Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is a combination built for outright performance, and the benchmark data for Minimum reflects that. This is a CPU that sits in the 89th percentile of all processors, while the GPU is in the 88th percentile of all graphics cards. The result is a system that does not merely play this 2014 third-person shooter; it overwhelms it, delivering frame rates that are relevant only for high-refresh-rate displays at every resolution tested.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU each have close rivals based on average benchmark scores, which helps contextualize where this combo sits in the broader hardware landscape.

For the Intel Core Ultra 5 235, its average benchmark score of 46062 puts it in a tight cluster of processors. The nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-13900HX, which scores 46098, a mere 0.1% difference. This means the Ultra 5 235 trades blows with a high-end mobile HX chip from the previous generation, delivering essentially identical compute performance. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is also effectively tied, with a score of 46030 and a delta of 0.1%, making it another direct alternative. On the server side, the AMD EPYC 4364P (45970, 0.2% delta) and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960, 0.2% delta) are also within a rounding error of the Ultra 5 235. In practical terms for gaming, any of these four processors would deliver indistinguishable performance in Minimum; the bottleneck will never be the CPU.

For the GPU, the RTX 4090 has an average benchmark score of 60347. Its closest rival is the Intel Arc Pro A60, which scores 60326, a 0% delta. This is a surprising pairing on paper, but the data shows they are statistically equivalent in raw benchmark terms. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60140, 0.3% delta) is also a near match. Slightly further away, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61896, -2.5% delta) actually scores higher, and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58657, 2.9% delta) scores lower. For a gamer, the RTX 4090 is in a class of its own for real-time rendering, but the synthetic benchmark data suggests that these professional or workstation cards sit in a similar performance envelope, meaning they would produce similar frame counts in compute-heavy tasks, though not necessarily in gaming-specific workloads.

How This Combo Ranks

Across all tested combinations of hardware for Minimum, this specific pairing ranks 126th out of 3712 combos. That places it in the top 3.4% of all systems tested. This is an exceptionally high ranking, indicating that only a small fraction of tested configurations deliver higher frame rates. The rank is driven primarily by the GPU’s raw power, as the CPU is strong but not at the very top of its own percentile. The data shows this is not a "just enough" system; it is a system that sits near the apex of the test pool, with only a handful of more exotic or newer components performing better. For a game released in 2014, this rank reflects a massive over-provisioning of hardware, but the measured FPS numbers confirm that it translates into massive headroom.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. The minimum FPS is only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution, but the average and maximum figures are consistent.

At 1920x1080, the system is effectively uncapped by the game engine. On Low settings, the average FPS is 394, which is a staggering number. Medium settings drop this to an average of 301 FPS, with a minimum of 256 and a maximum of 347. High settings yield an average of 253 FPS. Even at Ultra, the most demanding preset, the average FPS is 193. This means that at 1080p, the RTX 4090 is rarely breaking a sweat, and the frame rate is likely limited by the game’s engine or the CPU’s single-thread performance in certain scenes. The gap between Low and Ultra is significant—201 FPS—but even the lowest point on Ultra is far above any playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the numbers remain extremely high but show the expected scaling. Low settings produce an average of 254 FPS. Medium averages 194 FPS, with a minimum of 165 and a maximum of 223. High settings average 163 FPS. Ultra still maintains a robust 124 FPS average. The transition from 1080p to 1440p reduces performance by roughly 35-40% across all presets, which is consistent with the increased pixel count. However, the system remains so far above 60 FPS that the difference is academic; even the Ultra preset at 1440p offers more than double the playable threshold.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the data shows the first signs of the GPU being pushed. Low settings average 137 FPS, which is still excellent. Medium averages 105 FPS, with a minimum of 89 and a maximum of 120. High settings average 88 FPS. Ultra settings, the heaviest load tested, still produce an average of 67 FPS. This is the only configuration where the system dips below the 100 FPS mark, but it remains above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is a further 40-45% reduction in frame rate, but the absolute numbers remain high.

The Verdict

This PC can run Minimum with absolute ease. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous: at every resolution tested—1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160—all four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra) are considered playable, meaning they all clear the 60 FPS threshold. The best settings at each resolution are Ultra, with average FPS of 193 at 1080p, 124 at 1440p, and 67 at 4K.

The data indicates that even the most demanding configuration (4K, Ultra) holds a 7 FPS margin above the 60 FPS threshold, which is a relatively slim buffer for a game with potential frame-time spikes. However, the minimum FPS recorded at 4K Medium was 89, suggesting that the GPU does not experience severe drops. For the vast majority of players, this system will deliver a locked 60 FPS at 4K Ultra with V-sync enabled, and it will easily push 120+ FPS at 1440p on any preset. At 1080p, the system is so fast that it will likely be limited by the refresh rate of the monitor rather than the hardware.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals how the load shifts between the CPU and GPU as resolution changes. At 1080p, the CPU plays a more significant role. The gap between Low (394 FPS) and Ultra (193 FPS) is 201 FPS, which is a 51% reduction. This indicates that while the GPU is still the primary driver, the CPU’s ability to feed frames becomes a factor at these extreme frame rates. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235, with its 14 cores and 14 threads and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, is more than capable, but the scaling shows that the game’s draw calls and physics updates can become a bottleneck at over 300 FPS.

As resolution increases to 1440p, the GPU load grows. The difference between Low (254 FPS) and Ultra (124 FPS) is 130 FPS, a 51% reduction, but the absolute frame rates are lower. This is the classic transition point where the GPU becomes the dominant constraint, and the CPU’s influence wanes.

At 4K, the GPU is unquestionably the limiting factor. The difference between Low (137 FPS) and Ultra (67 FPS) is 70 FPS, a 51% reduction, but the absolute numbers are much lower. The pixel throughput required at 3840x2160 is four times that of 1080p, and the RTX 4090’s 82.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 1.01 TB/s memory bandwidth are being taxed. The CPU’s role diminishes to near-irrelevance; even a significantly weaker processor would likely produce similar frame rates at 4K, as the GPU is the bottleneck. The data shows that for this game, the CPU matters most at 1080p for achieving the highest possible frame rates, but the GPU is the component that determines playability at 4K.

Best Settings per Resolution

The optimal configuration for each resolution is straightforward, as the system has enough power to max out the game everywhere.

At 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra, with an average FPS of 193. This is the highest preset available, and it still delivers more than triple the 60 FPS threshold. There is no reason to lower the settings at this resolution, as even the most demanding preset leaves massive headroom for background tasks or streaming.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, with an average FPS of 124. This is comfortably above 60 FPS and also above the 120 FPS mark, making it ideal for 120Hz or 144Hz monitors. The system does not require any compromises; Ultra is the only sensible choice.

At 3840x2160, the best settings are Ultra, with an average FPS of 67. This is the only resolution where the system drops below 100 FPS, but it still clears the 60 FPS threshold. While Ultra is technically the best setting, the 7 FPS margin above the playable threshold is worth noting. For a more consistent experience with fewer frame-time dips, dropping to High (88 FPS average) or Medium (105 FPS average) would provide additional headroom, but the data shows Ultra remains playable. This system is not just capable of running Minimum; it is capable of running it at maximum fidelity at 4K, which reflects the RTX 4090’s dominance.