Minimum

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 60 FPS in 1080p?

A: Yes. The recorded data shows playable performance at 1080p on High, Medium, and Low presets, with average frame rates of 61, 72, and 95 FPS respectively. The Ultra preset drops to 46 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best playable settings preset at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, only the Low preset clears the 60 FPS threshold, averaging 61 FPS. Medium averages 47 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS, all below the playable line.

Q: Is 4K playable with this configuration?

A: No. At 3840x2160, every preset falls below 60 FPS. The highest average recorded is 33 FPS on Low settings, followed by 25 FPS on Medium, 21 FPS on High, and 16 FPS on Ultra. None of these reach the playable threshold.

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

A: The Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482. It sits 1.3% above the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% above the GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% above the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% above the GeForce GT 710 (1443). These are very tight margins, indicating near-identical raw performance among this group.

Q: Where does the Core i9-14900K rank among all tested CPUs?

A: The i9-14900K sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 79097, with nearest rivals including the i9-14900KF at 79371 (0.3% higher), the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus at 79574 (0.6% higher), and the EPYC 7413 at 80041 (1.2% higher). The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 trails it by 1.7% with a score of 77740.

Q: What is the overall combo rank for this pairing in Minimum?

A: This combination of Intel Core i9-14900K and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3299 out of 3712 tested combos in the game. That places it in the lower portion of the database, which aligns with the GPU's modest performance profile.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a clear pattern: the Intel Arc B390 is the limiting component in this pairing, and its influence grows dramatically as resolution increases. At 1080p, the CPU has enough headroom to push the GPU to 95 FPS on Low settings, but the GPU's ceiling becomes apparent when presets climb. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 23 FPS (95 to 72), from Medium to High costs another 11 FPS (72 to 61), and from High to Ultra costs 15 FPS (61 to 46). These steep drops across preset tiers indicate that the GPU's shading units, texture units, and memory bandwidth, all shared system resources, are saturated well before the CPU's 24 cores and 32 threads are stressed.

At 1440p, the GPU's limitations become more pronounced. The average frame rate at High settings falls from 61 FPS at 1080p to 39 FPS at 1440p, a 36% reduction. Low settings drop from 95 FPS to 61 FPS, a 36% reduction as well. This consistent scaling across the resolution jump suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck, since the CPU's workload does not scale linearly with pixel count. The Core i9-14900K, with its 6.00 GHz boost clock and strong single-thread performance (2262.5 in Cinebench R23 single-core), is far beyond what a 2014 third-person shooter requires for draw calls and game logic.

At 4K, the GPU is overwhelmed. The best average at 3840x2160 is 33 FPS on Low, which is barely half of the 60 FPS threshold. The scaling from 1440p Low (61 FPS) to 4K Low (33 FPS) represents a 46% performance loss, steeper than the 1080p-to-1440p drop. This nonlinear degradation points to memory bandwidth constraints, as the Arc B390 relies on system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The i9-14900K's dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support cannot compensate for the GPU's need to access the same memory pool for both geometry and textures.

The preset scaling further confirms the GPU-bound nature of this pairing. At every resolution, the gap between Low and Ultra is substantial: 49 FPS at 1080p (95 to 46), 31 FPS at 1440p (61 to 30), and 17 FPS at 4K (33 to 16). The absolute FPS losses shrink at higher resolutions because the GPU is already struggling with the base pixel workload, leaving less headroom for additional shading and effects. The CPU's role, by contrast, remains largely static across these scenarios; its 95th percentile ranking indicates it can feed the GPU far more frames than the Arc B390 can render.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the configuration delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 95 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded in the database. Medium settings average 72 FPS, with a minimum of 62 and a maximum of 83. High settings average 61 FPS, again with no min or max values logged. Ultra settings drop to 46 FPS average. All three playable presets clear the 60 FPS threshold, though High sits just one frame above it.

At 2560x1440, performance falls across the board. Low averages 61 FPS, exactly at the playable threshold. Medium averages 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 54. High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. Only Low is considered playable, and it holds no margin for demanding scenes; the recorded average is precisely 61 FPS, meaning any deviation in scene complexity could push it below 60.

At 3840x2160, the data shows a steep decline. Low averages 33 FPS. Medium averages 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 and a maximum of 29. High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. No preset at this resolution approaches the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium preset's min-max range of 21 to 29 FPS illustrates the narrow operating window the GPU has at 4K; even the best-case frame lands far below playability.

The frame rate deltas between resolutions are consistent with a GPU-bound workload. The 1080p Medium average of 72 FPS falls to 47 FPS at 1440p, a 25 FPS loss, and then to 25 FPS at 4K, another 22 FPS loss. The Low preset follows a similar path: 95 to 61 to 33. These stepwise reductions align with the increasing pixel counts of each resolution tier, confirming that the Arc B390's rendering pipeline, not the CPU, dictates the frame rate ceiling.

The Verdict

This PC can run Minimum, but only under specific conditions. At 1920x1080, the system is playable on High, Medium, and Low presets, with High being the best playable option at 61 FPS average. The Ultra preset at 1080p falls short at 46 FPS, so it is not recommended for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is marginal. Low settings average 61 FPS, which clears the threshold, but just barely. Medium, High, and Ultra all fail to reach 60 FPS, with averages of 47, 39, and 30 respectively. Players targeting 1440p must accept the lowest visual preset and even then, frame pacing could suffer in busy scenes given the narrow margin.

At 3840x2160, the system cannot run the game at a playable frame rate on any preset. The highest average is 33 FPS on Low, which is 45% below the 60 FPS target. The data indicates that 4K is simply beyond the Arc B390's capabilities for this title, regardless of the i9-14900K's processing power.

The overall picture is straightforward: this is a 1080p pairing. The CPU is more than capable, ranking in the 95th percentile of all processors, but the GPU, which sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, anchors the system's gaming performance. The combination ranks 3299 out of 3712 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower quarter of the database. For 1080p gaming at medium-to-high settings, it delivers acceptable results. For higher resolutions, the data says no.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Arc B390's nearest GPU rivals, based on average benchmark scores, are all NVIDIA parts from older generations. The GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, just 1.3% below the Arc B390. The GeForce 800M scores 1460, a 1.5% gap. The GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower, and the GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower. These deltas are small enough that users could expect similar frame rates in Minimum, all constrained to roughly the same performance envelope. In practice, any of these GPUs would likely produce comparable averages at 1080p Low or Medium, and all would struggle equally at 1440p and 4K.

On the CPU side, the Core i9-14900K's nearest rivals show even tighter clustering. The i9-14900KF averages 79371, a 0.3% advantage over the i9-14900K's 79097. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 79574, 0.6% higher. The AMD EPYC 7413 reaches 80041, 1.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 trails by 1.7% with a score of 77740. For a game like Minimum, which is GPU-bound at playable settings, swapping among these CPUs would produce no meaningful frame rate difference. The bottleneck remains the GPU in every scenario.

The practical takeaway from the rival data is that the pairing's performance in Minimum is determined almost entirely by the GPU. A user with any of the four rival CPUs and an Arc B390 would see nearly identical results. Conversely, pairing the i9-14900K with any of the rival GPUs would yield frame rates that are statistically indistinguishable from those recorded here, given the sub-3% performance gaps between the GPUs.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of Intel Core i9-14900K and Intel Arc B390 ranks 3299 out of 3712 tested combinations in Minimum. That places it in the 11th percentile of all tested combos, meaning roughly 89% of configurations in the database deliver better performance in this game. The ranking reflects the severe imbalance between the two components: a top-tier CPU paired with a bottom-tier GPU.

The low rank is not a commentary on the CPU. The i9-14900K's 95th percentile standing among all CPUs means it is one of the strongest processors in the database. But Minimum's frame rates are dictated by the GPU, and the Arc B390's 9th percentile ranking among all GPUs drags the overall combo down. In GPU-bound scenarios, the CPU's strength is irrelevant to the final frame rate; the recorded averages of 21 to 95 FPS across resolutions and presets all fall within the GPU's capabilities.

This ranking also contextualizes the playable settings data. The fact that the combo still manages 1080p High at 61 FPS, despite ranking near the bottom of the database, speaks to the age and optimization level of Minimum. A 2014 third-person shooter with modest graphical demands can run acceptably on hardware that would fail in modern titles. Still, the 3299 rank signals that users seeking higher resolutions or Ultra presets would need a substantially stronger GPU to move up the database ladder.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the best playable preset is High, which averages 61 FPS. This clears the 60 FPS threshold by a single frame, so it is the most demanding setting that remains playable. Medium offers more headroom at 72 FPS, and Low reaches 95 FPS, but High provides the best visual quality among the playable options. Ultra is not viable, as its 46 FPS average falls below the threshold.

At 2560x1440, the best playable preset is Low, averaging 61 FPS. This is the only setting at this resolution that reaches the 60 FPS mark. Medium comes close at 47 FPS but misses the threshold by a wide margin, and both High and Ultra are well below playability. The 61 FPS average on Low leaves no room for frame rate dips, so users should be prepared for occasional sub-60 moments in demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, there is no playable preset. The database records no playable settings at this resolution, and the best average FPS at any preset is 33 on Low. The verdict data confirms this: no settings are listed as playable, and the best settings field is null. Users targeting 4K must either lower their expectations to unplayable frame rates or consider different hardware entirely. The i9-14900K's processing power cannot overcome the Arc B390's rendering limits at this resolution.