Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 delivers a mixed bag depending on the preset. High settings produce an average of 42 FPS, which falls well below the 60 FPS playability threshold. Dropping to Medium improves the average to 50 FPS, with a minimum of 42 FPS and a maximum of 57 FPS — still short of smooth gameplay. Low settings are the only playable option at this resolution, yielding an average of 65 FPS. Ultra settings sink to 32 FPS on average, the lowest figure recorded for this combo at any resolution or preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the picture brightens considerably. High settings deliver an average of 78 FPS, comfortably above the 60 FPS line. Medium settings average 92 FPS, with a minimum of 79 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS — a tight, consistent frame window. Low settings reach 121 FPS on average, while Ultra dips to 59 FPS, just one frame shy of the playability threshold. That 59 FPS average is worth noting: it is the only sub-60 result at 1440p, and the margin is razor-thin.

At 1920x1080, the combo is thoroughly playable across every preset. Low settings average 187 FPS, the highest figure in the entire dataset. Medium settings produce 143 FPS on average, with a minimum of 122 FPS and a maximum of 165 FPS. High settings hit 120 FPS on average, while Ultra — the most demanding preset — still manages 92 FPS. Every 1080p configuration clears the 60 FPS threshold by a wide margin, making this resolution the clear sweet spot for the pair.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 4K?

A: Yes, but only on Low settings. The measured average at 3840x2160 Low is 65 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playability threshold. High (42 FPS), Medium (50 FPS), and Ultra (32 FPS) all fall short.

Q: What is the best playable preset at 1440p?

A: High settings offer the best visual quality while staying playable, with an average of 78 FPS. Medium averages 92 FPS and Low averages 121 FPS, but High is the highest preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS. Ultra averages 59 FPS, just below the threshold.

Q: Is Ultra settings playable at 1080p?

A: Yes. The average FPS at 1920x1080 Ultra is 92, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold. This is the only resolution where Ultra is fully playable.

Q: How does the Medium preset's frame consistency hold up?

A: The Medium preset at each resolution shows a tight frame window. At 1080p, the minimum is 122 FPS and maximum is 165 FPS. At 1440p, the range is 79 to 106 FPS. At 4K, it spans 42 to 57 FPS. The spread narrows as resolution increases, but the absolute values also drop.

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average is 187 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is nearly triple the 4K Ultra figure of 32 FPS, illustrating the massive performance swing across resolution and preset combinations.

Q: Which resolution offers the most balanced experience?

A: 2560x1440 on High settings provides a 78 FPS average, which is comfortably playable while still offering substantial visual fidelity. It sits between the 4K Low compromise (65 FPS) and the 1080p Ultra option (92 FPS), making it a strong middle ground.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data shows a clear pattern: the AMD Radeon RX 9060 becomes the dominant factor as resolution rises, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K's influence is most visible at lower resolutions where frame rates are extremely high. At 1920x1080, the CPU's strong single-thread performance — evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7303 — helps push frame rates to 187 FPS on Low settings. That figure suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU far more frames than the GPU can render at higher resolutions.

Scaling from 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS at High settings drops from 120 to 78, a 35% reduction. From 1440p to 4K at High, the average falls from 78 to 42, a 46% reduction. These steep drops indicate that the GPU's rendering throughput — not the CPU's processing power — is the limiting factor. The RX 9060's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s, become increasingly strained as pixel count grows.

The preset scaling at each resolution reinforces this. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces the average from 187 to 92, a 51% drop. At 1440p, the same preset shift goes from 121 to 59, a 51% drop. At 4K, Low to Ultra goes from 65 to 32, also a 51% drop. The consistent percentage decline across resolutions suggests the GPU's performance ceiling is being hit uniformly, regardless of CPU headroom.

The CPU's role is more nuanced. With 24 cores and 24 threads, the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has ample parallel processing capability, reflected in a PassMark multithread score of 60860. However, Minimum is a third-person shooter from 2014, and its engine likely does not scale perfectly across 24 threads. The single-core Cinebench R23 score of 7303 suggests strong per-thread performance, which matters more for older game engines. At 1080p Low, the 187 FPS average indicates the CPU is doing its job efficiently, but the GPU still becomes the bottleneck once settings or resolution increase.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, the closest performance match is the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which averages a benchmark score of 83807 versus 84003 for the 290K Plus — a delta of just 0.2%. In practical terms, the 285K would behave virtually identically in Minimum, with no measurable difference in frame rates. The AMD EPYC 4584PX sits 1.1% behind with an average score of 83090, while the AMD EPYC 9135 is 1.2% behind at 82980. These server-class chips would produce nearly the same CPU-driven performance, though their power characteristics and platform requirements differ. The AMD EPYC 7F72 is actually 1.3% ahead of the 290K Plus with an average score of 85072, making it the only rival in this group that edges out the Intel part.

For the AMD Radeon RX 9060, the nearest GPU rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, which scores 16129 on average against the RX 9060's 16014 — a delta of -0.7%. That means the RTX 3060 Ti is marginally faster in synthetic benchmarks, and in Minimum, the frame rates would be nearly indistinguishable. The AMD Radeon R9 370X scores 15862 (1% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 scores 15852 (also 1% behind). These two AMD cards would trail the RX 9060 by a small margin, translating to a few frames per second at most. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 is 2.1% behind at 15679, making it the weakest of the four rivals, but still close enough that gameplay differences would be minor.

For a 2014 title like Minimum, any of these GPU alternatives would deliver playable results at 1080p and 1440p with similar settings, though the RX 9060's RDNA 4.0 architecture and 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 compute give it a slight edge in raw throughput over the older R9 370X.

The Verdict

The verdict from the measured data is unambiguous: this combination can run Minimum, but the playable envelope depends heavily on resolution. At 1920x1080, every preset is playable, with Ultra averaging 92 FPS and Low reaching 187 FPS. This is the fully playable zone, where the user can select any preset and remain far above the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, High, Medium, and Low are all playable, with averages of 78, 92, and 121 FPS respectively. Ultra settings average 59 FPS, which is technically below the 60 FPS threshold but so close that most users would not perceive the difference. The data lists High as the best playable setting at this resolution, with an average of 78 FPS.

At 3840x2160, only Low settings are playable, averaging 65 FPS. This is above the 60 FPS threshold but leaves no headroom. Medium (50 FPS), High (42 FPS), and Ultra (32 FPS) all fall short. For 4K gaming, the user must accept Low settings or reduce the resolution.

In summary, the system delivers a smooth 60+ FPS experience at 1080p across all presets, at 1440p for most presets, and at 4K only on Low. The 1440p High preset at 78 FPS represents the best balance of visual quality and performance.

How This Combo Ranks

Among 3712 tested combinations in the database for Minimum, this pairing of Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 2179th. That places it in the lower half of all tested combos, at roughly the 41st percentile. The ranking reflects the GPU's mid-tier positioning — the RX 9060 sits at the 59th percentile among all GPUs — rather than any CPU limitation, since the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is at the 96th percentile among all CPUs.

The rank of 2179 out of 3712 means there are 1533 combinations that perform better in this specific game. Given that the GPU is a 59th-percentile part, this outcome is expected: Minimum is a 2014 shooter, and its performance is largely GPU-bound at higher resolutions. The CPU's high percentile ranking does little to boost the combo when the GPU becomes the bottleneck.

However, the ranking is not a poor result in absolute terms. The combo still delivers 60+ FPS at 1080p Ultra and 1440p High, which are demanding configurations for a decade-old title. The rank reflects the competitive field — many combos in the database include faster GPUs — but for the target user, the measured frame rates are what matter. The data shows a playable system across most common gaming scenarios, with the only meaningful limitation being 4K Ultra, where the average drops to 32 FPS. Those seeking higher 4K performance would need a stronger GPU, but for 1080p and 1440p play, this combo ranks adequately and performs accordingly.