, so any additional load in demanding scenes could push it below the threshold.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data shows that this combination shifts from GPU-bound at lower resolutions to more balanced behavior as resolution climbs. At 1920x1080, the gap between Low and Ultra is substantial: Low averages 188 FPS while Ultra averages 92 FPS. This 96 FPS spread indicates that the GPU is doing most of the work, with the CPU having enough headroom to feed the graphics card at high frame rates.

At 2560x1440, the spread narrows. Low averages 121 FPS and Ultra averages 59 FPS, a difference of 62 FPS. The smaller gap suggests that the GPU is beginning to become the limiting factor, though the CPU still has enough performance to push frame rates well beyond 60 FPS at lower presets.

At 3840x2160, the spread compresses further. Low averages 65 FPS and Ultra averages 32 FPS, a difference of only 33 FPS. This compression indicates that the GPU is now the dominant constraint. The Intel Core i7-14700KF, with its 20 cores and 28 threads, is not the bottleneck at any resolution; the RTX 2070 SUPER's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are what determine the ceiling at higher pixel counts.

The scaling between resolutions reinforces this interpretation. At Low settings, dropping from 1080p to 1440p reduces average FPS by 67 frames (from 188 to 121), and dropping from 1440p to 4K reduces it by another 56 frames (from 121 to 65). At Ultra settings, the corresponding drops are 33 frames (92 to 59) and 27 frames (59 to 32). The consistent decline across resolutions points to the GPU being the primary driver of performance differences, with the CPU contributing little to the frame rate variance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers strong results across all presets. Low averages 188 FPS, Medium averages 144 FPS with a minimum of 122 FPS and a maximum of 165 FPS, High averages 121 FPS, and Ultra averages 92 FPS. Even the lowest minimum recorded at this resolution, 122 FPS on Medium, is more than double the 60 FPS playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, performance remains solid but the ceiling lowers. Low averages 121 FPS, Medium averages 93 FPS with a minimum of 79 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS, High averages 78 FPS, and Ultra averages 59 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 79 FPS shows that even in demanding moments, the system stays well above the playable line. The Ultra preset, however, dips below 60 FPS on average, which makes it unsuitable for a locked 60 FPS experience.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles at higher presets. Low averages 65 FPS, Medium averages 50 FPS with a minimum of 42 FPS and a maximum of 57 FPS, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS. The Medium preset's maximum of 57 FPS never even reaches the 60 FPS threshold, which indicates that anything above Low at 4K will consistently fall short of playable frame rates.

The minimum and maximum data points, where available, provide additional context. At 1080p Medium, the 122 to 165 FPS range shows a stable experience with no concerning dips. At 1440p Medium, the 79 to 106 FPS range remains comfortable. At 4K Medium, the 42 to 57 FPS range confirms that the preset is unplayable by the 60 FPS standard, despite the average being 50 FPS.

The Verdict

This PC can run Minimum, but the playable range depends heavily on resolution. At 1920x1080, all four presets clear 60 FPS, with Ultra averaging 92 FPS. This is the optimal environment for this combination, offering both high visual quality and a comfortable frame rate margin.

At 2560x1440, the system runs High at 78 FPS, Medium at 93 FPS, and Low at 121 FPS, all above the threshold. Ultra averages 59 FPS, which fails the 60 FPS requirement. The best playable setting at this resolution is High, with a 78 FPS average.

At 3840x2160, only Low is playable, averaging 65 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below 60 FPS, with averages of 50, 42, and 32 FPS respectively. The 65 FPS at 4K Low provides only a slim margin above the threshold.

The database verdict confirms these findings: at 2560x1440 the playable settings are High, Low, and Medium, with High identified as the best option; at 1920x1080 all settings are playable with Ultra as the best option; at 3840x2160 only Low is playable. Users targeting 4K should stick to Low settings, while 1440p users have three viable presets and 1080p users have full freedom.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest preset that maintains 60 FPS at 2560x1440?

A: High, with an average of 78 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 59 FPS, just below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: Can this system run the game at 4K with Medium settings?

A: No. At 3840x2160, Medium averages 50 FPS with a minimum of 42 FPS and a maximum of 57 FPS. The maximum never reaches 60 FPS, so the preset is not playable by the database standard.

Q: What is the best playable preset at 1920x1080?

A: Ultra, averaging 92 FPS. All presets at this resolution exceed 60 FPS, with Low reaching 188 FPS, Medium reaching 144 FPS, and High reaching 121 FPS.

Q: How much performance drops when moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings?

A: The average FPS falls from 121 at 1920x1080 to 78 at 2560x1440, a decrease of 43 FPS.

Q: Is the RTX 2070 SUPER or the Core i7-14700KF the limiting factor at 4K?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary constraint at 3840x2160. The frame rate spread between Low and Ultra compresses to just 33 FPS at 4K, compared to 96 FPS at 1080p, showing that the graphics card cannot scale performance with preset changes at higher resolutions.

Q: Does the Ultra preset at 1440p meet the 60 FPS standard?

A: No. The recorded average is 59 FPS, which is one frame below the playable threshold of 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i7-14700KF and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks 2142 out of 3712 tested combos in the database for Minimum. This places it in the lower half of all tested systems, which is notable given the individual components' standings.

The CPU alone ranks in the 94th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 70163. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F at 69996 (0.2% slower), the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX at 69875 (0.4% slower), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X at 69515 (0.9% slower), while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K sits 1% faster at 70879.

The GPU, however, ranks only in the 65th percentile among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 20282. This imbalance explains why the combo ranks in the lower half of the database: the CPU has significant headroom, but the RTX 2070 SUPER holds the system back, particularly at higher resolutions where the GPU becomes the dominant factor.

The ranking reflects the GPU's age and position relative to modern hardware. While the CPU is a current-generation part with top-tier synthetic scores, the GPU is from the GeForce 20-series, which places it well behind contemporary options. The result is a system that performs well at 1080p and 1440p but cannot fully utilize the CPU's capabilities at higher resolutions.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Based on the nearest rivals in the database, several other components would produce similar behavior in this system.

On the CPU side, the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F scores 69996, just 0.2% below the Core i7-14700KF's 70163. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX is 0.4% slower at 69875, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X is 0.9% slower at 69515. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is 1% faster at 70879. Any of these processors would yield nearly identical frame rates in Minimum, since the game is not CPU-limited in this configuration.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 20480, which is 1% above the RTX 2070 SUPER's 20282. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534, 1.2% higher. The Intel Arc B570 scores 20556, 1.3% higher, and the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582, 1.5% higher. These alternatives are all within a narrow band of the RTX 2070 SUPER, so users with any of these GPUs would likely see similar performance in Minimum, with the same limitations at 4K and the same playable presets at 1080p and 1440p.

The database shows that the RTX 2070 SUPER sits at the lower end of this rival group, with all four alternatives scoring slightly higher. However, the differences are small, ranging from 1% to 1.5%, so the practical impact on frame rates in Minimum would be minimal. The playable settings and resolution outcomes would remain essentially unchanged.