Minecraft

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows for Minecraft with the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 show a clear hierarchy across the four quality presets. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers an average of 186 FPS, which is the highest recorded figure in the entire dataset. Medium follows at 147 FPS, High at 117 FPS, and Ultra drops to 73 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 39 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra costs 44 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset imposes a disproportionately heavy load on this hardware combination.

For the best experience per the measured rows, the Medium preset at 1080p represents the optimal balance. It sustains 147 FPS on average, with a minimum of 125 FPS and a maximum of 170 FPS. That minimum frame rate is still well above the 60 FPS threshold commonly associated with smooth play, and the preset includes the additional graphical fidelity that Low omits. Low at 186 FPS is technically faster, but the gap to Medium is not as large as the gap from Medium to High, suggesting diminishing returns in the opposite direction—namely, that Medium captures most of the performance headroom while offering more visual detail than Low.

At 1440p, Medium again stands out. The average of 93 FPS, with a minimum of 79 FPS and a maximum of 107 FPS, keeps gameplay fluid on higher-resolution displays. High at 74 FPS is playable, but the minimum frame data is not recorded for that preset, making Medium the safer recommendation based on the available measurements. Low at 117 FPS is the fastest 1440p option, yet the drop from Low to Medium (24 FPS) is smaller than the drop from Medium to High (19 FPS), which reinforces Medium as the sensible middle ground.

At 4K, no preset achieves a fully comfortable average. Low hits 61 FPS, which is marginal but usable, while Medium falls to 49 FPS and High to 39 FPS. Ultra bottoms out at 24 FPS, which is effectively unplayable for most users. The data suggests that 4K should be reserved for Low settings if frame rate is the priority, and even then, the 61 FPS average leaves little headroom for demanding scenes.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture with a TU117 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It carries 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. The GPU’s base clock is 1485 MHz, boosting to 1665 MHz, and its memory runs at an effective 8 Gbps. These specifications place the card in the 40th percentile of all GPUs according to the benchmark database, with an average benchmark score of 7472.

The GTX 1650’s nearest rivals in the database are telling. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447, a delta of 0.3 percent, while the Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441, a delta of 0.4 percent. The AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425, a delta of 0.6 percent. On the other side, the Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, which is 1 percent higher. This grouping shows that the GTX 1650 sits in a crowded performance tier, but its 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are the defining constraints for Minecraft at higher resolutions and settings.

In Minecraft, the GPU’s role is primarily to handle chunk rendering, texture fill, and draw calls. The measured FPS data shows that the GTX 1650’s memory bandwidth becomes a bottleneck at 4K, where the High preset drops to 39 FPS and Ultra to 24 FPS. The 128-bit bus and 4 GB capacity are sufficient for 1080p and 1440p Medium, but the 4K numbers indicate that the card cannot sustain the data throughput required for high-detail rendering at that resolution. The pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s are modest figures that align with the observed performance ceiling.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all presets. At Low settings, the average falls from 186 FPS at 1080p to 117 FPS at 1440p, then to 61 FPS at 4K. That represents a 34 percent reduction from 1080p to 1440p, followed by a 48 percent reduction from 1440p to 4K. At Medium settings, the progression goes from 147 FPS at 1080p to 93 FPS at 1440p to 49 FPS at 4K, with percentage drops of 37 percent and 47 percent respectively. High settings show 117 FPS at 1080p, 74 FPS at 1440p, and 39 FPS at 4K, translating to 37 percent and 47 percent drops.

This pattern indicates that the limiting component shifts as resolution increases. At 1080p, the CPU’s single-thread performance plays a larger role, as the GTX 1650 is not pushed to its limits—the Low preset’s 186 FPS suggests the GPU has spare capacity. At 1440p, the GPU begins to take over as the primary constraint, and at 4K, the GTX 1650 is clearly saturated, with all presets falling below 61 FPS. The Ultra preset exemplifies this: 73 FPS at 1080p, 46 FPS at 1440p, and 24 FPS at 4K. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is a 37 percent reduction, and from 1440p to 4K a 48 percent reduction, mirroring the other presets.

The data confirms that this hardware combo is best suited to 1080p or 1440p gaming. At 4K, even the Low preset’s 61 FPS average is borderline, and the lack of recorded minimum frame rates for most 4K entries suggests that stability may be a concern. The resolution scaling analysis points to the GTX 1650 as the bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s 10 cores and 4.90 GHz boost clock have sufficient headroom to feed the GPU at lower resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the dataset provides complete coverage across all four presets. Low leads with an average of 186 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium follows at 147 FPS, with a minimum of 125 FPS and a maximum of 170 FPS. High drops to 117 FPS, again without min/max data, and Ultra bottoms out at 73 FPS. The Medium preset’s recorded range—125 to 170 FPS—shows a 45 FPS spread, indicating some scene-to-scene variance but no catastrophic dips.

At 2560x1440, the ordering remains the same. Low averages 117 FPS, Medium 93 FPS, High 74 FPS, and Ultra 46 FPS. Medium’s min/max of 79/107 FPS shows a 28 FPS spread, tighter than at 1080p. High and Ultra lack min/max data, but the averages suggest that High is playable while Ultra approaches the lower boundary of acceptable performance. The 1440p numbers are roughly 60-63 percent of their 1080p counterparts across Low, Medium, and High, while Ultra retains a slightly higher ratio at 63 percent.

At 3840x2160, the picture changes dramatically. Low averages 61 FPS, Medium 49 FPS, High 39 FPS, and Ultra 24 FPS. Only Medium has recorded min/max values, at 41/56 FPS. The 4K Low result is barely above the 60 FPS mark, and every other preset falls below it. The gap between Medium and High at 4K is 10 FPS, the same as the gap between High and Ultra, showing a linear degradation in the upper presets. The Ultra preset’s 24 FPS average is less than half of the 1080p Ultra result, underscoring the GPU’s inability to handle 4K high-detail rendering.

FAQ

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

A: The highest average is 186 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low preset.

Q: Does the Medium preset at 1440p maintain a playable minimum frame rate?

A: Yes, the Medium preset at 2560x1440 records a minimum of 79 FPS and a maximum of 107 FPS, with an average of 93 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Arc A310?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, while the Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, placing the Arc A310 1 percent higher. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447, which is 0.3 percent lower than the GTX 1650.

Q: What is the worst-performing preset at 4K?

A: The Ultra preset at 3840x2160 delivers an average of 24 FPS, the lowest figure in the entire dataset.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p with Low settings?

A: The 186 FPS average at 1080p Low suggests the GTX 1650 is not fully utilized, meaning the Intel Core Ultra 5 225’s single-thread performance (with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz) is more relevant at this resolution and preset.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested CPU-GPU pairs in Minecraft?

A: The combo ranks 1128 out of 1176 combinations, placing it in the lower percentile of tested configurations.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, based on the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process. Its base clock is 3.30 GHz, boosting to 4.90 GHz, and it carries 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor scores 25891 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3655 in single-core, with a PassMark single-thread score of 4412. Its percentile versus all CPUs is 85, with an average benchmark score of 36938.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the database are closely matched. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F scores 36945, a delta of 0 percent. The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D scores 37018, which is 0.2 percent higher, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 scores 37093, 0.4 percent higher. The Intel Core i9-12900T scores 37112, 0.5 percent higher. These deltas are negligible, indicating that the Core Ultra 5 225 is competitive with mid-range Ryzen parts and a lower-power i9 variant.

In Minecraft, the CPU’s role is significant at lower resolutions where the GPU is not saturated. The 1080p Low result of 186 FPS demonstrates that the Core Ultra 5 225 can drive high frame rates, likely due to its strong single-thread performance—the 3655 Cinebench R23 single-core score and 4.90 GHz boost clock are key contributors. The 10-core configuration with 10 threads is unconventional in that there is no hyperthreading, but for Minecraft’s primarily single-threaded rendering logic, this is not a handicap.

As resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, the CPU becomes less relevant. The FPS drops align with the GPU’s memory bandwidth limitations rather than CPU throughput. The PassMark multithread score of 30459 and data compression score of 302811 suggest ample compute headroom for background tasks or chunk generation, but the measured FPS data shows that the GTX 1650 is the primary constraint above 1080p. The CPU’s 65 W TDP and Intel Socket 1851 platform are consistent with a mid-range desktop part, and its position in the 85th percentile of all CPUs indicates it is not the weak link in this pairing.