Minecraft

The combination of an AMD Ryzen 7 3700X processor and an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 graphics card produces mixed results in the sandbox title Minecraft. The measured frame rates range from a fluent 186 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings down to a stuttering 24 FPS at 4K with Ultra, revealing a system that handles lower resolutions with ease but begins to fall apart as pixel count increases. The CPU shows strong multi-threading potential and sits in the 84^th percentile relative to all tested CPUs, while the GPU is a 4GB entry-level part ranked near the 40^th percentile among modern cards. Together, the combo rank is modest—3548 out of 3710 tested combinations—meaning it delivers playable performance only when the game's settings are adjusted to match its limits.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is built on 7nm Zen 2 (Matisse) architecture, with 8 cores, 16 threads, a base clock of 3.60 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its 32MB L3 cache and DDR4 memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s provide strong headroom for many workloads. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 2092 in Cinebench R15 multi‑core, 204 in single‑core, 8899 in Geekbench multicore, and 1593 in single‑core. Corresponding PassMark tests show 22458 for multithreaded, 2656 for single‑thread, 66399 for integer math, and 39005 for floating point arithmetic.

The 3700X compares nearly edge‑to‑edge with a small group of modern CPUs. The nearest rivals, with their average scores and percentage delta from the 3700X, are:

• AMD Ryzen AI 7 350: 34222 (0.1% higher on the 3700X)
• AMD EPYC 4244P: 34220 (0.1% higher)
• Intel Core i5-13450HX: 34333 (0.2% lower)
• Intel Core Ultra 7 165H: 34083 (0.5% higher)

No discernible gap separates these parts. For Minecraft, this level of CPU performance is typically more than sufficient; the game’s world generation and many voxels depend heavily on single‑core action, and the 3700X’s single‑core result of 1593 Geekbench is above what one would consider a bottleneck. The measured FPS at 1080p Low hitting 186 FPS demonstrates that the processor is not holding back the frame rate in the least demanding scenario. At lower resolutions the CPU matter is visible (the drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is noticeable), but the larger drop to 4K indicates the GPU becomes the primary limiter.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings?

A: With High settings at 1920x1080, the combination delivers 117 FPS on average, with no min/max provided.

Q: How does the system perform at 3840x2160 at the highest preset?

A: At 4K Ultra, the average is only 24 FPS, which is barely moveable; no minimum or maximum values are listed.

Q: What is the GPU’s synthetic performance ranking?

A: The GTX 1650 outpaces all GPUs in the database, holding the 40th percentile overall. Its Passmark G3D score is 7880, and it scores 7880 in 3DMark Steel Nomad’s DirectX 12 test.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU generally the limiting factor in Minecraft?

A: The observed scaling suggests the GPU is the dominant ingredient. Going from 1080p High (117 FPS) to 1440p High (74 FPS) reduces performance by roughly 30%—a decline that continues to 4K High (39 FPS). This pattern follows the GPU’s rendering load, not the CPU’s capacity.

Q: Can the system handle 1440p gaming?

A: Yes, moderately. At 1440p Low it averages 117 FPS, Medium 93 FPS, High 74 FPS, and Ultra 46 FPS. So smooth 1440p is possible with the correct settings.

Q: How does the CPU’s multi‑core score compare to its immediate rivals?

A: The CPU is within 0.5 percentage points of the four rivals. Specifically, the 3700X is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350, 0.1% over the AMD EPYC 4244P, 0.2% below the Intel Core i5-13450HX, and 0.5% above the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS shows a clear trend: increasing resolution and settings both cause steep drops. Starting with the Low preset, 1920x1080 delivers 186 FPS, 2560x1440 averages 117 FPS, and 3840x2160 drops to 61 FPS. This is a sharp reduction that points to the GPU’s low fill rate and limited VRAM being the culprit. The same pattern holds for the other settings. At High, frames fell from 117 (1080p) to 74 (1440p) to 39 (4K). Ultra shows the largest gap: 73 FPS at 1080p, 46 at 1440p, and 24 at 4K. Medium demonstrates a similar curve, with 147, 93, and 49 FPS respectively.

The scaling behavior indicates that the CPU is not the principal chokepoint in most configurations. If the CPU were the primary constraint, the frame rates would remain more equal across different resolutions. Instead, the measured values are almost perfectly in step with pixel throughput – the GPU cores must fill more pixels as the resolution rises. The GTX 1650’s low bandwidth (128 GB/s) and 4GB VRAM play a decisive role, especially that the 4K frame buffer swallows the memory capacity, forcing constant til‑throughs. The only point where the CPU begins to be a concern is at very low settings on lower resolutions, where the FPS exceeds the CPU’s ability to deliver frames in under the GPU can render them – but even 186 FPS at 1080p is not limited by the 3700X’s 8‑thread, 16‑thread configuration.

Thus, resolution scaling shows that the 3700X is a capable pairing with the GTX 1650 under low‑conflict; high‑resolution gaming forces the GPU to collapse, while at 1080p the CPU hovers at high FPS margins.

How This Combo Ranks

In the large test database for this specific game, the Ryzen 5 3700X + GTX 1650 combination ranks 3548th out of 3710 tested combos. That places it close to the bottom among all tested systems. A ranking in this low percentile is expected given the GTX 1650 is a budget GPU, and the CPU is a high‑market‑segment processor that is not the limiting factor. Being ranked in the 3548 position means that there are 3548 systems that outperform it, and that only 162 combinations fall below it. This is a significant indicator that most modern game PCs either use faster integrated graphics or a more powerful discrete card. The only competitive advantage the combo has is that the CPU is a solid multi‑core performer, which makes it adequate for other tasks but not for high‑end Minecraft performance. For an optimized Minecraft experience, or when paired with a better GPU (e.g., the 4060, 3070, etc.) this CPU would be much better, but the measured data here only show that the preset combination does not push the FPS impressively.

GPU Role

The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the 12‑nm TU117 chip with a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost of 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units, 32 ROPS, and 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128‑bit bus with theoretical bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. Its pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s and texture throughput is 93.24 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 2.984 TFLOPS. These numbers are strictly entry‑level compared to any modern mainstream GPU, and they align with its 40^th percentile standing among all tested GPUs. The card’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (with a 0.3% advantage for the 1650), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% advantage), AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% advantage), and Intel Arc GeForce A310 (1% lower). The 4GB frame buffer is the largest deficit; in a sandbox game like Minecraft, where draw distances and less are high, the memory may be the cause for the 2160p low average being only 61 FPS. The GTX 1650’s Driver is DirectX‑12_1, OpenGL 6046, Vulkan 1.4, so it supports the necessary API functions. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 7472 sits near the 1650’s actual G3D score of 7880, confirming the close ranging. With the CPU available, the GPU delivers its maximum performance only at 1080p; at 4K the frame rates quickly become unplayable even at the Medium preset (49 FPS). The data confirms that the GTX 1650 is a 1080p‑era card, and the 4K Ultra frame of 24 FPS makes sense.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Below is the full measured set for Minecraft with the 3700X + GTX 1650:

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|-------------|----------|---------|---------|---------|

| 1920x1080 | Low | 186 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 147 | 125 | 170 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 117 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 73 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 117 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 93 | 79 | 107 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 74 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 46 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 61 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 49 | 41 | 56 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 39 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 24 | — | — |

No additional min/max values exist for the Low/High/Ultra slots besides the Medium values given. At 1080p, even the Ultra preset stays above 60 FPS (73 avg); Medium curves exceed framer rates of 147, and Low gives an excellent 186. The 1440p getget drops: Medium is 93, High 74, Ultra 46, Low 117. At 4K, the only settings that crosses the 60‑fps line is Low (61), while Medium is 49, High 39, and Ultra 24. Clearly, the theme is: more resolution + higher graphics – the FPS quickly below playable thresholds.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows give a clear path for best play. For 1080p, the game is quite effortless; even Ultra is playable at 73 FPS, and Medium offers 147 FPS with guaranteed minimum of 125 FPS. If the aim is the best balance of smoothness and quality, Medium is preferable because it holds a 147 average and a minimum above 120, while Ultra drops to 73. For 1440p, Medium is again the best setting: 93 FPS (min 91), which is fluid for wireless. High is okay at 74, Ultra is borderline at 46. For 4K, the only way to hit 60 FPS is to select Low (61); Medium is 49, which is playable but may show uneven moments. Ultra isn’t recommended at any resolution as it drags to 24 (2160), 46 (1440p), and 73 (1080p is still good though). At 4K, the user should be prepared to reduce settings to Low to get near 60.

In summary, the best overall preset to match the hardware is 1080p Medium (147 FPS) if a high refresh rate is the priority, or 1080p High (119) for a slight quality boost. At 1440p Low (117 FPS) is also viable for a sharp image. Do not push above three settings at 4K; the system log clearly shows that 4K is only a Low/Medium affair. For the most consistent framerate, 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at Medium is the recommended experience that capitalizes on the CPU strength without saturating the GPU to instability.