Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination delivers a distinctly resolution-dependent experience in Minimum, a Third-Person Shooter released in 2014. The benchmark data, measured directly rather than estimated, shows a system that scales from a comfortable 1080p ultra experience down to a marginal 4K low preset. At 1920x1080 the pairing is thoroughly dominant, with average frame rates ranging from 88 FPS at Ultra settings up to 179 FPS at Low. Dropping to 2560x1440 still keeps every setting above the 60 FPS playability threshold, though Ultra dips to 57 FPS. At 3840x2160 the picture changes drastically: only the Low preset clears the 60 FPS bar, with Medium and High falling below it and Ultra limping along at 30 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured results show a clear performance hierarchy across the three tested resolutions. At 3840x2160, the RTX 5050 is under heavy pressure. The High preset produces an average of 40 FPS, while Medium averages 48 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS and a maximum of 55 FPS. Low is the only playable option at this resolution, averaging 62 FPS. Ultra is the least viable, averaging just 30 FPS. These numbers indicate that 4K rendering demands more from the 8 GB GDDR6 memory buffer and the 2560 shading units than the card can comfortably deliver at higher quality settings.

Moving to 2560x1440 shows a substantial improvement. The Low preset jumps to 116 FPS average, Medium delivers 88 FPS with a minimum of 75 FPS and a maximum of 102 FPS, and High reaches 74 FPS. Ultra falls just short of the 60 FPS playability threshold at 57 FPS. The data here shows a consistent 30-40% performance uplift over the equivalent 4K settings, which is expected given the pixel count reduction from 8.3 million to 3.7 million. The minimum frame rates at Medium also suggest good frame pacing, with the 75 FPS floor staying well above the playable threshold.

At 1920x1080, the combination is clearly overprovisioned for this game. Low settings produce 179 FPS, Medium averages 137 FPS with a minimum of 117 FPS and a maximum of 158 FPS, and High reaches 115 FPS. Even Ultra, which stresses the GPU the most, maintains an 88 FPS average. The gap between Medium and High is just 22 FPS, while the jump from High to Low is 64 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset is not disproportionately demanding compared to High. The minimum frame rate at Medium, 117 FPS, is higher than the average frame rate at High, which suggests the card is never bottlenecked at this resolution.

The frame time data, where available, reinforces these findings. At 4K Medium, the 41 FPS minimum against a 48 FPS average indicates occasional dips, but these remain brief enough to avoid a sustained stutter. At 1440p Medium, the 75 FPS minimum versus an 88 FPS average shows a tighter distribution, and at 1080p Medium the 117 FPS minimum versus a 137 FPS average demonstrates excellent consistency. The absence of minimum and maximum values for several settings means those specific data points are not available, but the averages alone tell a coherent story of a card that scales predictably with resolution.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 62 FPS. This is the only setting at 4K that clears the playability threshold, and it does so narrowly. The 62 FPS average suggests that while the game is playable, there is little headroom for demanding scenes. High at 40 FPS and Medium at 48 FPS are both firmly below the line, and Ultra at 30 FPS is half the playable rate.

At 2560x1440, High is the best playable setting, averaging 74 FPS. This is a significant improvement over the 4K situation, and it means users can run the game with high quality assets without sacrificing smoothness. Medium at 88 FPS and Low at 116 FPS are also viable, but they do not offer the same visual fidelity. Ultra at 57 FPS is technically below the threshold, so it is not recommended for a 60 FPS target, though it is close enough that some users might tolerate it.

For 1920x1080, Ultra is the best playable setting, averaging 88 FPS. This is a decisive result: the system can run the game at maximum quality with a frame rate that is 46% above the playable threshold. The 88 FPS average at Ultra also leaves room for background tasks or streaming software. High at 115 FPS, Medium at 137 FPS, and Low at 179 FPS are all faster, but they sacrifice visual quality for frame rates that exceed what a 60 Hz or even 144 Hz display can fully utilize in most scenarios.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 sits in a tight cluster of processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 0.4% lower on average, effectively identical performance. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is 0.5% slower in aggregate, and the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H is 0.6% faster. The Intel Core i5-14600K is 0.8% faster. These deltas are all within noise margins, meaning any of these processors would produce nearly the same frame rates in Minimum when paired with the RTX 5050. The 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates this is a strong processor overall, but its specific performance in this game is matched by several alternatives.

For the GPU, the RTX 5050's nearest rivals are an eclectic group. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL scores 0.6% lower, while the AMD Radeon HD 8970M is 1% slower. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT is 1.6% faster, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile is 1.6% slower. These small deltas mean that swapping the RTX 5050 for any of these cards would yield nearly identical frame rates across all resolutions and settings. The RX 5600 XT, being slightly faster, would nudge the 4K Low average from 62 FPS to roughly 63 FPS, while the HD 8970M would drop it to about 61 FPS. None of these alternatives would change the playability verdict at any resolution.

It is worth remembering the GPU's nearest rivals include both desktop and mobile parts, which reflects the RTX 5050's position as an entry-level desktop card with performance that overlaps with older high-end mobile solutions. The 66th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms this is a mid-pack graphics card, and the 8 GB memory capacity is adequate for this 2014 title but would be a limiting factor in newer games.

The Verdict

The data answers the question directly: this PC can run Minimum at 60 FPS or above at 1080p and 1440p, but only at 4K on the Low preset. At 1920x1080, the system clears 60 FPS at every preset, with the Ultra setting averaging 88 FPS. This is a definitive pass for 1080p gaming, and the 179 FPS at Low means even high refresh rate displays can be satisfied. At 2560x1440, High is the best playable setting with 74 FPS, and Low and Medium also exceed the threshold. Ultra at 57 FPS is the only miss at this resolution. At 3840x2160, only Low at 62 FPS is playable, while Medium at 48 FPS, High at 40 FPS, and Ultra at 30 FPS all fall short.

The verdict by resolution is clear: 1080p users can run the game at maximum settings with a comfortable margin, 1440p users should stick to High or below for a locked 60 FPS, and 4K users must accept Low settings. The 60 FPS playability threshold is enforced strictly in the data, and the system meets it in seven out of twelve tested configurations. For a game released in 2014, this is a strong showing, but the 4K results highlight the RTX 5050's limits at higher pixel densities.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K with High settings?

A: No. The measured average frame rate at 3840x2160 with High settings is 40 FPS, which is well below the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: What is the highest playable setting at 1440p?

A: High is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS at 2560x1440, with an average of 74 FPS. Ultra falls short at 57 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT?

A: The RX 5600 XT is 1.6% faster in average benchmark score, so performance in Minimum would be nearly identical, with frame rates differing by only a frame or two.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 a bottleneck for the RTX 5050 in this game?

A: The CPU's nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14600K, is 0.8% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is 0.5% slower. These tiny deltas suggest the CPU is not a limiting factor, as any of these processors would produce similar frame rates.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The measured average is 88 FPS, which is 46% above the 60 FPS playability threshold. This is the best playable preset at 1920x1080.

Q: Does the 4K Medium preset maintain a stable frame rate?

A: The data shows an average of 48 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS and a maximum of 55 FPS. The minimum is close to the average, but the entire range sits below the 60 FPS threshold, so it is not playable.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 2274th out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum. That places it in the lower-middle portion of the database, which is consistent with the measured frame rates. The 1080p results are strong, with Ultra settings nearly reaching 90 FPS, but the 4K results pull the overall ranking down. The 61.3 percentile position (calculated from the rank and total) means roughly 61% of tested systems perform better in this game, while 39% perform worse.

The ranking is influenced by the fact that many tested combos pair higher-end CPUs with stronger GPUs, which would push 4K Medium or High above 60 FPS. This system's 4K ceiling is Low, which limits its overall position. However, the 1080p and 1440p results are respectable, and the rank of 2274 is not a reflection of poor performance at those resolutions. The GPU's 66th percentile ranking among all GPUs is higher than the combo's overall ranking, which suggests the CPU is holding back the system slightly in the aggregate benchmark, though the game-specific data shows the CPU is not a bottleneck in Minimum. The combo's position is a fair representation of a mid-range desktop setup that excels at 1080p, handles 1440p well with settings adjusted, and only manages 4K at the lowest quality preset.