Minimum

This PC configuration, pairing the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090, delivers performance that dramatically exceeds the demands of Minimum. Benchmark data confirms that every resolution and preset combination tested clears the 60 FPS playability threshold, with the weakest result still holding a comfortable margin above that target.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates for Minimum show a system that is never stressed, even at maximum settings. At 1920x1080, the data indicates a massive performance envelope. The Low preset produces an average of 394 FPS, while the Medium preset averages 301 FPS with a minimum of 256 FPS and a maximum of 347 FPS. Moving to High, the average remains high at 253 FPS. The Ultra preset, typically the most demanding, still yields an average of 193 FPS. This means even the lowest average at 1080p (Ultra) is more than triple the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the scaling from 1080p shows a predictable increase in load, but performance remains exceptional. The Low preset averages 254 FPS. The Medium preset delivers an average of 194 FPS, with a minimum of 165 FPS and a maximum of 223 FPS. High settings produce an average of 163 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p averages 124 FPS, which is still more than double the playability threshold. The transition from 1080p to 1440p shows a performance cost of roughly 36% on the Ultra preset, indicating the GPU is beginning to feel the resolution increase, but with no impact on playability.

The 3840x2160 resolution is where the RTX 4090's capabilities are more visibly taxed, though results still far exceed requirements. The Low preset at 4K averages 137 FPS. Medium settings yield an average of 105 FPS, with a minimum of 89 FPS and a maximum of 120 FPS. High settings produce an average of 88 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K averages 67 FPS, which is the lowest average across all tested configurations. This represents a significant drop from the 124 FPS seen at 1440p Ultra, a reduction of about 46%, but it still clears the 60 FPS threshold with a small margin. The data shows that even the most demanding scenario for this game—4K Ultra—is comfortably playable.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K sits near several comparable processors in aggregate benchmark performance. The closest match is the Intel Xeon 6511P, which has an average benchmark score that is 0.2% lower. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 is also extremely close, with a score 0.7% lower. On the other side, the Intel Core i7-14700KF scores 1% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F scores 1.3% higher. These deltas are all within a narrow band, meaning that in a game like Minimum, which does not heavily tax the CPU at high resolutions, any of these processors would deliver nearly identical frame rates. The performance variance among these chips is negligible for this title.

On the GPU side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090's nearest rivals are less about raw gaming parity and more about aggregate compute scores, but the data shows a similar story. The Intel Arc Pro A60 has an average score that is essentially identical (0% delta). The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 is 0.3% faster, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M is 2.5% slower, and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 is 2.9% faster. These scores come from a mix of compute and graphics tests, but for Minimum, the gaming performance of the RTX 4090 is so far ahead of the 60 FPS target that any of these alternatives would likely also maintain playable frame rates, though the exact margins would vary. The data suggests that the GPU is the primary driver of frame rates, and its closest competitors would still offer substantial performance.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data indicates that the GPU is the dominant factor in Minimum, especially at higher resolutions, while the CPU's role diminishes as resolution increases. The evidence lies in the scaling of frame rates across resolutions. At 1920x1080 with the Low preset, the system achieves 394 FPS, which is a staggering number that suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at extreme rates. However, as resolution increases to 2560x1440 and then 3840x2160, the average FPS on the Low preset drops to 254 and then 137, respectively. This steep decline is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering load increases with pixel count.

Further proof comes from the Ultra preset scaling. At 1080p, the average is 193 FPS, which drops to 124 FPS at 1440p and then to 67 FPS at 4K. The performance cost from 1080p to 4K is about 65%, a clear indication that the GPU is the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a smaller performance delta between resolutions, particularly at lower settings where the GPU load is lighter. The fact that even the Low preset at 4K (137 FPS) is lower than the Low preset at 1080p (394 FPS) confirms that the RTX 4090 is doing the heavy lifting. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, with its high single-core performance, is more than sufficient to avoid bottlenecking the GPU, but it is not the component that determines the final frame rate at these settings. In essence, the GPU dictates the performance ceiling, and the CPU ensures that ceiling is reached.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 4K with the highest settings?*

A: Yes. The benchmark data shows that at 3840x2160 with the Ultra preset, the system averages 67 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 254 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 124 FPS. This is a performance cost of approximately 51% for enabling the highest visual quality.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game at 1080p?

A: The data shows that at 1920x1080, the GPU is still the primary driver. The Low preset reaches 394 FPS, but the Ultra preset drops to 193 FPS, indicating that the GPU load scaling with settings, not the CPU, is the limiting factor.

Q: Does the game run smoothly at 4K with Medium settings?

A: Yes, at 3840x2160 with the Medium preset, the system averages 105 FPS, with a minimum of 89 FPS and a maximum of 120 FPS, ensuring a smooth experience well above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How close is the RTX 4090 to its nearest rival in terms of performance?

A: The nearest rival by average benchmark score is the Intel Arc Pro A60, which has a 0% delta, and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, which is 0.3% faster. These differences are minimal and would not meaningfully change the gaming experience in Minimum.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this configuration?

A: The lowest average FPS is 67, which occurs at 3840x2160 with the Ultra preset. This is the only configuration tested that falls below 88 FPS, but it still remains above the 60 FPS playability threshold.

The Verdict

This system can absolutely run Minimum, and it does so with overwhelming performance headroom. The verdict by resolution is clear: all settings at all resolutions are playable. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 193 FPS, providing a supremely smooth experience. At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 124 FPS, which is still more than double the 60 FPS target, ensuring flawless gameplay. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 67 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold, though with a smaller margin. This means the user can enable the highest visual fidelity at any resolution and expect a playable, smooth frame rate. The data confirms that this configuration is not just capable, but excessive for the requirements of Minimum, making it an ideal choice for high-refresh-rate monitors or future-proofing.

Best Settings per Resolution

For the best visual quality while maintaining at or above 60 FPS, the Ultra preset is the recommended choice at every resolution tested.

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, which achieves an average of 67 FPS. This is the peak visual experience, and it just meets the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are also Ultra, delivering an average of 124 FPS. This provides a significant margin above the 60 FPS target, allowing for high refresh rates without compromise.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is again the best choice, with an average of 193 FPS. This far exceeds the 60 FPS requirement, making it the optimal choice for maximum frame rates and visual fidelity. In all cases, the data shows that the Ultra preset is the definitive recommendation for this game.