Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB pairing delivers a highly playable experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. The data shows a combination that scales predictably across resolutions, with the strongest performance at 1080p and a noticeable decline as pixel count increases. The combo ranks in the 50th percentile among all tested configurations, indicating a balanced mid-pack position that favors high refresh rate gaming at standard resolutions.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Vermeer. It operates with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, drawing a 65 W TDP. This CPU features 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 32 MB L3 cache. The processor supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, offering a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. It connects via PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

In the context of Minimum, the CPU’s role is primarily to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. The 6-core/12-thread configuration is ample for a game from 2014, which was designed for fewer cores. Benchmark data for the CPU shows a Passmark single-thread score of 2872 and a multithread score of 19236. These scores place the processor in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, indicating strong single-thread performance that is critical for older game engines. The data suggests that at lower resolutions, where the GPU is not the bottleneck, the CPU can maintain high frame rates, as evidenced by the 206 FPS average at 1080p Low settings. The CPU’s performance relative to rivals is tight: it trails the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D by 0.2% and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 by 0.4%, while matching the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 with a 0% delta. It is also 0.5% behind the Intel Core i9-12900T.

The architecture’s efficiency, with a 7 nm process and 4,150 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, helps sustain boost clocks during gaming sessions. For a game like Minimum, the CPU’s capabilities are not a limiting factor; the data shows that even at 1080p Ultra, the combo achieves 101 FPS, suggesting that the processor can handle the game’s demands without causing a significant frame rate drop compared to lower settings. The CPU’s release date of 2025-09-15 is well after the game’s release, but its architecture remains relevant for modern game compatibility.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Minimum?

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 206, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested configurations in this game?

A: The combo ranks 1470 out of 2939 tested combinations, placing it in the middle of the pack.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p and 4K at Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 Ultra, the average FPS is 101; at 3840x2160 Ultra, it drops to 35 FPS. This represents a 65% reduction in frame rate.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor at 4K resolution?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K. At 3840x2160 Low settings, the average FPS is 72, which is significantly lower than the 206 FPS seen at 1080p Low, showing that the GPU cannot keep up with the pixel count.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for the Medium settings preset at 1440p?

A: For the 2560x1440 Medium preset, the minimum FPS is 87, with an average of 102 and a maximum of 117.

Q: How does the CPU’s benchmark score compare to its nearest rival?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 36945, which is virtually identical to the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 at 36938, showing a 0% delta.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear scaling pattern across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the combo performs exceptionally well, with averages ranging from 206 FPS at Low to 101 FPS at Ultra. Moving to 2560x1440, the averages drop to 133 FPS at Low and 65 FPS at Ultra. At 3840x2160, the averages fall further to 72 FPS at Low and 35 FPS at Ultra.

This scaling indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. The frame rate drop from 1080p Low (206 FPS) to 4K Low (72 FPS) is a 65% decrease, which is proportionally larger than the increase in pixel count from 2.07 million to 8.29 million (a 4x increase). This suggests that while the CPU can maintain high frame rates at lower resolutions, the Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB cannot sustain the same performance when the pixel throughput requirement quadruples.

The data shows that the GPU’s 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 322.3 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but at 4K, the memory capacity and bandwidth become limiting factors. The 128-bit memory bus and 64 ROPs are not designed for extreme resolutions in modern titles, and Minimum, despite being an older game, still places a significant load on the GPU at 4K. The gap between Low and Ultra settings at 4K is also telling: 72 FPS vs 35 FPS, a 51% reduction, which is more pronounced than the 49% reduction seen at 1080p (206 FPS vs 101 FPS). This further confirms that the GPU is the limiting component at 4K, as the CPU is not able to compensate for the increased graphical load.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F + AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB combination is ranked 1470 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the 50th percentile of all configurations, meaning half of the tested setups perform better and half perform worse. This mid-pack ranking is consistent with the GPU’s individual performance, which sits in the 24th percentile among all GPUs according to its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4093.

The GPU’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the Intel HD Graphics 630 (0.4% faster), NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (1.4% faster), NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (1.5% slower), and AMD Radeon R5 M330 (1.8% faster). These are all entry-level or integrated graphics solutions, which suggests that the RX 9060 XT’s benchmark score is relatively low, but its real-world gaming performance in Minimum is much better than those rivals. The combo’s rank of 1470 is likely lifted by the CPU’s strong 85th percentile standing, which prevents the system from falling lower in the rankings.

The data indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming with high refresh rates. At 1440p, it remains playable but not optimal for high refresh rate monitors. At 4K, the performance is marginal, with only the Low preset achieving a playable 72 FPS average. This ranking suggests that the combo is a solid choice for esports-style gaming on a budget, but not for high-end 4K gaming.

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

1920x1080:

• Low: Average 206 FPS, no min/max data.
• Medium: Average 158 FPS, min 134, max 182.
• High: Average 133 FPS, no min/max data.
• Ultra: Average 101 FPS, no min/max data.

2560x1440:

• Low: Average 133 FPS, no min/max data.
• Medium: Average 102 FPS, min 87, max 117.
• High: Average 86 FPS, no min/max data.
• Ultra: Average 65 FPS, no min/max data.

3840x2160:

• Low: Average 72 FPS, no min/max data.
• Medium: Average 55 FPS, min 47, max 63.
• High: Average 46 FPS, no min/max data.
• Ultra: Average 35 FPS, no min/max data.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each step up in resolution results in a significant FPS drop. For example, the High preset at 1080p yields 133 FPS, which drops to 86 FPS at 1440p (a 35% decrease) and then to 46 FPS at 4K (a 47% decrease from 1440p). The Medium preset provides the only complete min/max data across all resolutions, offering a stable frame time experience. At 1080p Medium, the frame rate ranges from 134 to 182 FPS, at 1440p Medium from 87 to 117 FPS, and at 4K Medium from 47 to 63 FPS. This indicates that the Medium preset is the most consistent, with the least variance between minimum and maximum frame rates relative to the average.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the target resolution and frame rate goals.

For 1080p gaming, the Low preset delivers 206 FPS, which is excellent for high refresh rate monitors (144Hz or higher). However, the Medium preset offers a better visual quality with 158 FPS average and a tight frame time range (134-182 FPS), making it the best balance of visual fidelity and performance. The High preset at 133 FPS is also viable for 120Hz displays, but the Ultra preset at 101 FPS is the minimum recommended for a 100Hz monitor.

For 1440p gaming, the Low preset at 133 FPS is ideal for 144Hz monitors, but the Medium preset at 102 FPS provides a more visual experience with a minimum of 87 FPS, which is still above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play. The High preset at 86 FPS is acceptable for 85Hz displays, while the Ultra preset at 65 FPS is only suitable for 60Hz monitors.

For 4K gaming, the only truly playable option is the Low preset at 72 FPS, which is suitable for 60Hz displays but not for high refresh rates. The Medium preset at 55 FPS is marginal, with a minimum of 47 FPS that may cause noticeable stutters. The High and Ultra presets at 46 FPS and 35 FPS, respectively, are not recommended for a smooth experience.

The data suggests that the Medium preset is the most versatile across all resolutions, offering a good balance of frame rate and visual quality. At 1080p, it provides a high frame rate with low variance; at 1440p, it remains above 87 FPS; and at 4K, it is just below the 60 FPS threshold but still playable for less demanding scenarios. For the best experience, users with 1080p or 1440p monitors should use the Medium preset, while 4K users should stick to Low settings to maintain a smooth frame rate.