Minimum

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination spans three resolutions and four quality presets. Starting at 3840x2160, the results are consistently below the 60 FPS playability threshold. At High settings, the average frame rate is 21 FPS. Dropping to Medium raises the average to 25 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS. Low settings improve the average to 33 FPS. Ultra is the most demanding preset at this resolution, yielding an average of 16 FPS. None of these figures approach a smooth experience, and the gap between Low and High at 4K is only 12 FPS, indicating that the graphics processor is heavily constrained at this pixel count.

Moving to 2560x1440, the situation improves substantially. Low settings deliver an average of 61 FPS, which is exactly at the playability threshold. High settings average 39 FPS, while Medium averages 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS. Ultra averages 30 FPS. The jump from 4K to 1440p at Low settings represents a 28 FPS improvement, confirming that resolution scaling has a pronounced effect on this particular hardware pairing.

At 1920x1080, the results are markedly better. Low settings reach an average of 95 FPS, the highest recorded figure across all tested configurations. Medium averages 72 FPS with a minimum of 62 FPS and a maximum of 83 FPS, meaning even the worst-case frame time stays above the 60 FPS threshold. High averages 61 FPS, which is playable but with less headroom. Ultra averages 46 FPS, falling short of the threshold. The spread between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 49 FPS, showing that the preset selection has a large impact on performance when the resolution is not the limiting factor.

How This Combo Ranks

The database places this combination at rank 3299 out of 3712 tested combos for Minimum. That puts it in the lower portion of the field, around the 11th percentile of all tested configurations. The ranking reflects the fact that the graphics processor is the dominant constraint in this pairing. The CPU is a top-tier part, sitting at the 96th percentile among all processors in the database, but the GPU is at the 9th percentile among all graphics cards. This extreme imbalance explains why the combo ranks so low despite the strong processor.

The measured FPS data aligns with this interpretation. At 1080p Low, the combination achieves 95 FPS, which is respectable for a low-demand preset. But at higher resolutions and presets, the frame rate collapses quickly. The data shows that the GPU is saturated well before the CPU becomes a bottleneck. In a game like Minimum, which is a third-person shooter from 2014, the workload may not be heavily threaded, meaning the 24-core CPU has significant headroom that cannot be utilized when the graphics pipeline is the limiting factor.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus provide context for the CPU side. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has an average benchmark score of 83807, which is 0.2% lower than the 290K Plus. The AMD EPYC 4584PX scores 83090, 1.1% lower. The AMD EPYC 9135 scores 82980, 1.2% lower. On the other side, the AMD EPYC 7F72 scores 85072, which is 1.3% higher. These deltas are all within a narrow band, meaning that swapping the 290K Plus for any of these parts would produce nearly identical frame rates in Minimum, since the CPU is not the performance limiter in this pairing.

For the GPU side, the Intel Arc B390 is closely matched with several older NVIDIA parts. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower than the Arc B390's 1482. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower. These deltas indicate that the Arc B390 performs within a few percentage points of these legacy GPUs in the single recorded 3DMark test. For Minimum specifically, users coming from any of these GPUs would see similar performance characteristics, with the same limitations at 4K and the same playability at 1080p on lower presets.

The Verdict

The verdict by resolution is clear. At 3840x2160, there are no playable settings. Every preset, from Low to Ultra, falls below the 60 FPS threshold, with the best case being 33 FPS at Low. This combination cannot run Minimum at 4K with a smooth frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the only playable setting is Low, which averages exactly 61 FPS. This clears the threshold, but barely. Medium averages 47 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS, all of which are below 60 FPS. The best settings for 1440p are Low, with an average of 61 FPS.

At 1920x1080, three presets are playable: Low at 95 FPS, Medium at 72 FPS, and High at 61 FPS. Ultra falls short at 46 FPS. The best settings for 1080p are High, which achieves 61 FPS on average. This means the combo can run Minimum at 1080p with most presets selected, but Ultra is not viable.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data indicates that the GPU is the dominant factor in this game at all tested resolutions. The CPU, an Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, is a high-end desktop part with 24 cores and 24 threads. Its benchmark scores place it at the 96th percentile, and its nearest rivals are within 1.3% of its average score. The GPU, an Intel Arc B390, is at the 9th percentile and its nearest rivals are all legacy NVIDIA parts with scores within 2.7% of its own.

The scaling between resolutions confirms this. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 95 at 1080p to 61 at 1440p and then to 33 at 4K. That is a 65% reduction from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average drops from 61 at 1080p to 39 at 1440p and 21 at 4K, a 66% reduction. The consistent percentage drop across presets indicates that the GPU is the limiting resource, because CPU-bound workloads would not scale this dramatically with resolution.

The preset scaling also points to GPU limitation. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra reduces the average from 95 to 46 FPS, a 52% drop. At 1440p, the same preset change reduces the average from 61 to 30 FPS, a 51% drop. At 4K, the drop is from 33 to 16 FPS, a 52% drop. The consistency of this scaling across all three resolutions suggests that the GPU's shading and rasterization resources are being saturated at every preset level, and the CPU has no role in lifting the frame rate once the GPU is maxed out.

The CPU's role is therefore one of providing a stable baseline. With a 96th percentile processor, there is no risk of CPU-side frame drops or stutter in this title. But the GPU cannot push enough frames to take advantage of that headroom. In games where the CPU is the bottleneck, upgrading the GPU would show no benefit; here, the opposite is true. Upgrading the GPU would yield significant improvements, while upgrading the CPU would yield none.

FAQ

Q: Can this combination run Minimum at 60 FPS at 4K?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS recorded is 33 FPS at Low settings. Medium averages 25 FPS, High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 16 FPS. None of the tested presets reach the 60 FPS threshold.

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

A: Low settings at 2560x1440 average 61 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 47 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. Low is the only playable preset at this resolution.

Q: Which component is the limiting factor for this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The Intel Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus sits at the 96th percentile among all CPUs. The FPS scaling across resolutions and presets is consistent with GPU saturation.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460, 1.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446, 2.5% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443, 2.7% lower.

Q: Is 1080p High a comfortable setting for this combo?

A: Yes, with a caveat. High at 1920x1080 averages 61 FPS, which is exactly at the threshold. Medium averages 72 FPS with a minimum of 62 FPS, providing more headroom. Low averages 95 FPS.

Q: What happens if the CPU is swapped for a similarly performing part?

A: The nearest CPU rivals, such as the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K or the AMD EPYC 4584PX, are within 1.2% of the 290K Plus's average score. Swapping would have no measurable effect on Minimum's frame rates, since the GPU is the bottleneck.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold. The best recorded result is Low at 33 FPS, but this is not playable. The database lists no playable settings for this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 61 FPS. Medium falls to 47 FPS, High to 39 FPS, and Ultra to 30 FPS. Low is the recommended setting for 1440p, but the margin above the threshold is only 1 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, with an average of 61 FPS. Medium averages 72 FPS and Low averages 95 FPS, both of which also clear the threshold. Ultra averages 46 FPS and is not playable. For users who prefer higher frame rates, Medium provides a 72 FPS average with a minimum of 62 FPS, which keeps every recorded frame above 60 FPS. For maximum visual quality while remaining playable, High is the choice, but it leaves no headroom above the threshold.