Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Minimum shows a clear progression of performance across resolutions and presets. At 3840x2160, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the Intel Arc B370 delivers an average of 19 FPS on High settings, 23 FPS on Medium with a minimum of 19 FPS and maximum of 26 FPS, 30 FPS on Low, and 15 FPS on Ultra. None of these averages approach the 60 FPS playability threshold, and the gap is substantial. The 4K results sit in a range that would be considered a slideshow for a third-person shooter, with even the least demanding preset falling to half of the target frame rate.

Moving to 2560x1440, the picture improves but remains firmly below playable levels. High settings produce an average of 35 FPS, Medium delivers 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 FPS and maximum of 48 FPS, Low reaches 55 FPS, and Ultra drops to 27 FPS. The Medium preset shows a 6 FPS spread between minimum and maximum, indicating frame time variance that would be noticeable during gameplay. The Low preset at 55 FPS is the closest this resolution comes to the 60 FPS target, yet it still falls short by 5 FPS on average.

At 1920x1080, the data finally shows playable territory. Low settings achieve an average of 85 FPS, Medium delivers 65 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS and maximum of 75 FPS, High reaches 55 FPS, and Ultra drops to 42 FPS. The Medium preset is the standout: its 65 FPS average clears the 60 FPS threshold, though the 56 FPS minimum means brief dips below the target are possible during intense scenes. The High preset at 55 FPS sits just 5 FPS below the playability line, while Ultra at 42 FPS is clearly not suitable for smooth gameplay.

The scaling pattern across resolutions is consistent. From 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, average FPS drops by roughly 35-40% across presets. From 2560x1440 to 3840x2160, the drop is steeper, around 45-50% for most settings. This nonlinear scaling indicates that the GPU is the dominant constraint at higher resolutions.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results reveal a system where the GPU is overwhelmingly the limiting factor for Minimum. The Intel Arc B370 has a recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. This is an integrated graphics solution with 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 raster output units, and 10 ray tracing cores. Its FP32 throughput is 6.144 TFLOPS, and it operates at a boost clock of 2400 MHz. For a third-person shooter from 2014, this GPU is positioned at the very low end of the performance spectrum.

The CPU side tells a different story. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It boosts to 5.30 GHz and has a 30 MB shared L3 cache. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42216 and single-core score of 5960 place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Passmark single-thread score of 4689 confirms strong per-core performance, which matters for older game engines like the one powering Minimum.

The resolution scaling data clarifies the bottleneck. At 1920x1080, the GPU can partially keep up with the CPU's frame generation capability, yielding 85 FPS on Low. But as resolution increases, the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the binding constraint. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are simply insufficient for 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 rendering at acceptable frame rates. The CPU's role diminishes as resolution climbs, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario.

The preset scaling within each resolution further confirms this. At 1920x1080, going from Low to Medium costs 20 FPS (85 to 65), Medium to High costs another 10 FPS (65 to 55), and High to Ultra costs 13 FPS (55 to 42). This steep drop with each preset tier indicates the GPU's shading and texture resources are quickly exhausted. The CPU is never the limiting factor here; even at Ultra 1080p, the Core Ultra 7 265 has ample headroom to feed frames to the GPU.

FAQ

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS at 1920x1080?

A: Yes, on Low and Medium presets. Low averages 85 FPS, and Medium averages 65 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS. High and Ultra fall short at 55 FPS and 42 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best preset at 2560x1440?

A: No preset at 2560x1440 reaches 60 FPS. Low comes closest at 55 FPS, followed by Medium at 42 FPS, High at 35 FPS, and Ultra at 27 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game?

A: The GPU is the dominant constraint. The Intel Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile. Resolution scaling shows steep FPS drops as pixel count increases, which is characteristic of GPU-bound scenarios.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% lower). Performance is essentially identical across this group.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 3840x2160?

A: All presets are well below playable. Low averages 30 FPS, Medium averages 23 FPS with a minimum of 19 FPS, High averages 19 FPS, and Ultra averages 15 FPS.

Q: Does the Medium preset at 1080p have stable frame times?

A: The recorded minimum of 56 FPS and maximum of 75 FPS show a 19 FPS spread. While the average of 65 FPS clears the 60 FPS threshold, the minimum indicates occasional dips below playable levels.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: this combination can run Minimum at playable frame rates only at 1920x1080, and only on Low or Medium presets. The verdict by resolution confirms that 3840x2160 and 2560x1440 have no playable settings whatsoever. At 1080p, Low and Medium are the only presets that clear the 60 FPS average threshold. The best playable configuration is Medium at 1080p, delivering 65 FPS average.

For a game released in 2014, this is a disappointing result. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is more than capable of handling the CPU workload, but the Intel Arc B370's integrated graphics solution cannot keep pace with modern rendering demands at higher resolutions. The 5th percentile GPU ranking places this system in the bottom tier of tested configurations.

The practical takeaway is that this system is suitable for 1080p gaming at medium settings for Minimum, but any attempt to push higher resolutions or higher presets will result in frame rates well below the 60 FPS target. Players seeking smooth 1440p or 4K gameplay would need a substantially more powerful discrete GPU.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The highest average is 30 FPS on Low, which is half the target. The database records no playable settings for this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the situation is similar. Low achieves 55 FPS, which is the best result, but it still falls short of the 60 FPS threshold. No preset is playable at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the best playable preset is Medium, with an average of 65 FPS. This is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. Low also clears the threshold at 85 FPS, but Medium offers the highest visual quality while maintaining playability. High at 55 FPS and Ultra at 42 FPS are not playable.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3425 out of 3712 tested combinations for Minimum. This places the system in the bottom 8% of all tested configurations. The ranking reflects the GPU's severe performance limitation, not the CPU's capability. The Core Ultra 7 265 alone ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, but the Arc B370's 5th percentile GPU ranking drags the overall combination down.

This rank suggests that most other hardware combinations tested for this game deliver better frame rates. The system is functional at 1080p Low and Medium, but it cannot compete with the majority of configurations in the database for higher-resolution play.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the GPU, the Intel Arc B370's performance is closely matched by several older AMD and ATI parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, just 0.2% higher. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, 0.5% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, 0.7% higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, 1.4% lower. Any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum, meaning users with those parts can expect the same 1080p Medium playability and the same shortfalls at higher resolutions.

For the CPU, the nearest rivals are all within 0.7% of the Core Ultra 7 265's average benchmark score. The AMD EPYC 4464P scores 64823, which is 0.3% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64438, 0.3% lower. The AMD EPYC 7343 scores 64202, 0.7% lower. The AMD EPYC 9124 scores 65104, 0.7% higher. None of these CPU differences would meaningfully change the frame rates in Minimum, since the GPU is the limiting factor.

The database shows that swapping the CPU to any of these near-identical alternatives would leave the gaming experience unchanged. Swapping the GPU to any of its nearest rivals would also produce nearly identical results. The bottleneck is firmly on the graphics side, and the performance profile is consistent across this cluster of similarly capable hardware.