Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT combination produces a wide spread of frame rates in Minimum, ranging from a playable 47 FPS at 4K Ultra to a very high 239 FPS at 1080p Low. The data indicates a system where the GPU is the primary driver of performance at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s capabilities become a more significant factor as resolution drops. This analysis walks through the benchmark results to explain the role each component plays and how their interaction defines the experience across different settings and resolutions.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen architecture, running at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. It belongs to the 2000 series and is built on a 12 nm process node. Its cache configuration includes 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 16 MB of L3 cache. The processor supports DDR4 memory over a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 5 2600 shows a clear split between its multi-threaded and single-threaded capabilities. Its multi-core performance is respectable, scoring 1248 points in Cinebench R15 and 5648 points in Geekbench multicore. The PassMark multithread score of 13160 reinforces this, while the PassMark physics score of 673 provides another data point for its compute capabilities. The single-threaded results are more modest, with a Geekbench singlecore score of 1154 and a PassMark singlethread score of 2239, which is typical for a processor of its generation.

For a game like Minimum, a Third-Person Shooter, these CPU metrics translate into a baseline that can support high frame rates, but the processor's relatively low single-core performance compared to modern rivals can be a bottleneck. The data shows that the CPU’s average benchmark score of 21484 places it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (deltaPct 0.2) and the Intel Core i9-11900H (deltaPct 0.5), have nearly identical average scores, indicating that the Ryzen 5 2600 is positioned in a competitive mid-range tier for overall compute performance.

In the context of the game's measured FPS, the CPU's role becomes apparent when examining the 1080p results. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 239 FPS, which is a very high frame rate. The fact that this is the highest average FPS recorded in the entire dataset suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough data at this resolution. However, as settings increase to 1080p Ultra, the frame rate drops to 136 FPS. This drop is more likely attributable to the increased graphical workload, but the CPU’s single-thread performance can still be a limiting factor in scenarios with many draw calls or complex physics. The CPU's multi-threading capabilities (6 cores/12 threads) help maintain stability, but the architecture's age means it cannot push frame rates as high as newer designs in CPU-bound scenarios.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is a high-end graphics card based on the RDNA 4.0 architecture, featuring the Navi 48 chip. It has a base clock of 1660 MHz, a boost clock of 2970 MHz, and a game clock of 2400 MHz. The card is equipped with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s. It contains 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, along with 64 ray-tracing cores.

In synthetic tests, the GPU demonstrates strong compute performance. It scores 7260 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12) and 65879 in Geekbench Vulkan. The PassMark G3D score of 26795 is a standard measure of its DirectX gaming performance, while the PassMark GPU compute score of 15864 highlights its ability to handle parallel workloads. These scores place the GPU in the 55th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13543. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon HD 7770M (deltaPct 0.1) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (deltaPct 0.2), which are much older cards; this suggests that the RX 9070 XT's synthetic score is being compared against a broad range of hardware, and its real-world gaming performance is significantly higher than those older parts.

The GPU's influence on the Minimum results is most evident at higher resolutions. At 4K, the frame rates scale directly with the graphical settings. The RX 9070 XT handles 4K High at 62 FPS, which is respectable for a demanding resolution. The 16 GB of VRAM ensures that texture-heavy scenes at 4K Ultra (which yields 47 FPS) do not run into memory capacity issues, allowing the card to focus on raw rendering performance. The high memory bandwidth (644.6 GB/s) also helps maintain consistent frame pacing in complex scenes. The data shows that the GPU is the dominant component at 4K, as the CPU has less influence on the final frame rate when the GPU is under heavy load.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks 1036 out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the top 28% of all configurations tested, which is a strong result given the age of the CPU. The rank reflects the system's ability to deliver high frame rates, particularly at lower resolutions, while the GPU ensures that the system remains competitive even at 4K.

The ranking is a holistic measure of the combo's performance across all tested resolutions and settings. The high rank is primarily driven by the GPU's capability, which allows the system to achieve very high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p. However, the CPU's lower single-thread performance compared to newer processors likely prevents the combo from ranking higher. The data suggests that while the RX 9070 XT can push frame rates over 200 FPS at 1080p, the Ryzen 5 2600 may not always be able to keep up in the most CPU-intensive scenarios, which could prevent the combo from reaching the very top of the rankings. The position at 1036 indicates a well-balanced system for the game, with the GPU being the clear star but the CPU not dragging the overall performance down to a significant degree.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system's performance envelope. At 1920x1080, the system achieves an average of 239 FPS on Low settings, 213 FPS on Medium, 179 FPS on High, and 136 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset shows a minimum FPS of 181 and a maximum of 245, indicating a stable frame delivery. At 1080p, the system is clearly capable of high refresh rate gaming, with all presets exceeding 136 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but begin to show the GPU's increasing workload. The system delivers 179 FPS on Low, 137 FPS on Medium, 115 FPS on High, and 88 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a minimum of 117 FPS and a maximum of 158 FPS, which is still a very smooth experience. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is noticeable but does not compromise the playability of the game, as even the Ultra preset stays above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the definitive limiting factor. The system produces 97 FPS on Low, 74 FPS on Medium, 62 FPS on High, and 47 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K shows a minimum of 63 FPS and a maximum of 85 FPS, which is a playable range for most users. However, the High and Ultra presets dip into the territory where a high refresh rate monitor cannot be fully utilized. The data indicates that 4K gaming is possible with this combo, but users must be selective with settings to maintain a smooth experience, with High settings providing an average of 62 FPS.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a clear trend that highlights the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. On Low settings, the system drops from 239 FPS at 1080p to 179 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of 60 FPS or approximately 25%. From 1440p to 4K, the frame rate drops from 179 FPS to 97 FPS, a reduction of 82 FPS or approximately 46%. This shows that as the pixel count increases, the GPU's workload grows exponentially, and its performance scales accordingly.

On Ultra settings, the drop is even more pronounced. The system goes from 136 FPS at 1080p to 88 FPS at 1440p, a 35% reduction, and then to 47 FPS at 4K, a 47% reduction from the 1440p figure. The pattern is consistent: the GPU is the limiting component as resolution increases. The CPU's role is less impactful because the frame rate is already being constrained by the GPU's rendering speed.

However, the data also reveals a subtle CPU influence. The fact that the system can achieve 239 FPS at 1080p Low suggests that the Ryzen 5 2600 is capable of handling the game's CPU-side tasks at lower resolutions. If the CPU were severely deficient, we would expect to see a plateau in frame rates at 1080p, but the system still scales with settings. The scaling pattern thus indicates that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck at 1440p and 4K, while the CPU is sufficient to avoid being the primary limiter at 1080p, even though its single-thread performance is dated.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured rows, the optimal settings depend on the user's resolution and target frame rate. For 1080p, the High preset offers a strong balance, providing an average of 179 FPS. This is high enough for a 144Hz monitor and leaves headroom for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset at 136 FPS is also viable for 120Hz displays, but the 43 FPS drop from High may not be worth the visual gain. For users with 240Hz monitors, the Low preset at 239 FPS is the only way to hit that refresh rate, but the visual quality trade-off is significant.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is an excellent choice, delivering 137 FPS with a minimum of 117 FPS. This provides a smooth experience on high refresh rate monitors. The High preset at 115 FPS is also good for a 120Hz display, but the Medium preset offers a higher average and better minimums, making it the more stable option. The Ultra preset at 88 FPS is still playable but may not feel as smooth as the lower presets.

For 4K gaming, the Medium preset is the recommended starting point, as it delivers 74 FPS with a minimum of 63 FPS. This is the only 4K preset that consistently stays above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 62 FPS is also viable, but it has no recorded minimum, making the Medium preset a safer bet for consistent performance. The Low preset at 97 FPS is the best for high refresh rate 4K monitors, but it sacrifices visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 47 FPS is not recommended for a smooth experience, as it dips below the standard 60 FPS target.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo in Minimum?*

A: The highest average frame rate is 239 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Minimum?*

A: Yes, it can handle 4K, but with compromises. The Medium preset delivers an average of 74 FPS, while the High preset delivers 62 FPS. Ultra settings drop to 47 FPS.

Q: How does the combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: This combo ranks 1036 out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the top 28% of all tested systems.

Q: Which resolution shows the biggest performance drop?

A: The biggest drop occurs when moving from 1440p to 4K on Low settings, where the frame rate falls from 179 FPS to 97 FPS, a 46% reduction.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 179 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves 88 FPS, a difference of 91 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the GPU is still the primary bottleneck, as frame rates scale with settings. However, the CPU's single-thread performance is sufficient to allow high frame rates, with the system hitting 239 FPS on Low settings.