Minimum

This is a straightforward analysis of a very unusual pairing: a top-tier 24-core Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus CPU matched with an entry-level NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060. The benchmark data for Minimum shows exactly what happens when a processor is far more capable than the graphics card. The CPU is clearly not the limiting factor at any resolution; instead, the RTX 4060's performance ceiling dictates the frame rates. The data reveals a clear hierarchy where the GPU is the bottleneck in nearly every scenario, especially at higher resolutions and presets.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured performance for this combo in Minimum shows a predictable pattern: resolution and settings directly trade off against frame rate. At 1920x1080, the system is exceptionally fast. The Low preset produces an average of 202 FPS, which is an outstanding result for a competitive third-person shooter. The High preset drops to 130 FPS, while Medium lands at 155 FPS. The most demanding preset at this resolution, Ultra, still maintains an average of 99 FPS. The only frame time data recorded at 1080p is for the Medium preset, which shows a minimum of 131 FPS and a maximum of 178 FPS, indicating a very smooth experience with no visible stuttering.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales down as expected. The Low preset remains very playable with an average of 130 FPS. High produces 84 FPS, and Medium averages 100 FPS with a minimum of 85 FPS and a maximum of 115 FPS. The Ultra preset at this resolution is still above the 60 FPS playability threshold, averaging 64 FPS. This is the first sign of the GPU struggling to keep up with the CPU's ability to feed it data, as the frame rate drops are proportionally larger than the resolution increase from 1080p.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the RTX 4060 is clearly overburdened. The Low preset is the only playable option, averaging 70 FPS. The Medium preset falls to 54 FPS average with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 62 FPS, which is a marginal experience. The High preset averages 45 FPS, and the Ultra preset is the worst performer, hitting an average of just 34 FPS. These numbers show a steep drop-off in performance as the pixel count increases, confirming that 4K gaming is not a realistic target for this GPU in this title, except at the lowest settings.

The difference between presets is significant. At 1080p, the delta between Low and Ultra is 103 FPS (202 to 99). At 1440p, that delta shrinks to 66 FPS (130 to 64). At 4K, the delta is 36 FPS (70 to 34). This trend indicates that the GPU is becoming fully saturated at higher resolutions, making the visual settings less impactful on the final frame rate because the card is already working at its limit.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The benchmark data provides a context for this specific CPU and GPU combination by listing their nearest rivals. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a very fast processor, with an average benchmark score of 84003, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Its closest competitors are the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which scores 83807 and is only 0.2% behind, and the AMD EPYC 7F72, which scores 85072 and is 1.3% ahead. The other two rivals, the AMD EPYC 4584PX and AMD EPYC 9135, are also within 1.1% and 1.2% respectively. This means that swapping the 290K Plus for any of these chips would result in virtually identical CPU-bound performance in Minimum, as the game's engine is unlikely to stress any of these high-end processors.

On the graphics side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 has an average benchmark score of 17639, placing it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are a mixed bag. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 scores 17666, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD Radeon 780M integrated graphics scores 17588, which is 0.3% lower. Finally, the AMD Radeon Pro 560 and Pro 460 are 0.5% and 0.7% behind, respectively. This is the critical piece of information. The data suggests that the RTX 4060's performance is closely matched by an integrated GPU like the Radeon 780M. In practice, this means that a system with a high-end CPU and a Radeon 780M would produce frame rates very close to those measured here, assuming the CPU is fast enough to avoid bottlenecking. The Radeon HD 7790 is a much older discrete card, and its similar score indicates that the RTX 4060's performance level is not exceptionally high, which aligns with the measured results in Minimum.

FAQ

*Q: Can this PC run Minimum at 1920x1080 with the highest settings?*

A: Yes. Benchmark results show the Ultra preset at 1920x1080 averages 99 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS playable threshold. The High preset averages 130 FPS, and the Low preset reaches 202 FPS.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 2560x1440?

A: The verdict data lists all four presets (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra) as playable at 2560x1440. The best settings are Ultra, which still achieves an average of 64 FPS, crossing the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Is 4K gaming possible with this combination?

A: Only with significant compromises. At 3840x2160, the Low preset is the only playable setting, averaging 70 FPS. The Medium preset falls to 54 FPS, and High and Ultra are not playable, averaging 45 FPS and 34 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the performance scale between 1080p and 1440p?

A: The frame rate drops are consistent. For example, the Low preset drops from 202 FPS at 1080p to 130 FPS at 1440p. The Medium preset drops from 155 FPS to 100 FPS. This indicates a significant performance cost for the resolution increase.

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

A: The data strongly suggests the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU is a top-tier model in the 96th percentile, while the GPU is in the 61st percentile. The frame rates scale dramatically with resolution and settings, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. Swapping the CPU for a rival within 1.3% performance would have a negligible impact, while the GPU's close match to a mid-range integrated chip explains the frame rate limits.

The Verdict

The verdict is clear: this system can run Minimum very well, but its capability is heavily dependent on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the system is a powerhouse, clearing the 60 FPS threshold on every preset, including Ultra at 99 FPS. This is the ideal resolution for this combination, offering maximum smoothness and visual fidelity. At 2560x1440, the system remains fully playable across all presets, with Ultra just clearing the bar at 64 FPS. This is a viable high-refresh-rate option for the High and Medium presets, which average 84 FPS and 100 FPS, respectively.

The situation changes at 3840x2160. The only playable setting is Low, which averages 70 FPS. Every other preset fails to maintain a consistent 60 FPS. The Medium preset's average of 54 FPS and its minimum of 46 FPS would result in noticeable hitches. Therefore, the practical conclusion is that this PC is a 1080p and 1440p machine for Minimum. At 4K, players would need to significantly lower their expectations and settle for the lowest visual quality to get a playable frame rate. The data unequivocally shows that 1080p is the sweet spot, and 1440p is the highest resolution for a fully unrestricted experience.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data paints a clear picture of the division of labor between the CPU and GPU. At 1920x1080, the CPU is powerful enough to feed the GPU at very high frame rates, as evidenced by the 202 FPS result on the Low preset. However, the GPU is still the primary constraint. The performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets is 103 FPS, a massive swing that is entirely due to the GPU's workload. If the CPU were the bottleneck, this gap would be much smaller, as the CPU's frame generation limit would be reached regardless of the graphics settings.

At 2560x1440, the GPU's role becomes even more dominant. The increased pixel count puts more strain on the Raster Operations Pipelines (ROPs) and texture units, and the frame rates drop proportionally. The Ultra preset's average of 64 FPS is just above the 60 FPS threshold, showing that the GPU is nearing its limit. The CPU's high single-thread and multi-thread scores (e.g., 7303 and 51731 in Cinebench R23) are more than sufficient for a game like Minimum, which is a 2014 title and unlikely to utilize all 24 cores effectively.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is completely overwhelmed. The massive drop to 34 FPS on Ultra shows that the RTX 4060's memory bandwidth of 272.0 GB/s and 8 GB of VRAM are insufficient to handle the data load at this resolution with high-quality textures. The CPU's performance is essentially irrelevant here; the bottleneck is entirely on the graphics card's ability to render the scene. The scaling between resolutions is a direct measure of GPU load, and the steep decline confirms that the RTX 4060 is the limiting factor in every scenario. The CPU is never the primary constraint in this pairing, making the GPU the sole determinant of playability.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 at 2000th place out of 3712 tested system combinations for Minimum. This places it in the lower-middle portion of all tested hardware pairs. This rank is a direct consequence of the GPU's performance level. While the CPU is in the top 4% of all processors, the GPU is only in the 61st percentile. The ranking reflects the overall system's gaming performance, where the weakest link (the GPU) dictates the outcome. A system with a more balanced pairing, such as a mid-range CPU and a higher-tier GPU, would likely rank significantly higher due to the nature of the game's demands.

The ranking is not a reflection of the CPU's capability, but rather a judgment on the synergy of the two components for this specific game. A 24-core processor is overkill for a third-person shooter from 2014. The data shows that the frame rates are consistently GPU-bound. Therefore, this combo's rank of 2000 is a result of the RTX 4060's mid-range performance being the limiting factor. To improve the rank, one would need to pair the CPU with a much more powerful GPU. Conversely, a weaker CPU paired with the same GPU would likely achieve similar frame rates, as long as the CPU could still feed the GPU above its rendering speed. The rank highlights the importance of balance; in this case, the extreme CPU performance is wasted, as it does not translate into higher frame rates in Minimum.