Minimum

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 brings six cores and twelve threads to this pairing, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. Built on the Zen architecture via the Pinnacle Ridge codename, this chip uses a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries and fits into the AM4 socket. The cache layout includes 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache, which is a modest amount by modern standards. Memory support is dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.

Looking at synthetic benchmarks, the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11186 and single-core score of 1579 reveal a processor that is far stronger in heavily threaded workloads than in lightly threaded ones. This imbalance matters for a third-person shooter like Minimum, where frame pacing often depends on a few primary threads. The Passmark single-thread score of 2239 sits at a level where the CPU can keep up with mid-range GPUs at lower resolutions, but the gap between multi-core and single-core performance suggests that scenarios demanding both high IPC and high core utilization could expose the chip’s age.

The percentile ranking of 77 among all CPUs indicates that this processor outperforms roughly three-quarters of the tested population, yet its nearest rivals in average benchmark score are telling. The Intel Core i5-1345U scores 19691, just 0.4% higher, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U trails by 0.6%. The Intel Core i5-11600KF and Core i7-10700F sit within 0.7% of the Ryzen 5 2600’s average score of 19616. This clustering shows that the 2600 holds its own against much newer parts in aggregate compute, but those rivals often have higher single-thread performance — a factor that could matter in Minimum’s engine when the GPU is not fully saturated.

At 1080p with Low settings, the measured average FPS of 154.4 suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU enough frames to reach high refresh rates. However, the fact that the CPU has no integrated graphics means all rendering falls to the discrete GPU, and the PCIe Gen 3 x16 interface provides adequate bandwidth for the RTX 2060. The 65W TDP and unlocked multiplier indicate headroom for overclocking, but the data here reflects stock operation.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 uses the TU106 chip on a 12 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 445 mm² and 10,800 million transistors. It operates at a base clock of 1365 MHz and boosts to 1680 MHz, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a dual-slot card with a 160W TDP, requiring a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested 450W PSU.

The GPU’s compute resources include 1920 shading units, 120 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, along with 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 80.64 GPixel/s, texture rate is 201.6 GTexel/s, and FP32 throughput reaches 6.451 TFLOPS. These specs place the card in the mid-range tier for its generation, and its Passmark G3D score of 14111 reflects that positioning. The GPU’s percentile rank of 58 among all GPUs shows it sits just above the median, with nearest rivals like the AMD Radeon RX 7600S (0.5% higher) and the Radeon Pro 5600M (1.7% lower) bracketing its average benchmark score of 16074.

In Minimum, the GPU’s performance varies dramatically with settings. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS plummets to 28, which is barely playable. The 6 GB VRAM capacity becomes a potential constraint at higher resolutions and detail levels, though the measured data shows the card still manages to render at 4K High with 32.4 FPS. The boost clock of 1680 MHz appears sufficient for 1080p gaming, where the card achieves 102.5 FPS at High settings and 154.4 FPS at Low. The GPU’s PCIe 3.0 x16 interface matches the CPU’s lanes, avoiding any bottleneck from the bus.

The RTX 2060’s support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 means it can handle modern rendering APIs, though Minimum’s 2014 release date suggests the game may rely on older pipelines. The 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores are present but likely unused in this title, given its age.

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

The measured FPS data tells a clear story about where the bottleneck lies. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 154.4 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 101.7 FPS (a 34% reduction), and 4K Low sees 56.9 FPS (a 63% drop from 1080p). This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-limited scenario — the CPU has enough headroom to push more frames, but the GPU’s rendering throughput becomes the constraint as pixel count rises.

At High settings, the same pattern emerges but with lower absolute numbers: 102.5 FPS at 1080p, 64.1 FPS at 1440p, and 32.4 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is 37%, and from 1080p to 4K is 68%. These larger drops at higher settings confirm that the GPU is the primary limiter, as the increased shading and texture work scales with resolution and detail.

The question is whether the CPU ever becomes the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the 154.4 FPS figure is high but not extreme — a faster CPU might push this higher, but the data does not show frame rates that would indicate a hard CPU ceiling. The gap between Low and Medium settings at 1080p (154.4 vs 121.9 FPS) suggests the GPU is already being taxed by the extra effects, not the CPU. At 4K Ultra, the 28 FPS result is far from any CPU limit; the GPU is clearly overwhelmed by the combination of high resolution and maximum detail.

This resolution scaling analysis points to a system where the RTX 2060 is the bottleneck in most scenarios, particularly above 1080p. The Ryzen 5 2600’s six cores provide enough throughput to avoid stalling the GPU at lower resolutions, but the GPU’s modest 6 GB VRAM and 192-bit bus become increasingly inadequate as pixel count grows.

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

The complete measured FPS dataset for this combo in Minimum is as follows:

1920x1080:

• Low: 154.4 FPS
• Medium: 121.9 FPS
• High: 102.5 FPS
• Ultra: 75.7 FPS

2560x1440:

• Low: 101.7 FPS
• Medium: 78.2 FPS
• High: 64.1 FPS
• Ultra: 51.3 FPS

3840x2160:

• Low: 56.9 FPS
• Medium: 39.2 FPS
• High: 32.4 FPS
• Ultra: 28 FPS

At 1080p, the progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline, with Ultra delivering 75.7 FPS — still playable but 51% lower than Low. The 1440p results show a similar pattern, with Ultra at 51.3 FPS representing a 50% drop from Low. At 4K, the situation becomes more marginal: only Low settings exceed 50 FPS, and Ultra falls below 30 FPS.

The scaling efficiency between settings is consistent across resolutions. Moving from Low to Medium costs roughly 21% performance at 1080p, 23% at 1440p, and 31% at 4K. The larger penalty at 4K suggests that memory bandwidth constraints amplify the cost of higher settings. From Medium to High, the drops are 16% at 1080p, 18% at 1440p, and 17% at 4K. High to Ultra costs 26% at 1080p, 20% at 1440p, and 14% at 4K — the smaller percentage drop at 4K indicates the GPU is already so saturated that additional detail has diminishing impact on frame rate.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks 1375 out of 1733 tested combinations in Minimum. That places it in the 21st percentile of all combos — meaning roughly 79% of tested configurations achieve higher average frame rates in this game. The rank is based on measured data, not synthetic estimates, so it reflects real-world performance in this title.

The low rank is somewhat surprising given the individual components’ percentiles. The CPU ranks in the 77th percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU sits in the 58th percentile among GPUs. Yet the combination lands in the bottom quarter of tested combos for Minimum. This discrepancy suggests that the game’s engine may not scale well with this particular hardware pairing, or that other combos in the database include more recent parts that benefit from architectural improvements.

The nearest rival comparisons for each component provide context. The CPU’s rivals are within 0.7% of its average score, indicating that swapping to an Intel Core i5-1345U or AMD Ryzen 5 7530U would yield negligible compute differences. The GPU’s rivals, such as the AMD Radeon RX 7600S, are also within 1.8% of its average score. This tight clustering means the combo’s low rank is not due to any single component being a severe outlier, but rather the combination of two mid-tier parts that together do not excel in Minimum specifically.

The rank of 1375 out of 1733 implies that many combos with older or less capable GPUs still outperform this pairing in this game, possibly due to Minimum’s optimization favoring certain architectures or driver paths. The data suggests that the RTX 2060’s Turing architecture does not provide a particular advantage in this title.

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

For a smooth 60+ FPS experience, 1080p Medium at 121.9 FPS offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. This setting provides over double the frame rate of 4K Ultra and maintains a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. If the target is 1440p, the High preset at 64.1 FPS is the only setting that exceeds 60 FPS, though barely — Medium at 78.2 FPS provides more headroom with only a modest visual compromise.

At 4K, no settings preset achieves 60 FPS. The Low preset at 56.9 FPS is the only option that approaches playable frame rates, but it still falls short of a smooth 60 FPS target. For players with 4K displays, the data indicates that this combo is not suitable for Minimum at acceptable frame rates — even the lowest settings cannot maintain a consistent 60 FPS.

The Ultra presets are only viable at 1080p, where 75.7 FPS remains playable, though the 26% performance penalty over High (102.5 FPS) is substantial for the visual gains Ultra provides. At 1440p Ultra (51.3 FPS) and 4K Ultra (28 FPS), the frame rates fall below the threshold where fast-paced third-person shooting remains responsive.

The best overall recommendation based on measured data is 1080p High, which delivers 102.5 FPS — a solid margin above 60 FPS with most visual features enabled. For those prioritizing maximum frame rates, 1080p Low at 154.4 FPS provides a high-refresh experience that many esports titles would envy, though the visual sacrifice is significant.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Minimum at 60 FPS at 1080p with High settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings is 102.5, which provides a comfortable 70% margin above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best resolution for this pairing in Minimum?

A: Based on the data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings presets exceed 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low and Medium settings (101.7 and 78.2 FPS) clear 60 FPS, while High (64.1 FPS) barely does. At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: The drop is substantial. At Low settings, 4K delivers 56.9 FPS versus 154.4 FPS at 1080p — a 63% reduction. At High settings, the drop is from 102.5 to 32.4 FPS, a 68% reduction.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The resolution scaling data indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck. Frame rates drop more steeply with resolution increases than with settings changes, and even at 1080p Low, the CPU does not appear to cap frame rates below 154 FPS.

Q: Does this combo rank well compared to other tested configurations?

A: No. It ranks 1375 out of 1733 combos in Minimum, placing it in the bottom 21% of tested configurations, despite the CPU’s 77th percentile and GPU’s 58th percentile standings among their individual peers.

Q: What settings should I use for a 1440p display?

A: The Medium preset at 78.2 FPS provides the best balance of visual quality and performance above 60 FPS. High settings at 64.1 FPS are also viable, but the margin above 60 FPS is thinner and frame rate dips could become noticeable.