Minimum

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT lands at rank 651 out of 1733 tested combinations in Minimum, placing it in the upper third of all tested combos. This is a strong showing for a mid-range pairing, though the data reveals that the CPU is the more modest contributor to the overall ranking. The combo’s position suggests that while the GPU carries significant weight in this third-person shooter, the processor’s limitations become apparent at lower resolutions where the graphics card is less constrained.

The CPU itself sits at the 75th percentile against all processors, with an average benchmark score of 17489. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE with an average score of 17482 (0% delta), the Intel Core i5-12450H at 17475 (0.1% delta), the Intel Core i3-14100T at 17636 (-0.8% delta), and the Intel Core i3-13100F at 17665 (-1% delta). The deltaPct values show that the 4600G is effectively neck-and-neck with these competitors, trailing the i3-14100T and i3-13100F by less than one percent, which indicates that CPU-bound scenarios in Minimum will see very similar performance across these chips.

The GPU, meanwhile, achieves the 76th percentile against all graphics cards with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4157 and an average benchmark score of 32619. Its nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 at 32540 (0.2% delta), the NVIDIA P104-100 at 32747 (-0.4% delta), the NVIDIA T600 Mobile at 32849 (-0.7% delta), and the AMD FirePro S10000 at 32388 (0.7% delta). The RX 7800 XT’s performance is essentially identical to these cards, though the context of the game’s measured FPS suggests that the GPU’s raw compute advantage over its CPU counterpart is what drives the higher-resolution results.

GPU Role

The Radeon RX 7800 XT brings substantial memory resources to the table, with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivering 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a significant amount of VRAM for a 2014-era third-person shooter, and it means that texture-heavy scenes at 4K resolution will not be constrained by memory capacity. The memory clock runs at 2438 MHz, which translates to 19.5 Gbps effective, and the GPU’s base clock of 1295 MHz with a boost clock of 2430 MHz provides the headroom needed for sustained performance under load.

The game clock of 2124 MHz is the more relevant figure for sustained gaming workloads, as it represents the typical operating frequency during gameplay. The GPU’s architecture, RDNA 3.0, is built on a 5 nm process with 28,100 million transistors and a die size of 346 mm². The shading units number 3840, with 240 texture mapping units and 96 render output units, alongside 60 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate of 233.3 GPixel/s and texture rate of 583.2 GTexel/s indicate that the GPU is well-equipped for the rasterization demands of Minimum, while the FP32 throughput of 37.32 TFLOPS suggests ample compute for any effects the game might throw at it.

In the measured FPS data, the GPU’s role is most evident at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the combo produces 42 FPS, which is a playable but not smooth experience, while at 4K High the average rises to 56.3 FPS. The jump from 4K Low at 86.1 FPS to 4K Ultra at 42 FPS shows a clear scaling pattern that reflects the GPU’s workload increasing with settings. The 16 GB VRAM ensures that even the most demanding texture packs at 4K will fit comfortably, and the bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s prevents memory throughput from becoming a bottleneck.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling across resolutions tells a story of a system that is primarily GPU-limited at 4K but becomes increasingly CPU-limited as resolution drops. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 251.3 FPS, which is a very high frame rate that suggests the CPU is approaching its ceiling. When resolution increases to 1440p Low, the FPS drops to 159.7, a 36% reduction that is consistent with the GPU taking on more pixel-pushing work. Moving to 4K Low further reduces the average to 86.1 FPS, another 46% drop, demonstrating that the GPU is now the dominant constraint.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings. At High settings, the combo delivers 162.9 FPS at 1080p, 104.3 FPS at 1440p, and 56.3 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 36%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 46%. This increasing rate of decline as resolution rises is a hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario, where the graphics card’s pixel throughput becomes the limiting factor. At Medium settings, the numbers are 191.7 FPS at 1080p, 124.1 FPS at 1440p, and 67.9 FPS at 4K, with similar percentage drops.

The Ultra settings tell the most revealing story. At 1080p Ultra, the combo produces 120.3 FPS, which is lower than the 4K Low result of 86.1 FPS, but the scaling from 1080p to 1440p Ultra (78.6 FPS) is a 35% drop, and from 1440p to 4K Ultra (42 FPS) is a 47% drop. The fact that the 1080p Ultra result is only 120.3 FPS, far below the 251.3 FPS at 1080p Low, indicates that the GPU is doing significantly more work per frame with Ultra settings, and the CPU has more headroom to feed it. This suggests that at 1080p Low, the CPU is the limiting factor, but at 4K Ultra, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across twelve combinations of resolution and settings. Starting at 1080p, the Low preset delivers 251.3 FPS, Medium achieves 191.7 FPS, High reaches 162.9 FPS, and Ultra drops to 120.3 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 131 FPS, which is a substantial range that shows how much the settings affect the workload.

At 1440p, the numbers are lower but still robust: Low produces 159.7 FPS, Medium hits 124.1 FPS, High manages 104.3 FPS, and Ultra falls to 78.6 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 81.1 FPS, a narrower gap than at 1080p, which indicates that the GPU is becoming more of a constraint as resolution increases. The 1440p Ultra result of 78.6 FPS is still comfortably above 60 FPS, making it a viable option for smooth gameplay.

At 4K, the performance becomes more demanding. Low produces 86.1 FPS, Medium achieves 67.9 FPS, High reaches 56.3 FPS, and Ultra drops to 42 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the only one below 60 FPS, and at 42 FPS it is noticeably less smooth. The 4K High result of 56.3 FPS is close to the 60 FPS threshold, and 4K Medium at 67.9 FPS crosses it. These numbers indicate that 4K gameplay is possible with this combo, but only at Medium settings or lower for a consistently smooth experience.

FAQ

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

A: The 1440p resolution offers the best balance, with High settings achieving 104.3 FPS and Ultra hitting 78.6 FPS, both above the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gameplay?

A: Yes, but only at Medium settings or lower. 4K Medium produces 67.9 FPS, while 4K High drops to 56.3 FPS and 4K Ultra falls to 42 FPS.

Q: How much of a performance jump is there from 1080p to 1440p?

A: At High settings, the drop is from 162.9 FPS to 104.3 FPS, a 36% reduction. At Low settings, the drop is from 251.3 FPS to 159.7 FPS, also a 36% reduction.

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

A: At 1080p Low, the 251.3 FPS result suggests the CPU is approaching its limit, as the GPU has more headroom at lower resolutions.

Q: What is the highest FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 251.3 at 1080p Low settings, which is the most CPU-bound scenario in the measured data.

Q: How does the RX 7800 XT compare to its nearest rival in terms of benchmark score?

A: The RX 7800 XT has an average score of 32619, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 and 0.7% higher than the AMD FirePro S10000, but 0.4% lower than the NVIDIA P104-100.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data shows a clear progression from Low to Ultra, and the choice of preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1080p, all settings are playable, with even Ultra producing 120.3 FPS. For competitive play, the Low preset at 251.3 FPS offers the highest possible frame rate, which is beneficial for minimizing input latency. The Medium preset at 191.7 FPS provides a good balance between visual quality and performance, and High at 162.9 FPS is also a strong choice.

At 1440p, the High preset at 104.3 FPS is the recommended option for a smooth experience with good visual fidelity. Ultra at 78.6 FPS is also viable, but the 25.7 FPS drop from High to Ultra may not justify the visual improvement for most users. The Medium preset at 124.1 FPS offers a higher frame rate margin, making it a good choice for those who prioritize smoothness over maximum quality.

At 4K, the Medium preset at 67.9 FPS is the best option, as it is the only 4K configuration above 60 FPS. The High preset at 56.3 FPS is playable but may feel less smooth, and Ultra at 42 FPS is best avoided for action-heavy gameplay. The Low preset at 86.1 FPS is also viable, but the visual degradation may be significant. For the best overall experience, 1440p High is the sweet spot, delivering over 100 FPS with strong visual quality.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Renoir, and built on a 7 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, with a total of 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU’s 3DMark scores provide context for its performance: a single-thread score of 726, a 2-thread score of 1430, a 4-thread score of 2732, an 8-thread score of 4138, and a max-thread score of 4889. The single-thread score of 726 is notably lower than the multi-thread scores, which indicates that the CPU’s per-core performance is modest by modern standards.

In Multi-core workloads, the Cinebench R23 score of 13593 shows the CPU’s aggregate capability, while the single-core score of 1919 reveals the per-core strength. The Geekbench scores follow a similar pattern: 6093 multi-core and 1575 single-core. The PassMark multi-thread score of 15992 and single-thread score of 2653 confirm this trend. The passmark physics score of 676 is particularly relevant for gaming, as it reflects the CPU’s ability to handle game logic and physics calculations.

In Minimum, the CPU’s role is most visible at 1080p Low, where the 251.3 FPS result approaches the practical limit of what this processor can feed to the GPU. The fact that the 1080p Ultra result is 120.3 FPS, less than half of the Low result, suggests that the GPU is doing significantly more work per frame, allowing the CPU to keep up. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 4863 and 8-thread score of 4138 indicate that the CPU has sufficient multi-threaded capacity for the game’s demands, but the single-thread score of 726 is the limiting factor for very high frame rates. This is consistent with a third-person shooter that likely has a primary game thread that cannot be fully parallelized, making the CPU’s per-core performance the key constraint at lower resolutions.