Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination represents a stark pairing of a modern, high-throughput CPU with an older, entry-level GPU. In Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter, this pairing produces a predictable bottleneck, with the GTX 1650 consistently acting as the primary constraint on frame rates. The measured data reveals a system that can achieve playable performance at 1080p with adjusted settings, but the GPU’s 4 GB memory and limited shading power become increasingly exposed as resolution climbs.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, built on a 5 nm process. Its base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.70 GHz, combined with a 32 MB shared L3 cache, provide substantial computational headroom. In synthetic benchmarks, the processor posts a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21765 and a single-core score of 3072, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs tested. This indicates that in a game like Minimum, which relies on physics and AI calculations, the CPU has ample capacity to feed frames to the GPU.

Data from the measured frames per second (FPS) supports this assessment. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 81 FPS on average. This is the highest measured average across all tested configurations, and it is notably higher than the 52 FPS recorded at 1440p Low and 28 FPS at 4K Low. The fact that the 1080p Low score is more than double the 4K Low score suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor; if the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions. The processor’s Passmark multithread score of 25645 and single-thread score of 3689 further confirm that it is not a weak link in this chain.

In terms of rival positioning, the 7400F’s average benchmark score of 32750 places it within a tight cluster of competitors. It is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i5-14600T (32707), 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (32697), 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (32662), and 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (32812). These deltas are negligible, indicating that the 7400F’s raw processing power is competitive with these other chips. However, in Minimum, this CPU advantage does not translate into high FPS at higher resolutions because the GPU cannot keep up with the rendering demands. The CPU’s role here is to ensure that even when the GPU is struggling, it is not also being starved of data.

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

Based solely on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience is found at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This configuration yields an average of 81 FPS, which is the only measured result that exceeds the 60 FPS threshold, a common target for smooth gameplay. The next best 1080p option is Medium, which averages 62 FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS. While the Medium preset offers better visual fidelity, the data shows that it also introduces frame dips below 60 FPS. For a consistently smooth experience, Low is the safest choice.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset produces an average of 52 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target. The Medium preset at 1440p drops to 40 FPS, and High and Ultra fall to 34 and 26 FPS, respectively. These numbers indicate that 1440p is not a viable resolution for this combo if the goal is high refresh rate gameplay. At 3840x2160, even the Low preset only manages 28 FPS, which is not smooth enough for a shooter. Therefore, the data strongly suggests that users should prioritize 1080p and, if possible, stick to the Low preset to maintain the highest frame rate. The Medium preset at 1080p is a secondary option for those who prefer visuals over absolute smoothness, but the 62 FPS average and 53 FPS minimum make it a less stable alternative.

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

The measured FPS exhibits a clear and steep decline as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the average is 81 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 52 FPS, a reduction of approximately 35%. At 4K Low, the average is 28 FPS, which is a further 46% reduction from the 1440p figure. This pattern is consistent across all settings. For instance, at High settings, the averages are 52 FPS at 1080p, 34 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. At Ultra settings, the averages are 40 FPS, 26 FPS, and 14 FPS for 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, respectively.

This scaling behavior is a classic indicator of a GPU-bound scenario. The pixel count increases dramatically from 1080p (2.07 million pixels) to 4K (8.29 million pixels), which places a proportional load on the GPU’s shading units and memory bandwidth. The GTX 1650, with its 896 shading units and 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth, is simply not equipped to handle this increased workload. The CPU, meanwhile, has no corresponding increase in workload that would explain the FPS drop. Therefore, the data indicates that the GTX 1650 is the definitive limiting component in this test. The FPS decline is not linear with pixel count, suggesting that other factors, such as memory capacity limits at 4K, also come into play.

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

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

A: The highest average FPS is 81, achieved at 1920x1080 with the Low settings preset.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F or the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GTX 1650 is the limiting factor. This is evidenced by the significant FPS drop from 1080p to 4K, which is a characteristic of a GPU bottleneck, not a CPU one.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Arc A310?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, which is 1% lower than the Intel Arc A310’s score of 7550.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for the Medium settings preset at 1920x1080?

A: The minimum FPS recorded for that configuration is 53, with an average of 62 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested combos in this game?

A: The combo is ranked 2837 out of 2939 tested combinations.

Q: What is the memory bus width of the GTX 1650?

A: The GTX 1650 has a 128-bit memory bus, which supports a memory bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture GPU built on a 12 nm process, with a die size of 200 mm² and 4,700 million transistors. Its base clock is 1485 MHz, with a boost clock of 1665 MHz. The GPU is equipped with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. This memory configuration is a critical weakness for the card in modern games, and the data suggests it also affects Minimum at higher resolutions. The card’s FP32 performance is 2.984 TFLOPS, with a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s.

The GPU’s benchmark profile shows a percentile rank of 40 across all GPUs, with an average score of 7472. In terms of rivals, it is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447), 0.4% ahead of the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441), and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425), but 1% behind the Intel Arc A310 (7550). These scores are all very close, indicating that the GTX 1650 sits at the very bottom of the discrete GPU performance ladder.

In Minimum, the GPU’s role is to handle the rendering of the game’s third-person perspective and the associated effects. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the card is capable of 81 FPS, which is a playable rate. However, at 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 40 FPS. This suggests that the card has enough raw power for low-detail 1080p, but the jump to higher presets, which likely increases texture quality and shadow complexity, quickly overwhelms it. The 4 GB VRAM is likely a contributor to the poor performance at 4K, where the average FPS across all settings is below 30. The 28 FPS at 4K Low is the best 4K result, but it is still not fluid enough for a shooter.

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

The measured data provides a comprehensive matrix of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the results are uniformly low. The Low preset yields an average of 28 FPS. Medium is slightly worse, with an average of 22 FPS and a minimum of 18 and maximum of 25. High drops to 18 FPS, and Ultra is the lowest, at 14 FPS. None of these results are close to a playable 60 FPS, and even the minimum FPS for Medium is below 20.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the performance improves but remains sub-optimal for fast-paced action. The Low preset averages 52 FPS. Medium averages 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 and maximum of 46. High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. This resolution offers a workable experience only on the Low preset, and even then, the frame rate is not consistently smooth.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the performance is the most viable. The Low preset leads with an average of 81 FPS. Medium follows with 62 FPS, a minimum of 53, and a maximum of 72. High averages 52 FPS, and Ultra averages 40 FPS. This is the only resolution where the combo can exceed 60 FPS, and it does so only on the Low preset. The data shows a clear progression: lower resolutions and lower settings yield higher frame rates, while the GPU’s limitations become more apparent with increased graphical load.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination is ranked 2837 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the bottom 3.5% of all configurations tested for this game. This low ranking is primarily attributable to the GTX 1650’s position in the GPU hierarchy. While the CPU is a strong performer, ranking in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, the GPU’s 40th percentile ranking drags the overall combo down.

The ranking of 2837 suggests that the vast majority of other CPU-GPU pairings tested for Minimum deliver higher frame rates. This is consistent with the measured FPS data, which shows that the combo struggles to maintain 60 FPS at 1080p, let alone at higher resolutions. The GPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks, such as the Intel Arc A310 and AMD Radeon R7 350, are all low-end parts, and the combo’s position in the rankings reflects this. For a game released in 2014, the GTX 1650 should theoretically be able to handle it, but the data indicates that the card’s age and memory limitations are significant handicaps. The CPU’s performance is essentially wasted in this configuration, as it cannot compensate for the GPU’s rendering deficit. This rank is a clear signal that this is an imbalanced pairing for this particular title, with the GPU being the sole reason for the poor overall standing.