Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination delivers an overwhelmingly positive result for Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014. Across all tested resolutions and presets, the measured average frame rates never drop below 61 FPS, meaning this system clears the 60 FPS playable threshold everywhere. The data shows a hardware pairing that is not merely sufficient but has substantial headroom, allowing maximum image quality at every resolution tested.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 4K (3840x2160), the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 61 FPS. This is the critical finding for this resolution: the system just barely clears the playable threshold at the highest settings. The measured data shows a progression from 124 FPS at Low, down to 95 FPS at Medium, further to 79 FPS at High, and finally to that 61 FPS average at Ultra. The gap between High and Ultra is 18 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset carries a significant rendering load, yet the combo still manages to stay above 60 FPS on average.

At 1440p (2560x1440), the best settings remain Ultra, but with a much more comfortable average of 112 FPS. This is nearly double the 4K Ultra result, showing that the resolution reduction from 4K to 1440p provides massive performance relief. The preset scaling at this resolution shows 230 FPS at Low, 176 FPS at Medium, 148 FPS at High, and the 112 FPS at Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra is 118 FPS, yet even the most demanding preset leaves more than 50 FPS of headroom above the 60 FPS threshold.

At 1080p (1920x1080), the best settings are again Ultra, delivering an average of 174 FPS. This result is particularly strong, as it suggests the system is far from being stressed at this resolution. The data shows 356 FPS at Low, 273 FPS at Medium, and 229 FPS at High. The scaling from Low to Ultra represents a 182 FPS reduction, but the final Ultra result of 174 FPS is still nearly three times the playable threshold. This makes 1080p Ultra a scenario where the hardware is effectively coasting.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data indicates that the GPU is the primary scaling factor as resolution increases, while the CPU remains largely unchallenged. The most telling evidence comes from comparing the same preset across resolutions. For Ultra settings, the average FPS drops from 174 at 1080p to 112 at 1440p (a 35.6% reduction), and then further to 61 at 4K (a 45.5% reduction from 1440p). This steep decline with resolution is the classic signature of GPU-bound performance, as the rendering load increases with pixel count while the CPU workload stays relatively constant.

The CPU's role becomes clearer when examining the performance at Low settings. At Low, the 1080p result is 356 FPS, which drops to 230 FPS at 1440p and 124 FPS at 4K. The fact that Low settings still show a significant resolution-based drop suggests that even at the lowest graphical settings, the GPU is still the limiting factor at higher resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the Low preset results would cluster closer together across resolutions. The 1080p Low result of 356 FPS is particularly notable because it approaches the practical limits of display refresh rates, indicating the CPU can feed frames far faster than most monitors can display.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, with its 24 cores and 24 threads, shows no signs of being a constraint in this older title. The benchmark results for the CPU, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44253 and a single-core score of 2439, place it in the 96th percentile among all CPUs. This level of computational headroom means that Minimum, which is not a particularly demanding game by modern standards, never comes close to saturating the processor. The GPU's absolute performance, with a Passmark G3D score of 34457 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6567, is what defines the frame rates in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 ranks 246th out of 3712 tested combinations for Minimum. This places it in the top 6.6% of all systems tested for this game. Given that this is a 2014 title being run on hardware released years later, this high ranking is expected, but the data confirms it rather than assuming it.

The ranking reflects the overall capability of the pairing. The CPU's average benchmark score of 93785 puts it in the 96th percentile versus all CPUs, while the GPU's average benchmark score of 54247 places it in the 86th percentile versus all GPUs. The combination of a top-tier CPU and a high-end GPU results in a system that handles this game with ease, as evidenced by the fact that even the worst measured result (4K Ultra at 61 FPS) still clears the playable threshold. For comparison, the rank of 246 indicates that there are 245 other combinations that perform better, but those would likely involve even more recent or specialized hardware that offers diminishing returns for a game like Minimum.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals based on average benchmark score are the Intel Xeon 6520P with a score of 93786 and a delta of 0%, the AMD EPYC 4564P with a score of 95183 and a delta of -1.5%, the AMD EPYC 9175F with a score of 95615 and a delta of -1.9%, and the AMD EPYC 4565P with a score of 95764 and a delta of -2.1%. These deltas represent the percentage difference in average benchmark score relative to the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. The Xeon 6520P is essentially identical in performance, while the EPYC parts are slightly ahead, with the 4565P being 2.1% faster. In practice, swapping to any of these would yield nearly indistinguishable frame rates in Minimum, as the game is unlikely to stress any of these processors to their limits.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER with an average score of 54209 and a delta of 0.1%, the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X with a score of 54828 and a delta of -1.1%, the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB with a score of 55698 and a delta of -2.6%, and the AMD Radeon 8060S with a score of 55757 and a delta of -2.7%. The RTX 4080 SUPER is effectively a match, with a 0.1% delta meaning it performs within a rounding error of the RTX 4080. The Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.1% ahead, while the RX 6750 GRE and Radeon 8060S are 2.6% and 2.7% ahead respectively. These deltas are small enough that in-game performance differences would be minimal, likely translating to a few frames per second at most in Minimum. Any of these alternatives would deliver a similar experience, particularly at 1080p and 1440p where the system has abundant headroom.

FAQ

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

A: Yes. The measured data shows an average of 61 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, which is just above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The verdict for 3840x2160 lists all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) as playable, with Ultra being the best settings at 61 FPS.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p and 4K at Ultra settings?

A: At 1080p Ultra, the average frame rate is 174 FPS, while at 4K Ultra it drops to 61 FPS. This represents a 65% reduction in average frame rate when moving from 1080p to 4K, driven by the four-fold increase in pixel count.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor for this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The evidence comes from the sharp frame rate drops as resolution increases at the same preset. For example, at High settings, the average FPS goes from 229 at 1080p to 148 at 1440p to 79 at 4K. This resolution-dependent scaling is characteristic of GPU-bound performance, while the CPU's 24 cores and high benchmark scores (96th percentile) suggest it has ample headroom.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 compare to the RTX 4080 SUPER for this game?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 54209, which is 0.1% higher than the RTX 4080's score of 54247. This delta is negligible, meaning both cards would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum. The RTX 4080 is listed as a nearest rival to the RTX 4080 SUPER with this minimal performance difference.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p?

A: The best settings for 2560x1440 is Ultra, with an average frame rate of 112 FPS. This is well above the 60 FPS threshold, leaving substantial headroom even at maximum image quality. The verdict for this resolution confirms all presets are playable, with Ultra as the best.

Q: Does the system ever drop below 60 FPS in any tested configuration?

A: No. The lowest measured average frame rate across all resolutions and presets is 61 FPS at 4K Ultra. Every other configuration produces higher averages, with the 1080p Low setting reaching 356 FPS. The verdict by resolution confirms all settings are playable at all three resolutions.

The Verdict

This PC can run Minimum exceptionally well at every resolution tested. The verdict data is unambiguous: at 1920x1080, the best settings are Ultra with an average of 174 FPS; at 2560x1440, Ultra delivers 112 FPS; and at 3840x2160, Ultra still clears the threshold with 61 FPS. All presets at all resolutions are marked as playable, meaning there is no configuration where this system fails to reach 60 FPS.

The practical takeaway is that this hardware combination offers far more performance than Minimum requires. The 4K Ultra result of 61 FPS is the only configuration that comes close to the playable threshold, and even that has a small margin of safety. For anyone with a high refresh rate monitor, the 1440p and 1080p results provide ample frame rates, with 1080p Low reaching 356 FPS for maximum responsiveness. The system's rank of 246 out of 3712 tested combos confirms its position in the upper echelon for this title, and the data suggests that users could expect a flawless experience with no need to compromise on visual quality.