Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and Intel Arc B370 combination delivers a strictly low-end experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. With a combo rank of 2703 out of 2939 tested configurations, this pairing sits in the bottom 9% of all systems, a placement driven almost entirely by the GPU’s severe performance ceiling. The data shows a platform that is CPU-capable but GPU-limited to the point where playability is a challenge at higher resolutions and settings.

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, built on a 7 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, drawing a 65 W TDP. This part is mounted on the AMD Socket AM4 platform and supports DDR4 memory via a dual-channel interface, with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 32 MB L3 pool.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 5600F posts a Passmark single-thread score of 2872 and a multithread score of 19236. Its average benchmark score of 36945 places it at the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals in the database are tightly clustered: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 scores 36938 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D scores 37018 (-0.2%), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 scores 37093 (-0.4%), and the Intel Core i9-12900T scores 37112 (-0.5%). This cluster indicates the 5600F is a mainstream performer, not a standout but also not a bottleneck for a game like Minimum, which launched in 2014 and has modest computational demands.

For a third-person shooter from that era, the 5600F’s 12 threads and Zen 3 IPC are far more than adequate to feed even a fast discrete GPU. The data supports this: when the GPU is not the limiting factor, the CPU delivers. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 85 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it holds 65 FPS, with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS. These figures suggest the CPU is capable of driving frame rates well above 60 FPS in this title, and the drop to lower FPS at higher settings is not a CPU limitation but a consequence of the GPU struggling.

The CPU’s percentile rank (85th) versus the GPU’s percentile rank (5th) highlights a massive imbalance. The 5600F is a solid mid-range processor from 2025, while the Arc B370 is an integrated-class part. In Minimum, the CPU’s role is to provide a stable foundation, which it does, but it is never the component that constrains the final frame rate. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU has substantial headroom, as evidenced by the fact that lowering resolution from 1440p to 1080p at Low settings improves FPS from 55 to 85, a 54% increase, which is a GPU-side scaling effect.

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

The Intel Arc B370 is a radically different proposition. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Panther Lake chip, fabricated on Intel’s 3 nm process. Its clock speeds are a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2400 MHz. The memory is system shared, meaning it draws from the main system RAM, with bandwidth described as system dependent. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units.

The Arc B370’s compute capabilities are modest: 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scores 1184, placing it at the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all legacy parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (-0.2%), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (-0.5%), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (-0.7%), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (+1.4%). This comparison is damning; the Arc B370 is effectively competing with graphics hardware from over a decade ago.

In Minimum, the GPU’s performance is the defining factor. The measured FPS data shows a clear ceiling: at 1080p Low, the system hits 85 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it collapses to 15 FPS. The GPU’s 5th percentile ranking means it is in the bottom tier of all tested graphics solutions. For a game from 2014, the Arc B370 can manage playable frame rates only at low resolutions and low-to-medium settings. The system shared memory configuration means there is no dedicated VRAM, which likely exacerbates performance issues at higher resolutions where memory bandwidth and capacity become more critical. The data does not provide specific VRAM usage, but the system dependent bandwidth implies that the GPU’s performance will scale with system memory configuration, a variable that this benchmark setup does not isolate.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. The scaling from 1080p to 4K is severe and consistent across all settings. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 85 at 1080p to 55 at 1440p and then to 30 at 4K. This represents a 64.7% drop from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the drop is from 55 at 1080p to 35 at 1440p to 19 at 4K, a 65.5% reduction. At Medium settings, the numbers are 65, 42, and 23, a 64.6% decline. At Ultra, the figures are 42, 27, and 15, a 64.3% reduction.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all four settings is a strong indicator that the GPU is the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the FPS to remain flat or drop less steeply as resolution increases, because the CPU workload would stay constant. Instead, the FPS scales almost linearly with the number of pixels, which is the signature of a GPU that is saturated even at the lowest resolution. The fact that the 5600F can deliver 85 FPS at 1080p Low but only 30 FPS at 4K Low suggests that the GPU’s fill rate and shading capacity are exhausted well before the CPU’s limits are reached.

The data also shows that the jump from 1080p to 1440p costs about 35% of the frame rate, while the jump from 1440p to 4K costs about 45% more. This non-linear degradation is typical for an IGP with limited memory bandwidth, as the system shared memory becomes a more significant constraint at higher pixel counts. The Arc B370’s 5th percentile ranking makes this behavior expected; it is not designed for 4K gaming, and the benchmark results confirm that even at Low settings, 4K is borderline unplayable at 30 FPS.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Minimum with this combo?*

A: The data shows that 1080p is the only resolution where the combo achieves consistently playable frame rates. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 85, and at 1080p Medium it is 65. At 1440p, the average FPS drops to 55 at Low and 42 at Medium, which is still playable but with a noticeable reduction in smoothness. At 4K, the maximum average FPS is 30 at Low settings, which is below the threshold for a smooth experience.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its closest competitor is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which scores 1186, a 0.2% difference. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher). The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower. This places the Arc B370 in the same performance tier as these legacy parts.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F a bottleneck in this system?

A: No. The CPU’s Passmark single-thread score of 2872 and multithread score of 19236 are far above what Minimum requires, given its 2014 release date. The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K shows a consistent drop of about 65% across all settings, which indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU has headroom, as evidenced by the 85 FPS result at 1080p Low.

Q: What is the frame time consistency at Medium settings?

A: At Medium settings, the measured FPS shows a minimum of 56 and a maximum of 75 at 1080p, with an average of 65. At 1440p Medium, the average is 42, with a minimum of 36 and a maximum of 48. At 4K Medium, the average is 23, with a minimum of 19 and a maximum of 26. The spread between min and max is roughly 19-30% of the average, indicating moderate frame time variance.

Q: What is the combo’s ranking among all tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 2703 out of 2939 tested combinations in Minimum. This places it in the bottom 8% of all systems, which is consistent with the GPU’s 5th percentile ranking. The CPU’s 85th percentile ranking does not compensate for the GPU’s severe performance deficit.

Q: Can this system handle Ultra settings at any resolution?

A: At 1080p Ultra, the system achieves an average of 42 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. At 1440p Ultra, the average drops to 27 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 15 FPS. The data suggests that Ultra settings are only viable at 1080p, and even then, the frame rate is below the 60 FPS threshold that is often considered standard.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F + Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 2703 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places the system in the bottom 8% of all configurations, a position that aligns perfectly with the GPU’s individual percentile ranking of 5. The CPU, by contrast, ranks in the 85th percentile, which creates a stark imbalance. The data indicates that the combo’s ranking is almost entirely determined by the GPU. If the system had a more capable graphics solution, the CPU would likely allow for significantly higher frame rates, given its strong single-thread and multithread scores. However, as configured, the Arc B370’s 1184 3DMark score acts as a hard cap on performance.

In practical terms, this ranking means the combo is only suitable for low-end gaming. The measured FPS data supports this, as the system only exceeds 60 FPS at 1080p Low (85 FPS) and approaches it at 1080p Medium (65 FPS). Every other configuration falls below 60 FPS. The ranking is not an outlier; it is a direct consequence of pairing a mid-range 2025 CPU with an integrated graphics unit that performs on par with ATI parts from the early 2010s. For a game like Minimum, which is not graphically demanding by modern standards, this combo still struggles at higher resolutions, confirming that the GPU is a severe bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the combo’s performance across all resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system delivers an average of 85 FPS at Low settings, 65 FPS at Medium settings (with a minimum of 56 and a maximum of 75), 55 FPS at High settings, and 42 FPS at Ultra settings. This is the only resolution where the combo achieves a playable experience across all settings, with Low and Medium both exceeding 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, performance drops significantly. The average FPS is 55 at Low settings, 42 at Medium settings (minimum 36, maximum 48), 35 at High settings, and 27 at Ultra settings. None of these averages reach 60 FPS, and the Ultra setting falls below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum for a playable experience. The Medium setting is the best option at this resolution, providing a reasonably smooth experience for a slower-paced game.

At 3840x2160, the combo is not viable for serious play. The average FPS is 30 at Low settings, 23 at Medium settings (minimum 19, maximum 26), 19 at High settings, and 15 at Ultra settings. Every setting at 4K is below 30 FPS, and the Ultra setting is essentially a slideshow. The data shows that the Arc B370’s system shared memory configuration and low compute throughput (6.144 TFLOPS) are simply insufficient for 4K rendering in this title.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal configuration for this combo is 1080p with Low or Medium settings. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 85 FPS, which provides a very smooth experience and leaves headroom for frame time spikes. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 65 FPS, with a minimum of 56 FPS, which is still playable and offers better visual fidelity. The data suggests that Medium is the best balance of performance and quality at 1080p, as it stays above 60 FPS on average and the minimum is close to that threshold.

For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, 1080p High is a viable option at 55 FPS, but the drop below 60 FPS may be noticeable in fast-paced scenes. 1080p Ultra is not recommended, as the 42 FPS average is below the smoothness threshold. At 1440p, the only setting that provides a playable experience is Low, at 55 FPS. Medium at 1440p drops to 42 FPS, which is borderline, and High and Ultra are not recommended due to sub-40 FPS averages. At 4K, no setting is recommended, as even Low only achieves 30 FPS, which is too low for a responsive gaming experience.

The best experience per the measured rows is 1080p Medium. This setting provides an average of 65 FPS, with a minimum of 56 FPS, ensuring that the game remains fluid in most situations. The 1080p Low setting is the safer choice for competitive play, where frame rate is paramount, but the visual upgrade from Low to Medium is significant enough to justify the 20 FPS average loss. The data does not support any upgrade to higher resolutions, as the GPU’s performance ceiling is too low to maintain acceptable frame rates beyond 1080p.