Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a classic entry-level desktop combination, and in Minimum it produces a clear picture of where the bottleneck sits. The data shows a system that is almost entirely GPU-bound at higher resolutions, with the CPU showing it has ample headroom to push far more frames if the graphics card could keep up. This is a practical setup for 1080p gaming, but the measured results show its limits expand quickly as resolution climbs.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and telling. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 82.3 FPS at 1920x1080 to 49.6 FPS at 2560x1440, a substantial 32.7 FPS loss. Moving to 3840x2160, the average drops further to 27.7 FPS. That is a 54.6 FPS difference between 1080p and 4K at Low settings, which represents a 66% reduction in performance. This scaling pattern indicates that the GTX 1650 is the limiting component; the pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth are being saturated as resolution increases.

At High settings, the same trend is visible but with lower absolute numbers. The average FPS goes from 53.4 at 1080p to 32.4 at 1440p, and finally to 19.2 at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K is 13.2 FPS, which is a smaller absolute decline than the 21 FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p. This suggests that the GPU is already struggling so much at 1440p High that the additional pixel load at 4K has a diminishing absolute impact, though the frame rate becomes unplayable.

The data shows that the Ryzen 5 5600G is not the factor here. Its 6 cores and 12 threads, with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, are more than capable of feeding the GTX 1650. The CPU's benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 16758, indicate strong processing power that is not being taxed by this game at these settings. The bottleneck is purely on the graphics side, as evidenced by the consistent FPS collapse as resolution increases regardless of the quality preset.

Settings Recommendations

For a playable experience, the measured rows show that 1080p is the only viable resolution for this combo. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 82.3 FPS, which is excellent for fast-paced third-person shooting. Medium settings still provide a smooth 64.4 FPS, offering a good balance between visual fidelity and performance. High settings at 1080p yield 53.4 FPS, which is acceptable for most players, but the jump to Ultra drops the average to 42.3 FPS, which may feel less responsive in intense combat.

The data suggests that the best experience per the measured rows is the Medium preset at 1080p. It provides a 64.4 FPS average, which is 21% higher than High settings, while the visual improvement over Low is noticeable in most games. Pushing to 1440p is not advisable. Even at Low settings, the average FPS is 49.6, which is below the 60 FPS threshold that most PC builders consider the baseline for smooth gameplay. At 1440p High, the average drops to 32.4 FPS, which is a significant compromise.

At 4K, the results are purely academic. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 27.7 on Low settings, which is not playable for a shooter that requires quick reactions. Ultra settings at 4K produce a dismal 16.3 FPS average. The recommendation from the data is clear: stick to 1920x1080 and use Medium or High settings, depending on whether you prefer higher frame rates or better visuals.

GPU Role

The GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture card with 896 shading units and 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. Its memory bandwidth is 128.1 GB/s, and it operates at a base clock of 1485 MHz with a boost clock of 1665 MHz. These specifications are modest by modern standards, and the benchmark results confirm this. The GPU's PassMark G3D score is 7880, placing it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs.

The 4 GB VRAM capacity is a critical constraint in Minimum. At 1080p, the game fits within this limit, allowing the card to operate at its full potential. However, the 12 GB of GDDR5 bandwidth is not sufficient to handle the increased texture data and pixel shading required at 1440p and 4K. This is why the FPS drops so dramatically; the card is not only fill-rate limited but also likely hitting memory capacity limits at higher resolutions.

The GPU's FP32 performance is 2.984 TFLOPS, which is a modest figure. The data shows that the card's performance is consistent with its specifications. It is neither a high-end part nor a complete slouch. The fact that it can maintain 82.3 FPS at 1080p Low shows that it has enough raw power for lighter loads, but the 16.3 FPS at 4K Ultra highlights how quickly that power is exhausted. The card's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors confirm it is a low-power part, and the measured performance reflects that thermal and power envelope.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings is playable. Low delivers 82.3 FPS average, which is the highest score in the entire dataset. Medium follows at 64.4 FPS, High at 53.4 FPS, and Ultra at 42.3 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is exactly 40 FPS, showing that the quality preset has a massive impact on performance at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the scores drop significantly. Low averages 49.6 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target. Medium averages 42.5 FPS, High averages 32.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 26.8 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 22.8 FPS, which is narrower than at 1080p. This suggests that the GPU is becoming the primary constraint, and the settings have less relative impact.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. Low averages 27.7 FPS, Medium averages 20.3 FPS, High averages 19.2 FPS, and Ultra averages 16.3 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is only 11.4 FPS. This compression of the FPS range indicates that the GPU is completely overwhelmed, and even reducing settings cannot compensate for the sheer number of pixels being rendered. The data shows a clear linear progression of performance loss as resolution increases, with the 4K results being 66% to 61% lower than their 1080p counterparts across all settings.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this pairing of the Ryzen 5 5600G and GTX 1650 ranks 1653 out of 1733 combos for Minimum. This places it in the bottom 5% of all tested systems, which is a low rank. The percentileVsAllGpus for the GTX 1650 is 43, meaning it performs better than 43% of all GPUs, but the combination's rank in this specific game is much lower.

The CPU's nearest rivals in overall benchmark scores include the Intel Core i7-11600H and the AMD EPYC 7713P, with deltaPct values of 0.2 and -0.2 respectively. This indicates the Ryzen 5 5600G is essentially on par with these parts in general compute tasks. However, the game's performance is dictated by the GPU, and the GTX 1650's nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100, have similar average scores with deltaPct values of 0.5 and -0.5. This shows that the GPU is performing as expected for its class.

The low combo rank is not a surprise given the hardware. The GTX 1650 is an end-of-life product from 2019, and the Ryzen 5 5600G is a 2021 CPU with integrated graphics. The measured FPS data confirms that this is a 1080p-only setup, and the rank of 1653 out of 1733 reflects that this combination will struggle in any modern game at higher resolutions. The data indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor; upgrading the GPU would be the only way to improve this combo's rank.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Minimum at 1440p with acceptable performance?*

A: No. The measured data shows that at 2560x1440, the highest average FPS is 49.6 on Low settings. High settings drop to 32.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 26.8 FPS. These scores are below the 60 FPS threshold and are not suitable for a third-person shooter.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1080p gaming?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 offers the best balance, with an average of 64.4 FPS. This is 21% higher than High settings and provides a smoother experience than Low while maintaining better visual quality.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU is the bottleneck. The GTX 1650 has a PassMark G3D score of 7880, and its performance collapses as resolution increases. The Ryzen 5 5600G has a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 16758, indicating it has sufficient processing power to handle the game without being the limiting factor.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1650's average benchmark score is 8713. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro P2200, has a score of 8671, which is a deltaPct of 0.5. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8761, a deltaPct of -0.5. This indicates the GTX 1650 is statistically on par with these cards.

Q: What is the expected FPS at 4K on Low settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 on Low settings is 27.7 FPS. This is not playable for a fast-paced game, and the 4K results are consistently below 30 FPS across all presets.

*Q: Is the 4 GB VRAM of the GTX 1650 sufficient for Minimum?*

A: At 1080p, the 4 GB VRAM is sufficient, as evidenced by the playable frame rates. However, the significant drop in performance at 1440p and 4K suggests that memory capacity and bandwidth become limiting factors at higher resolutions.