Minimum

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 sits at rank 2971 out of 3712 tested combos in the database for Minimum. This places it in the lower 20th percentile of all tested configurations, which at first glance may seem modest, but the context of the game matters substantially. Minimum is a third-person shooter from 2014, and its engine demands are far more modest than modern titles. The combo's rank reflects the RTX 2060's position in the GPU hierarchy, as the CPU is exceptionally strong. The RTX 2060 itself holds a percentile rank of 58 among all GPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly 58% of the database's tested graphics cards. Meanwhile, the Core Ultra 7 265K sits in the 94th percentile among CPUs, outperforming 94% of all processors recorded. This massive asymmetry, a top-tier CPU paired with a mid-range GPU from 2019, defines the combo's behavior across resolutions. The rank of 2971 out of 3712 suggests that while the combination is far from the top, it is also far from the bottom, and its real-world playability depends entirely on resolution and settings, as the measured FPS data demonstrates.

CPU and GPU Roles

In Minimum, the RTX 2060 is the primary bottleneck at every resolution, and the data clearly shows this. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 154.2 FPS, which is a very high frame rate. Moving to Medium settings drops this to 117.1 FPS, and High settings yield 101.7 FPS. The jump to Ultra settings brings 75.8 FPS. These numbers show that even at the highest preset at 1080p, the system remains well above the 60 FPS threshold. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p represents a drop of about 51%, from 154.2 to 75.8 FPS, which is a typical pattern for GPU-bound scenarios where increasing graphical workload directly reduces frame rates. The CPU's immense headroom, given its 20 cores and 20 threads with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, is never stressed by this title. The RTX 2060, with its 1920 shading units and 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, is the limiting factor.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern continues but with lower absolute numbers. Low settings produce 101.5 FPS, Medium produces 75 FPS, and High produces 61.7 FPS. Ultra settings fall to 48.5 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1440p is a drop from 101.5 to 48.5 FPS, a reduction of about 52%. This is nearly identical to the percentage drop seen at 1080p, confirming that the GPU is consistently the constraint. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p at High settings reduces FPS from 101.7 to 61.7, a 39% decline, which is more severe than the settings-based scaling at the same resolution. This is because raising resolution increases the pixel count, and the RTX 2060's pixel rate of 80.64 GPixel/s becomes a hard limit.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is severely overtaxed. Low settings produce 51.4 FPS, Medium produces 42.8 FPS, High produces 34.7 FPS, and Ultra produces just 24.8 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS threshold. The jump from 1440p to 4K at High settings drops FPS from 61.7 to 34.7, a 44% reduction. This is a clear indication that the RTX 2060 cannot handle 4K rendering for this title at any preset. The CPU's role is essentially negligible here; even at 4K Ultra, where the GPU is producing just 24.8 FPS, the Core Ultra 7 265K is not the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates across all resolutions, but the data shows a consistent decline as resolution increases, which is the signature of a GPU-bound workload. The CPU's massive multi-threaded score of 35,850 in Cinebench R23 and 20,918 in R20 are irrelevant to this game's frame pacing, as Minimum is not a CPU-intensive title.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the GPU, the nearest rivals to the RTX 2060 in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580, the AMD Radeon 680M, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600. The GTX 580 has an average score of 15,283, which is effectively identical to the RTX 2060's 15,290, with a delta of 0%. This means the GTX 580, despite being an older architecture, would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum at the same settings. The Radeon 680M, an integrated GPU, scores 15,270, a 0.1% delta, meaning it is also statistically indistinguishable. The RTX 3050 OEM scores 15,199, a 0.6% delta, and the RX 7600 scores 15,171, a 0.8% delta. All four of these GPUs would behave within 1% of the RTX 2060 in this game, so any of them would deliver the same playability profile: capable at 1080p and 1440p with adjusted presets, but not at 4K. None of these alternatives would change the fundamental conclusion that 4K is not playable.

For the CPU, the nearest rivals to the Core Ultra 7 265K are the Intel Xeon 6511P, the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270, the Intel Core i7-14700KF, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F. The Xeon 6511P has an average score of 71,051, a delta of -0.2%, meaning it is slightly slower but effectively identical. The Xeon Platinum 8270 scores 71,370, a -0.7% delta, also effectively identical. The Core i7-14700KF scores 70,163, a 1% delta, and the Ryzen 7 9700F scores 69,996, a 1.3% delta. Since the CPU is not the bottleneck in Minimum, swapping the Core Ultra 7 265K for any of these rivals would produce no measurable difference in FPS. The frame rates would be exactly the same as those recorded, because the GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions. This is a case where CPU choice is irrelevant for this specific game, and any of these processors would pair equally well with the RTX 2060.

The Verdict

The recorded data provides a clear verdict for this combo in Minimum. At 1920x1080, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with the lowest average FPS being 75.8 at Ultra settings. This means the system clears the 60 FPS threshold with significant margin at the most demanding preset. At 2560x1440, three presets are playable: Low at 101.5 FPS, Medium at 75 FPS, and High at 61.7 FPS. Ultra settings at 1440p fall to 48.5 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold, so that preset is not recommended. At 3840x2160, no preset is playable. The highest average FPS at 4K is 51.4 at Low settings, which is below 60 FPS, and all other presets are lower (42.8 at Medium, 34.7 at High, 24.8 at Ultra). Therefore, the verdict is that this PC can run Minimum, but only at 1080p with any preset, and at 1440p with up to High settings. It cannot run the game at 4K with any preset. For users with a 1080p monitor, the experience is fully playable with headroom. For 1440p users, High settings provide a playable experience, but Ultra should be avoided. For 4K users, this combo is not suitable, and lower resolutions or a GPU upgrade would be required.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data was recorded for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 in Minimum. All values are average FPS; minimum and maximum FPS were not recorded for any configuration.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset produced 154.2 FPS. The Medium preset produced 117.1 FPS. The High preset produced 101.7 FPS. The Ultra preset produced 75.8 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra is a reduction of 78.4 FPS, or approximately 51% of the Low value. The step from Low to Medium is a drop of 37.1 FPS, from Medium to High is a drop of 15.4 FPS, and from High to Ultra is a drop of 25.9 FPS. The largest single step is between Low and Medium, indicating that the Medium preset adds a significant graphical workload. The smallest step is between Medium and High, suggesting that the High preset is relatively close to Medium in demand.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset produced 101.5 FPS. The Medium preset produced 75 FPS. The High preset produced 61.7 FPS. The Ultra preset produced 48.5 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra is a reduction of 53 FPS, or approximately 52% of the Low value. The step from Low to Medium is a drop of 26.5 FPS, from Medium to High is a drop of 13.3 FPS, and from High to Ultra is a drop of 13.2 FPS. The steps are more even here compared to 1080p, with each preset increment costing between 13 and 27 FPS. The High preset at 61.7 FPS is just barely above the 60 FPS threshold, with only 1.7 FPS of headroom.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset produced 51.4 FPS. The Medium preset produced 42.8 FPS. The High preset produced 34.7 FPS. The Ultra preset produced 24.8 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra is a reduction of 26.6 FPS, or approximately 52% of the Low value. The step from Low to Medium is a drop of 8.6 FPS, from Medium to High is a drop of 8.1 FPS, and from High to Ultra is a drop of 9.9 FPS. The steps are very consistent, each costing roughly 8 to 10 FPS. None of these values reach the 60 FPS threshold, and even the Low preset falls 8.6 FPS short.

Comparing across resolutions at the same preset, the Low preset drops from 154.2 FPS at 1080p to 101.5 FPS at 1440p (a 34% reduction) and then to 51.4 FPS at 4K (a 49% reduction from 1440p). The High preset drops from 101.7 FPS at 1080p to 61.7 FPS at 1440p (a 39% reduction) and then to 34.7 FPS at 4K (a 44% reduction from 1440p). The Ultra preset drops from 75.8 FPS at 1080p to 48.5 FPS at 1440p (a 36% reduction) and then to 24.8 FPS at 4K (a 49% reduction from 1440p). These patterns confirm that resolution scaling is consistent and GPU-bound across all presets.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average FPS of 75.8. This provides an 15.8 FPS margin over the 60 FPS threshold, meaning the system can handle the maximum graphical settings at this resolution without dipping below playable frame rates. Users can enable all visual features without concern.

For 2560x1440, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, with an average FPS of 61.7. This is a very slim margin of only 1.7 FPS above the threshold. While this is technically playable, the lack of headroom means that any scene with additional complexity could potentially push frame rates below 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 75 FPS offers a more comfortable experience with 15 FPS of headroom, while Low at 101.5 FPS provides the smoothest experience. However, the question asks for the most demanding preset that clears 60 FPS, and that is High.

For 3840x2160, there is no preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. The highest average FPS is 51.4 at Low settings, which is 8.6 FPS below the threshold. Therefore, no best settings can be recommended at this resolution, as even the lowest preset fails to reach playable frame rates. The system should be paired with a 1080p or 1440p monitor for this game, or the resolution should be set to a lower value in the game's display options.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Minimum?

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 154.2, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this combo run Minimum at 4K resolution?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 51.4 at Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. All other 4K presets are lower, with Ultra at 24.8 FPS.

Q: At 1440p, which settings are playable?

A: At 2560x1440, the playable settings are Low (101.5 FPS), Medium (75 FPS), and High (61.7 FPS). Ultra settings at 48.5 FPS are not playable.

Q: How much faster is the combo at 1080p compared to 1440p at High settings?

A: At 1920x1080 High settings, the average FPS is 101.7, while at 2560x1440 High settings, it is 61.7. The 1080p result is 40 FPS higher, or approximately 65% faster.

Q: What is the rank of this combo among all tested combinations?

A: This combo ranks 2971 out of 3712 tested combos, placing it in the lower portion of the database's results.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance in this game?

A: The GPU limits performance. The CPU is in the 94th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 58th percentile. The FPS scaling across resolutions and presets follows a GPU-bound pattern, with consistent percentage drops as resolution increases.