Minimum

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Minimum with the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 shows a predictable and steep decline as resolution increases, but the shape of that decline reveals important information about where the bottleneck sits. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 267 FPS on average. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same Low preset drops that to 172 FPS, a reduction of roughly 35%. Jumping again to 3840x2160 at Low yields 93 FPS, which is another 46% drop from the 1440p figure. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low settings — from 267 to 93 FPS — represents a 65% loss in average frame rate, which is substantial but not catastrophic for a game of this era.

The pattern shifts noticeably when examining the Ultra preset. At 1080p Ultra, the combo achieves 131 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, that falls to 84 FPS, a 36% reduction. At 4K Ultra, the system manages only 45 FPS, which is a 46% drop from the 1440p result and a 66% decline from the 1080p figure. These percentage losses are very consistent across settings tiers, suggesting that the scaling penalty from higher resolutions is relatively uniform regardless of quality level. The fact that the 4K Ultra result dips to 45 FPS — below the 60 FPS threshold often considered smooth — indicates that at maximum settings and maximum resolution, this configuration is no longer able to maintain a fluid experience.

The data indicates that the RTX 3080 is the primary scaling driver here. The GPU's memory bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s and its 10 GB of GDDR6X memory are being taxed progressively harder as pixel count rises. At 1080p, the CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads can keep feeding frames at a very high rate — 267 FPS at Low is far beyond what most displays can show. At 4K, the GPU's compute resources (29.77 TFLOPS FP32) become the limiting factor, and the frame rate settles into a range that reflects the GPU's raw throughput rather than any CPU constraint. The benchmark results show that the transition from 1440p to 4K costs more in absolute FPS terms (from 172 to 93 at Low, a difference of 79 FPS) than the transition from 1080p to 1440p (from 267 to 172, a difference of 95 FPS), though the percentage drops are similar.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 plays the dominant role in this combo's Minimum performance. The GPU is built on the Ampere architecture using Samsung's 8 nm process, with a die containing 28,300 million transistors across 628 mm². Its base clock of 1440 MHz boosts to 1710 MHz, and the memory runs at 1188 MHz with 19 Gbps effective speed. The 10 GB GDDR6X frame buffer operates over a 320-bit bus, delivering 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth. These specifications matter for Minimum because the game's settings scale heavily with fill rate and memory throughput.

The measured results show the GPU's influence directly. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS falls to 45, which is below the 60 FPS achieved at 4K High. The difference between High and Ultra at the same resolution — 60 FPS versus 45 FPS — represents a 25% performance cost for the additional quality settings. Similarly, at 1440p, Ultra produces 84 FPS versus 110 FPS at High, again a 24% drop. This consistent penalty suggests the Ultra preset introduces rendering features that heavily tax the GPU's shading units (8704) and texture mapping units (272). The pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 465.1 GTexel/s are being fully utilized at these settings.

The GPU's 68 ray tracing cores and 272 tensor cores are present in the hardware, though Minimum from 2014 predates widespread ray tracing implementation, so their impact on this title is likely minimal. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) means the GPU can handle modern APIs, but the game's 2014 release date suggests it was built for earlier DirectX versions. The PassMark G3D score of 25086 places the GPU in the 68th percentile among all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 23172 sits very close to rivals like the NVIDIA P106-100 (23249, -0.3% delta) and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23250, -0.3% delta). This positioning indicates the RTX 3080 is a solidly mid-to-upper tier performer in the broader database, though not at the absolute top.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the benchmark database, this specific combination of AMD Ryzen 5 4600G and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 achieves a combo rank of 1051 out of 3712 tested combinations for Minimum. That places it in roughly the 72nd percentile of all tested combos — meaning about 28% of configurations perform better in this game. The ranking reflects the balance between the CPU and GPU; the Ryzen 5 4600G, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is not a top-tier processor, but it pairs adequately with the RTX 3080 for this title.

The CPU alone sits at the 71st percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17507. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE (17482, +0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE (17614, -0.6% delta), and the Intel Core 7 150U (17395, +0.6% delta). The differences between these CPUs are negligible — within 0.8% — which indicates the 4600G is competitively positioned in its performance tier. The GPU, at the 68th percentile among all GPUs, sits slightly lower than the CPU in relative standing. Its nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of its average score, showing that the RTX 3080's synthetic benchmark performance is very close to several other cards in the database.

The combination's rank of 1051 out of 3712 suggests that while neither component is exceptional in isolation, their pairing works well for Minimum. The game's 2014 release date means it is not particularly demanding by modern standards, and the RTX 3080's raw power can overcome many potential CPU bottlenecks. However, the 4600G's Zen 2 architecture and 8 MB shared L3 cache may limit maximum frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios, which is evident in the 1080p Low result of 267 FPS — high, but not as high as a stronger CPU might achieve with the same GPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four settings tiers. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low settings average 267 FPS, Medium averages 204 FPS with a minimum of 174 and maximum of 235, High averages 171 FPS, and Ultra averages 131 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 136 FPS, which is a 51% reduction from the Low figure. The Medium preset's min-max range of 174-235 FPS shows a relatively tight band, indicating consistent frame pacing.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down proportionally: Low averages 172 FPS, Medium averages 132 FPS with a range of 112-151, High averages 110 FPS, and Ultra averages 84 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 88 FPS, again a 51% reduction. The Medium preset's range of 112-151 FPS at 1440p shows more variance than at 1080p, suggesting the GPU is working harder and frame times are less uniform.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops further: Low averages 93 FPS, Medium averages 71 FPS with a range of 60-82, High averages 60 FPS, and Ultra averages 45 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra spread at 4K is 48 FPS, which is a 52% reduction — remarkably consistent with the 1080p and 1440p percentages. The Medium preset at 4K has a minimum of 60 FPS, which exactly matches the High preset's average of 60 FPS, indicating that even the Medium settings at 4K can dip to the same level as the High preset's typical performance.

The data shows a clear hierarchical structure: each settings tier costs roughly 20-25% of the previous tier's frame rate at a given resolution. For example, at 1440p, Low gives 172 FPS, Medium gives 132 (23% less), High gives 110 (17% less than Medium), and Ultra gives 84 (24% less than High). This pattern holds across all resolutions, suggesting the settings tiers impose consistent GPU workloads.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS values, the optimal preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 4K displays, the High preset at 60 FPS average is the only tier that achieves a stable 60 FPS baseline, though the Medium preset's average of 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 FPS offers a small safety margin. The Ultra preset at 4K drops to 45 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and likely to feel less smooth. For 4K gaming, Medium provides the best balance — the 71 FPS average with a 60 FPS minimum ensures no drops below the smoothness threshold, while still offering higher quality than Low's 93 FPS.

At 1440p, all four presets exceed 84 FPS, so the choice comes down to quality preference. The Ultra preset at 84 FPS is perfectly playable and offers the highest visual fidelity. The High preset at 110 FPS provides additional headroom for high-refresh-rate displays. For 1440p 144Hz monitors, the Medium preset at 132 FPS is the best match, as it stays above 112 FPS minimum while offering better quality than Low's 172 FPS, which exceeds display capabilities anyway.

At 1080p, the situation is more nuanced. The Ultra preset at 131 FPS is smooth and visually rich. The High preset at 171 FPS suits 165Hz displays. The Medium preset at 204 FPS is ideal for 240Hz panels, with a minimum of 174 FPS ensuring no dips below the refresh threshold. The Low preset at 267 FPS is only useful for extreme high-refresh displays, and the visual quality trade-off is significant. The data suggests that for most 1080p users, the High preset offers the best experience — it maintains 171 FPS average, which is above 144Hz refresh rates, while providing substantially better visuals than Low.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G plays a supporting role in this combo, but its characteristics still influence the results. This CPU features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. It is built on TSMC's 7 nm process using the Zen 2 architecture (codename Renoir), with 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration with 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth.

In Minimum, the CPU's influence is most visible at lower resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 267 FPS, but this figure is likely constrained by the CPU's single-thread performance and memory subsystem rather than the GPU. The CPU's 3DMark single-thread score of 726 and Geekbench single-core score of 1460 indicate moderate single-thread capability. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1919 further confirms this. At 1080p Low, the GPU is underutilized because the CPU cannot feed it instructions fast enough to reach higher frame rates.

As resolution increases, the CPU becomes less relevant. At 4K Ultra, the 45 FPS result is almost entirely GPU-limited, as the RTX 3080's compute resources are saturated. The CPU's 12 threads can handle the game logic and draw call submission without becoming a bottleneck at these lower frame rates. The CPU's 3DMark 16-thread score of 4863 and max-thread score of 4889 show that multi-threaded performance is adequate for a game from 2014, which likely does not heavily utilize more than 4-6 threads.

The CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 15992 and single-thread score of 2653 place it in the 71st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE, has an average score of 17482 (0.1% higher), while the Intel Core 7 150U sits at 17395 (0.6% lower). These tiny deltas indicate the 4600G is right at the boundary of its performance tier. For Minimum, the CPU is sufficient but not exceptional — it allows the RTX 3080 to perform at its measured levels, but a stronger processor would likely push 1080p frame rates higher.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 2560x1440 offers the best balance. At Medium settings, the combo achieves 132 FPS average with a minimum of 112 FPS, which supports high-refresh-rate monitors while maintaining quality. At 4K, the Ultra preset drops to 45 FPS, which is below smoothness thresholds.

Q: How does the RTX 3080 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 3080 has an average benchmark score of 23172, which is 0.3% lower than the NVIDIA P106-100 (23249) and 0.4% lower than both the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (23250) and AMD Radeon RX 6600M (23273). These differences are within measurement noise.

Q: Why does the Ultra preset cost so much performance compared to High?

A: At 1440p, Ultra averages 84 FPS versus 110 FPS at High, a 24% drop. At 4K, the same comparison shows 45 FPS versus 60 FPS, also a 25% drop. This consistent penalty suggests the Ultra preset enables rendering features that significantly increase GPU workload.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 4600G a bottleneck for the RTX 3080 in this game?

A: At 1080p Low, the 267 FPS result is likely CPU-limited, as the GPU could theoretically render more frames. However, at 4K Ultra, the 45 FPS result is GPU-limited. The CPU's 71st percentile ranking among all CPUs means it is adequate but not top-tier.

Q: What settings should be used for 4K gaming with this combo?

A: The Medium preset is recommended, as it averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 FPS. The High preset averages exactly 60 FPS, which leaves no headroom for drops, while Ultra falls to 45 FPS.

*Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations in Minimum?*

A: The combo ranks 1051 out of 3712 tested combinations, placing it in approximately the 72nd percentile. This means about 28% of tested combos perform better, reflecting the CPU's mid-tier status paired with a strong GPU.