Minecraft

The Intel Core i5-9400 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT delivers frame rates that separate cleanly across four presets and three resolutions. In the measured data, this combination reaches 455 frames per second (FPS) at 1920x1080 Low, declining to 82 FPS at 3840x2160 Ultra. The combo rank of 1,202 out of 3,710 tested combinations places it in the upper 68th percentile of the database, meaning it exceeds roughly two-thirds of all measured CPU–GPU pairings for Minecraft.

Settings Recommendations

The measured results systematically favor the Medium preset, which provides the highest average frame rate among the four settings while retaining visual detail. At 1920x1080, Medium yields 418 FPS, exceeding High (385 FPS) and approaching Low (455 FPS) while keeping better fidelity. At 2560x1440, Medium again improves on High: 318 FPS versus 252 FPS, and only slightly below Low's 390 FPS. At 4K, Medium provides 166 FPS, while High drops to 132 FPS and Ultra falls to 82 FPS. Therefore, the Medium preset is the recommended choice for this socket pair.

The Ultra preset, while visually richer, assesses a significant cost: at 4K the average of 82 FPS is still playable, but at 1440p the 158 FPS provides ample headroom; at 1080p the 250 FPS is lower than Medium’s 418 FPS. If the title’s highest quality shaders and distance settings are the goal, Ultra remains viable at 1080p, but for most users Medium delivers a more consistent experience with margin to spare. Low presets, on the other hand, scale relatively well: 455 FPS at 1080p and 210 FPS at 4K, yet the visual compromise is considerable. The data points to Medium as the sweet spot between atoms and fidelity.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 9070 XT brings a large 16 GB GDDR6 frame buffer, a 256-bit bus, and 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth, combined with a base clock of 1660 MHz, a boost clock of 2970 MHz, and 4096 shading units. In Minecraft, the GPU is clearly not the limiter at lower resolutions and moderate presets. The measured averages continue to climb past 400 FPS at 1080p – a level where any modern GPU would be heavily dependent on the CPU & driver. At 4K, the GPU still shows formidable capacity: the Low preset averages 210 FPS, and even Ultra, which stresses the pixel clock and texture pipeline, remains at 82 FPS with no published minimum, indicating that the GPU handles full 4K without collapsing.

The setting in Ultra (Translation: Ultra) consumes the GPU headroom. Between Medium and Ultra at a given resolution, the average drops by roughly 50-60% (or example, 166→82 FPS at 4K, 318→158 at 1440p, 418→250 at 1080p). This is attributable to increased shader stress, volumetric and render distance that the GPU’s 48.66 TFLOPS FP32 can still render at above 60 FPS in the worst case. The card’s ROP count and pixel rate (380.2 GPixel/s) keep 4K increments close to one another: 4K Medium 166, High 132 glovesformer, but Ultra still 82. Thus the GPU core role is to render richer scenes and higher resolutions, while the CPU sets the FPS ceiling early on.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 has six physical cores and six threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost of 4.10 GHz, and features a shared 9 MB L3 cache. Its single-thread performance is carried by those two high frequencies; in Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 392, and in Geekbench single-core 1389. Those lower level numbers shape the frame rates seen in Minecraft’s CPU-driven simulation threads. The data shows evidence of a CPU bottleneck at 1080p Low: the frame rate jumps from 455 FPS at 1080p Low to 390 FPS at 1440p (a drop of only 14%), and then to 210 FPS at 4K (a 46% drop). If the CPU were the one constant limit, the pixel increase from 1080p to 1440p would cause a much larger FPS drop due to GPU work, but the measured 0.34X reduction suggests the CPU keeps the frame feeding and is running at a near-throttle point at 1080p Low.

In multithreaded operation, the 6-core part scores 2,784 in Cinebench R15 and 5,141 in Geekbench multicore. L3 cache and a 47th percentile rank as a CPU mean the device handles Minecraft’s occasional physics and world-generation threads, but the observed frame ceiling of a few hundred determines the overall outcome for high-refresh monitors. The CPU is clearly the pacing component at 1080p Low – the FPS no longer scale with what the GPU could supply, and the results remain at a 15mm to below 17 with CPU limits.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of an Intel Core i5-9400 with the AMD R8160 XXT holds a rank of 1,202 out of 3,710 combinations measured for Minecraft. That position places it in the top third of the database. It outperforms about 2,500 other CPU/GPU flickers, while being 1,202. This percentile shows that the pairing is far from mid-pack, but not among the very highest. Compared to the CPU’s standalone positioning (foreground at the 47th percentile) and the GPU’s (55th percentile), the combination delivers higher measured frames than many hardware that would be much closer to average.

The GPU’s nearestRival’s scores do not directly line across product names, which indicates the RX 2407XT offers a score that matches all older hardware when averaged over generic benchs. This means that in real-world Minecraft, the and - i5-1640 la combos outperform most of the 3,700 tested, though high-end recent CPUs can still push FPS higher at same settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the max measured average FPS at 1080p?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 455, obtained at 1920x1080 with Low setting.

Q: At 4K, is a 60 FPS possible?

A: Yes – every preset at 3840x2160, even Ultra with 82 FPS, stays above 60 FPS. The Low preset at 4K averages 210 FPS.

Q: Does the RX 9070 XT have enough video memory?

A: Yes. Its 16 GB GDDR6 buffer and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth handle Ultra 4K framebuffer no issue, as the measured 16 GB capacity more than suffices for 4096×2160 rendering.

Q: Which component limits the frame rate at 1920x1080?

A: From the observed FPS scaling, the CPU appears to constrain the output. The tiny drop from 1080p Low (455) to 1440p Low (390) suggests the GPU has more than enough spare at 1080p, while the i5-9400’s single-core power (R23 935) is the ceiling.

Q: Why does Medium often deliver higher FPS than High?

A: In the measured data, Medium consistently outperforms High – e.g., 418 vs 385 FPS at 1080p. The reason is not spec in this database, but the data clearly shows that the Medium preset requires lighter GPU load than High (which may enable stronger volumetric effects, etc.).

Q: How does this rank compare to other tested combos?

A: With rank 1,202 out of 3,710, this combo is better than approximately 67.6% of all tested pairings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS | Min/Max (if recorded) |

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

| 1920x1080 | Low | 455 | not |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 418 | 356 – 481 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 385 | not |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 250 | not |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 390 | not |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 318 | 270 – 366 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 252 | not |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 158 | not |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 210 | not |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 166 | 141 – 191 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 132 | not |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 82 | not |

At every resolution, the Medium preset provides the highest FPS of the non-Low settings, and clearly the data shows all values are above 80. The only min/max data exists for Medium, with the values above.

Resolution Scaling

FPS scaling from 1080p to 1440p and from 1440p to 4K, the component of each step varies. From 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 (a ~1.8-fold increase in pixel count):

• Low: 455 → 390, a drop of 14.3% (not as large as pixel)
• Medium: 418 → 318, a 23.9% shift
• High: 385 → 252, a 34.5% reduction
• Ultra: 250 → 158, a 36.8% reduction

Then from 1440p to 4K (96.6% pixel increase, roughly 2.25x pixels):

• Low: 390 → 210, a 46.2% decl
• Medium: 318 → 166, 47.8%
• High: 252 → 132, 47.6%
• Ultra: 258 → 82, 148.1%, actually 158 to 82 - that's about 48.1%.

The interesting read: the gaps from 1080p to 1440p are comparatively small for Low and Medium, suggesting that at this stage, the CPU is delivering most of the sentences. From 1440p to 4K, the drop becomes a consistent ~46-48% regardless of preset, which is nearly proportional to the pixel count. This behavior indicates a clear cut-through: the i5-9400 is the pacing factor at 1080p; while at 4K the GPU is fully saturated and scaling follows the resolution ratio closely. The Ultra preset at 4K FPS also at 82 FPS. If you need a typical ~60 FPS at this resolution, there is real headroom on Ultra by 139uage.

Ultimately, the CPU still dominates all things at 1080p, making it the clear limiting resource for those looking to approach refresh rates near 400, meanwhile the GPU in the system is the limit once the resolution increases or all settings are sw to high/ultra.