Minimum

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

The measured FPS data for Minimum shows a steep, consistent performance curve as resolution climbs. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, this AMD Ryzen 5 5500 + AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT combo delivers 176.8 FPS. Move to 2560x1440 and that figure drops to 111.7 FPS, a 36.8% reduction. At 3840x2160, Low settings produce 64 FPS, which is 63.8% below the 1080p result. This pattern — where each resolution step costs roughly a third to two-thirds of the remaining performance — points to the GPU as the primary scaling bottleneck.

The gap between settings widens dramatically at higher resolutions, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering. At 1080p, the spread from Low to Ultra is 92.5 FPS (176.8 down to 84.3). At 1440p, that spread narrows to 55.8 FPS (111.7 down to 55.9). At 4K, the spread is just 31.3 FPS (64 down to 32.7). When the delta between presets shrinks as resolution increases, it indicates the GPU is saturated and can no longer exploit the headroom that lower settings would normally provide. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads based on Zen 3 architecture, has enough throughput to feed the GPU at 1080p, but the Radeon RX 6650 XT's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus become the limiting factor as pixel count rises.

Interestingly, the 4K Ultra result of 32.7 FPS is barely playable, while 4K Low at 64 FPS is smooth. This suggests that at 4K, the game's rendering load is almost entirely on the GPU's compute units and memory subsystem. The RX 6650 XT has 2048 shading units and 64 ROPs, and its 280.3 GB/s memory bandwidth is being stretched thin at 3840x2160. The data shows that dropping from Ultra to Low at 4K recovers 31.3 FPS — a 95.7% performance uplift — which is far more than the 52.7% uplift seen at 1080p (84.3 to 176.8 FPS). Resolution scaling here is not linear; it is exponential in terms of GPU load, and the combo's performance cliff between 1440p and 4K is steep.

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

For a 60 FPS target, the data supports High settings at 1440p as the sweet spot. The measured 71 FPS at 2560x1440 High clears that threshold with 18.3% to spare, while Ultra at the same resolution drops to 55.9 FPS — just under the ideal target. At 1080p, High delivers 111.8 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh monitors, but Medium at 133.8 FPS and Low at 176.8 FPS show that the combo can push well beyond 120 FPS if you prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p costs 22 FPS (133.8 down to 111.8), a 16.4% reduction, while the visual difference between those presets in a third-person shooter is often marginal in fast motion.

At 4K, no preset achieves a locked 60 FPS. High gives 39 FPS, Medium 44.6, and Low 64. If you must play at 3840x2160, Low is the only measured preset that breaks 60 FPS, and it does so by a slim 6.7% margin. Ultra at 4K is not viable at 32.7 FPS. Given the data, the practical recommendation is to target 1440p High for a balance of image quality and smoothness, or 1080p High if you want to guarantee headroom above 100 FPS. The measured rows show no benefit to running Medium over High at any resolution — the FPS gap is consistent (roughly 20-25% faster), but the visual cost in a game from 2014 is likely not worth it when High still clears 60 FPS at 1440p.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This pairing sits at rank 1149 out of 1733 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the 66th percentile of all systems measured. That means roughly one-third of tested configurations perform better, and two-thirds perform worse. The rank reflects a mid-pack standing that aligns with the individual component percentiles: the Ryzen 5 5500 ranks in the 79th percentile among all CPUs, while the RX 6650 XT ranks in the 72nd percentile among all GPUs. The combo's rank is slightly lower than either component's individual standing, which suggests the game's engine does not perfectly utilize the pair's combined potential.

Looking at the nearest rivals, the CPU's average benchmark score of 20875 is within 0.2% of the Intel Core i5-12500 (20897), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655GE (20900), and the Intel Core i5-12600T (20917). The GPU's average score of 29024 is effectively tied with the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (29011, 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 470 (28996, 0.1% delta). This means the combo's performance envelope is well-understood: it is a balanced pairing where neither component dramatically outclasses the other, but the rank of 1149 indicates that in Minimum specifically, many other combinations of CPUs and GPUs extract more frame rate per unit of raw compute. The game's release date in 2014 means it may favor older architectures or specific driver paths, which could explain why the combo underperforms its synthetic benchmark standing.

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

1920x1080: Low 176.8 FPS, Medium 133.8 FPS, High 111.8 FPS, Ultra 84.3 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 24.3% drop (43 FPS), Medium to High is a 16.4% drop (22 FPS), and High to Ultra is a 24.6% drop (27.5 FPS). The step from High to Ultra is the steepest relative decline after the initial preset change, indicating Ultra adds significant rendering cost for diminishing returns.

2560x1440: Low 111.7 FPS, Medium 87.6 FPS, High 71 FPS, Ultra 55.9 FPS. Here, Low to Medium costs 24.1 FPS (21.6%), Medium to High costs 16.6 FPS (18.9%), and High to Ultra costs 15.1 FPS (21.3%). The consistent percentage drops across settings at 1440p suggest the GPU is evenly stressed by each preset tier, with no single setting causing a bottleneck spike.

3840x2160: Low 64 FPS, Medium 44.6 FPS, High 39 FPS, Ultra 32.7 FPS. Low to Medium is a 30.3% drop (19.4 FPS), Medium to High is a 12.6% drop (5.6 FPS), and High to Ultra is a 16.2% drop (6.3 FPS). The smaller absolute differences at 4K confirm that the GPU is nearing its memory bandwidth ceiling — the 8 GB frame buffer and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth cannot sustain higher presets, so the relative cost of each setting compresses.

Cross-resolution comparisons show that 1080p Low (176.8) is 2.76 times faster than 4K Low (64), while 1080p Ultra (84.3) is 2.58 times faster than 4K Ultra (32.7). This proportionality suggests the game scales resolution almost purely on GPU fill rate, with the RX 6650 XT's 168.6 GPixel/s pixel rate being the dominant factor.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT's specifications explain the measured FPS patterns. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is moderate by current standards but sufficient for a 2014 game. The memory clock runs at 2190 MHz (17.5 Gbps effective), and the GPU has a base clock of 2055 MHz, a game clock of 2410 MHz, and a boost clock of 2635 MHz. These clocks are high for the RDNA 2.0 architecture, which helps at lower resolutions where the 2048 shading units can stretch their legs.

At 1080p, the GPU's 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 compute is the limiting factor. The data shows the combo achieves 176.8 FPS at Low, which is near the practical ceiling for this chip's shading throughput. At 4K, the memory subsystem becomes the bottleneck — 8 GB is enough capacity for the game's textures, but the 128-bit bus and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth cannot feed the 64 ROPs fast enough at 3840x2160. The pixel rate of 168.6 GPixel/s is the hard ceiling, and the measured 4K results (32.7 to 64 FPS depending on settings) align with that fill rate limitation.

The GPU's transistor count of 11,060 million on a 237 mm² die (7 nm TSMC) gives it a density of 46.7M transistors per mm², which is efficient but not class-leading. The 32 ray accelerators (RT cores) are present but irrelevant for this game, as Minimum predates ray tracing. The card's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is adequate, especially paired with the Ryzen 5 5500's PCIe Gen 3 support — the x8 link at Gen 3 provides half the bandwidth of Gen 4, but the measured data shows no obvious starvation at 1080p where the CPU is fully utilized. The GPU's 176 W TDP and dual-slot cooler are not factors in the FPS data, but the 450 W suggested PSU indicates this is a mid-range power draw that pairs well with the 65 W CPU.

FAQ

*Q: Is this combo capable of 60 FPS at 1440p in Minimum?*

A: Yes, at High settings the measured average is 71 FPS, which clears 60 FPS by 18.3%. Medium delivers 87.6 FPS, and Low hits 111.7 FPS. Ultra is the only preset that falls short at 55.9 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset for 1080p gaming with this hardware?

A: High at 111.8 FPS is the strongest balance of quality and speed. Low gives 176.8 FPS but sacrifices visuals, while Ultra drops to 84.3 FPS — still smooth but with a 24.6% penalty versus High for marginal gains.

*Q: Can this combo handle 4K in Minimum?*

A: Only at Low settings, which measures 64 FPS. Medium (44.6), High (39), and Ultra (32.7) all fall below 60 FPS, making them unsuitable for smooth play at 3840x2160.

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

A: The Ryzen 5 5500 scores 20875 on average, which is 0.1% behind the Intel Core i5-12500 (20897) and 0.2% behind the Intel Core i5-12600T (20917). It is effectively tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655GE (20900) at a 0.1% deficit.

Q: Is the GPU the bottleneck at any resolution?

A: Yes, particularly at 4K where the 8 GB memory and 128-bit bus limit performance. The measured FPS drop from 1080p Low (176.8) to 4K Low (64) is a 63.8% reduction, which is far steeper than the CPU's workload increase, confirming the GPU is the limiting component.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems?

A: It ranks 1149 out of 1733 combos, placing it in the 66th percentile. The CPU ranks in the 79th percentile among all CPUs, and the GPU in the 72nd percentile among all GPUs, so the combo's in-game rank is slightly below what the individual components suggest.