Minimum

Minimum is a 2014 third-person shooter that favors high frame rates, and the measured data for the AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 shows a system that is almost never the bottleneck. The pairing ranks in the 55th spot out of 1733 tested combinations, placing it comfortably in the top tier of configurations. With this hardware, the experience is defined by how far you push graphical settings, as the frame rate window between the lightest and heaviest presets is substantial. The data supports a clear strategy for getting the most out of this game on this specific rig, and the following sections break down exactly what those numbers mean for your in-game choices.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data strongly suggests that the "Ultra" preset is the only one that introduces any potential compromise on high-refresh-rate displays. At 1920x1080, Ultra still delivers an average of 195.1 FPS, which is excellent, but it is a significant drop from the High preset’s 253 FPS. The story becomes more critical at 2560x1440, where Ultra averages 126 FPS, and at 3840x2160, it falls to 66.9 FPS. This indicates that Ultra is the first setting tier where the GPU’s workload starts to outweigh the CPU’s ability to feed it, especially at higher resolutions.

For the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, the "High" preset is the sweet spot. It provides a substantial visual upgrade over Medium while maintaining frame rates that are only slightly lower. The data shows High at 253 FPS at 1080p, 160.4 FPS at 1440p, and 90.7 FPS at 4K. These numbers are all high enough for smooth, responsive gameplay on most monitors, and the 4K result is particularly notable as it is the only preset besides Low that remains playable at that resolution. Lowering to Medium offers a performance boost of about 50 FPS at 1080p and 34 FPS at 1440p, but the visual cost is typically not worth that gain when High is already so fast.

The "Low" preset is only advisable if you are chasing maximum frame rates on a 360Hz or higher refresh rate monitor. At 1080p, Low produces 358.3 FPS, which is a 41% improvement over High. However, this comes at the cost of almost all visual detail. For the vast majority of users, the High preset is the recommended starting point. If you find yourself on a 4K display, High is the optimal choice, as it is the highest quality setting that keeps the average frame rate above the 90 FPS mark.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications show why it handles Minimum with ease. It features 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth. This massive memory pool is far more than the game requires, ensuring that texture loading and asset streaming are never a limiting factor, even at 4K resolution. The GPU’s high pixel rate of 443.5 GPixel/s and texture rate of 1,290.2 GTexel/s are directly responsible for the high frame rates seen at the "High" and "Medium" presets.

The card’s clock speeds are also a key factor. With a base clock of 2235 MHz and a boost clock of 2520 MHz, the 4090 is running at speeds that allow it to process the game’s simple geometry and lighting extremely quickly. This is evident in the performance scaling; the GPU is so powerful that at 1080p and 1440p, it is often waiting for the CPU to send it more work. However, the data shows that the GPU begins to become the primary limiter only when the resolution and settings are maxed out. At 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 66.9 FPS, which is a clear sign that the GPU’s raw compute power is finally being taxed by the pixel workload. The benchmark results for the GPU itself, such as a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 9223 and a Passmark G3D score of 38194, underline its position in the top percentile, but in this game, its role is to provide a massive headroom that is only partially utilized at lower settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT plays a supporting role in this configuration, providing the necessary single-thread performance to keep the RTX 4090 fed. With 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Zen 3 architecture, it has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. This is a 65W part, but its strong single-core performance is what matters most for a title like Minimum. The CPU’s benchmark results, such as a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2438 and a Passmark single-thread score of 3348, are critical for the game’s main thread, which handles game logic and physics.

The data reveals the CPU’s impact in the scaling between resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 358.3 FPS, but this number is limited by the CPU’s ability to issue draw calls. As the resolution increases and the GPU takes on more work, the frame rate drops, showing that the CPU is no longer the primary constraint. The CPU’s nearest rivals, like the Intel Core i7-10700 and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X, have comparable average scores, indicating that this processor is not a weak link in the chain. However, when you push to 4K Ultra, the frame rate difference between the CPU and GPU-bound scenarios becomes clear. The CPU is likely maxing out its single-thread capabilities at frame rates above 200 FPS, but it is not the bottleneck at 4K, where the GPU’s workload dominates. In essence, the 5600GT provides a solid foundation, but it is the GPU that dictates the final performance ceiling at higher settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best setting for a 1440p monitor?

A: The High preset is the best choice for 2560x1440. It delivers an average of 160.4 FPS, which is excellent for smooth gameplay. Ultra is also viable at 126 FPS, but High offers a better balance of visual quality and performance headroom.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in this title?

A: Yes, it can. At 3840x2160, the High preset produces an average of 90.7 FPS, which is playable. The Low preset achieves 134.6 FPS for higher refresh rates, while Ultra drops to 66.9 FPS, which is still technically playable but closer to the edge of smoothness.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the CPU is the limiting factor. This is evident from the frame rates, which are extremely high (e.g., 358.3 FPS on Low) and don’t scale as much with resolution as they do when the GPU becomes the bottleneck at 4K.

Q: How much of a performance difference is there between Medium and High?

A: The difference is noticeable but not massive. At 1080p, High averages 253 FPS while Medium averages 303 FPS, a difference of 50 FPS. At 1440p, the gap is 33.6 FPS (160.4 vs 194), and at 4K, it is 16.6 FPS (90.7 vs 107.3).

Q: Why is the Ultra preset so much slower than High?

A: The Ultra preset appears to include settings that are disproportionately heavy on the GPU. The data shows a significant drop in average frame rate compared to High at all resolutions, most notably at 4K where it falls from 90.7 FPS to 66.9 FPS, suggesting a feature that causes a large rendering overhead.

Q: Is the RTX 4090’s 24 GB of VRAM necessary for this game?

A: No, it is not necessary. Minimum is an older title, and its textures are unlikely to use even a fraction of the available 24 GB. The VRAM capacity is overkill, but it ensures that memory is never a bottleneck and provides headroom for other tasks.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data across the three resolutions provides a clear picture of how the system’s workload shifts. At the Low preset, the average FPS drops from 358.3 at 1080p to 256.9 at 1440p, a 28% decrease, and then to 134.6 at 4K, a 62% decrease from the 1080p figure. This steep drop indicates that even on Low settings, the GPU is beginning to take on a significant workload as the pixel count increases. In contrast, the High preset shows a more gradual decline: 253 FPS at 1080p, 160.4 at 1440p, and 90.7 at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is 64%, which is similar to Low, but the absolute numbers are more moderate.

This pattern suggests that the game scales primarily with resolution, and the GPU is the component that feels the most impact. The CPU’s performance is relatively constant, but as the resolution increases, the GPU has to work harder to fill the extra pixels. The difference between the presets also grows at higher resolutions. For example, the gap between Low and Ultra is 163.2 FPS at 1080p, but shrinks to 67.7 FPS at 4K. This shows that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily loaded that the setting choices have a smaller relative impact on the final frame rate. The limiting component is definitively the GPU at 4K, while the CPU is the primary constraint at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows a clear hierarchy of settings. The Low preset leads with an average of 358.3 FPS, followed by Medium at 303 FPS, High at 253 FPS, and Ultra at 195.1 FPS. The difference between each tier is consistent, with a roughly 50 FPS step between Low, Medium, and High, and a larger 58 FPS drop from High to Ultra. This resolution is heavily CPU-bound, as even the heaviest preset produces frame rates well above the refresh rate of most standard monitors.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average FPS values are still very high. Low averages 256.9 FPS, Medium averages 194 FPS, High averages 160.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 126 FPS. The scaling from 1080p is noticeable but not dramatic, with the Low preset losing 101.4 FPS and the High preset losing 92.6 FPS. This resolution begins to shift the bottleneck towards the GPU, but the CPU still provides a strong foundation.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. The Low preset averages 134.6 FPS, which is a significant drop from 1080p. Medium averages 107.3 FPS, High averages 90.7 FPS, and Ultra averages 66.9 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is now only 67.7 FPS, compared to 163.2 FPS at 1080p. This shows that at 4K, the absolute performance is capped by the GPU’s rendering power, and the visual settings have a smaller influence on the final output. For a consistent experience across all resolutions, the High preset offers the best combination of performance and visual quality, with the data showing it is the only preset that remains above 90 FPS at 4K.