Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti combination is positioned near the bottom of the performance stack for this title, ranking 1712 out of 1733 tested combos. The measured data shows this pairing is fundamentally limited by the GPU, but the CPU still plays a decisive role in determining which settings are viable. The practical takeaway is that this system is a 1080p machine for this game, and even then, only at lower presets.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows make the optimal settings choice unambiguous. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 63.5 FPS. This is the only preset across all tested resolutions that clears the 60 FPS threshold, making it the baseline for a playable experience. The Medium preset at 1080p drops to 49.6 FPS, which is a 21.9% reduction from Low. While playable for some, the drop below 50 FPS introduces noticeable stutter in a third-person shooter where camera movement is constant.

High at 1080p yields 40.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 31.6 FPS. The jump from Low to High costs 23.1 FPS (a 36.4% loss), while the jump from High to Ultra only costs 8.8 FPS (a 21.8% loss). This indicates that the Ultra preset is not worth the performance hit relative to High. The data suggests that Low is the only setting that provides a consistently smooth experience, while Medium is the ceiling for those who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate. The 63.5 FPS at Low is 13.9 FPS higher than Medium, a margin that is far more impactful than the visual difference between these presets in a fast-paced game.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 5 2600 provides 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. Its benchmark scores show a processor that is competent for gaming but not a bottleneck at the settings this GPU can handle. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11186 and single-core score of 1579 place it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. More telling are the nearest rivals: it trails the Intel Core i5-11600KF by 0.6% and the Intel Core i5-1345U by 0.4% in average benchmark score, while beating the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U by 0.6% and the Intel Core i7-10700F by 0.7%.

These sub-1% deltas against a mix of mobile and desktop chips indicate that the 2600's raw compute is not the limiting factor here. With a Passmark single-thread score of 2239, the CPU has enough single-core grunt to feed the GTX 1050 Ti in most scenarios. The game's engine, released in 2014, is unlikely to leverage all 12 threads effectively, but the 6-core/12-thread configuration ensures that background tasks or game logic won't starve the GPU. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the CPU is keeping pace, as the 63.5 FPS average is likely near the GPU's maximum output at that preset. The CPU's role is to maintain a stable frame delivery, and the benchmark results suggest it is doing so without being the primary cause of frame drops.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is the clear performance ceiling for this system. Its specifications are modest: 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 112.1 GB/s bandwidth, 768 shading units, and a boost clock of 1392 MHz. The GPU's percentile rank of 30th among all GPUs is telling, and its nearest rivals are all mobile or entry-level desktop parts—the NVIDIA GeForce 930A (0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce 940M (0.4% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R7 240 (0.7% ahead). This places the 1050 Ti in a performance class where it is barely distinguishable from laptop parts.

The Passmark G3D score of 6340 and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 reflect a GPU that is several generations behind. The 4 GB VRAM is a significant constraint. As resolution increases, the GPU struggles to maintain frame rates. The data shows a stark pattern: at 1080p Low, it manages 63.5 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 41 FPS. At 4K Low, it plummets to 25.7 FPS. This scaling is purely GPU-bound, as the CPU is not changing. The 1050 Ti's texture rate of 66.82 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s are insufficient for higher resolutions, and the 112.1 GB/s memory bandwidth becomes a bottleneck when the frame buffer grows. The GPU is the component that dictates the Low-preset recommendation for any playable frame rate.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combination can achieve?

A: The maximum measured average is 63.5 FPS, which occurs only at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. No other settings/resolution combination reaches this level.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 2600 holding back the GTX 1050 Ti in this game?

A: The benchmark data does not indicate a CPU bottleneck. The CPU's average benchmark score is within 0.7% of its nearest rivals, and the frame rate drops correlate directly with GPU-heavy settings changes (resolution and preset), suggesting the GPU is the limiting component.

Q: How much faster is the Low preset compared to Medium at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 63.5 FPS, while Medium averages 49.6 FPS. This is a difference of 13.9 FPS, meaning Low is approximately 28% faster than Medium.

Q: Can this system handle 1440p gaming?

A: At 2560x1440, the best result is 41 FPS on Low. This is below the 60 FPS target and provides a suboptimal experience for a third-person shooter. The 4K results are far worse, with the best being 25.7 FPS on Low.

Q: What is the performance difference between the High and Ultra presets?

A: At 1080p, High averages 40.4 FPS and Ultra averages 31.6 FPS. The Ultra preset is 8.8 FPS slower, a 21.8% reduction, for what is typically a marginal visual gain.

Q: How does this GPU compare to its closest competitor?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has an average benchmark score of 5316, which is exactly matched by the NVIDIA GeForce 930A (0% delta). It is 0.4% ahead of the GeForce 940M and 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 240.

Resolution Scaling

The data reveals a brutal scaling curve. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 63.5 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 drops the average to 41 FPS, a loss of 22.5 FPS (35.4%). Moving further to 3840x2160 yields 25.7 FPS, a loss of 15.3 FPS from 1440p (37.3%) and 37.8 FPS from 1080p (59.5%). This steep decline is consistent across all presets. For example, High goes from 40.4 FPS at 1080p to 26.2 FPS at 1440p (a 35.1% drop) and then to 16.7 FPS at 4K (a 58.7% drop from 1080p).

The pattern is clear: the frame rate is halved or worse when moving to 4K. This is a textbook GPU-limited scenario. The 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory interface cannot sustain the pixel throughput required for 4K. The scaling is not linear, and the percentage losses are nearly identical between Low and High presets, which confirms that the resolution is the dominant factor. The CPU's performance is irrelevant at 4K because the GPU is completely saturated. For this system, 1080p is the only practical resolution; 1440p is playable only on Low, and 4K is a slideshow.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table presents the exact measured average FPS values from the dataset.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS |

| :--------- | :------- | :------ |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 63.5 |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 49.6 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 40.4 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 31.6 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 41.0 |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 32.8 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 26.2 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 21.1 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 25.7 |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 16.0 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 16.7 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 13.2 |

At 1080p, the spread from Low to Ultra is 31.9 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is the largest single drop at 13.9 FPS. At 1440p, the Low-to-Ultra spread is 19.9 FPS, and the Low-to-Medium drop is 8.2 FPS. At 4K, the entire range from Low to Ultra is only 12.5 FPS, with Medium (16.0) and High (16.7) being nearly identical. This data suggests that at 4K, the GPU is so overwhelmed that preset changes have a diminished impact, making the Low preset the only rational choice there. The 1080p Low figure of 63.5 FPS is the single outlier that makes this system usable, and all other settings are below the 60 FPS threshold, making 1080p Low the definitive target for this hardware combination.