Minimum

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X compare to its nearest rival in CPU benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 9600X posts an average benchmark score of 29,713, which is just 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE (29,656) and 0.5% below the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H (29,868). It also trails the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT by 0.6% and the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS by 0.8%, indicating a tightly clustered performance tier.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all tested graphics cards?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER sits in the 76th percentile versus all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 31,087. Its closest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro M5000, scores 31,206 (0.4% higher), while the NVIDIA TITAN RTX leads by 1.9% with a score of 31,676.

Q: Which resolution and settings combination yields the highest average FPS in Minimum?

A: The 1920x1080 Low preset delivers the highest measured average at 329 FPS. At the same resolution, Medium hits 252 FPS, High reaches 211 FPS, and Ultra drops to 161 FPS, showing a clear scaling curve as visual fidelity increases.

Q: How does the combo rank overall in this game?

A: This specific CPU-GPU combination ranks 449th out of 3,712 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the top 12.1% of all configurations for this title based on measured performance data.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU show more headroom when lowering settings?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary limiter at higher settings. For instance, at 4K, dropping from Ultra (56 FPS) to Low (114 FPS) more than doubles performance, while the CPU's 6-core, 12-thread design with a 5.40 GHz boost clock appears sufficient to feed the GPU across all tested presets.

Q: What is the FPS penalty for enabling Ultra settings at 1440p versus High?

A: At 2560x1440, moving from High (136 FPS) to Ultra (104 FPS) results in a 23.5% performance drop, while the jump from Low (212 FPS) to High represents a 35.8% reduction. The Medium preset sits between at 162 FPS.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X is built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) using a 4 nm process from TSMC, featuring 6 cores and 12 threads. Its base clock runs at 3.90 GHz, boosting up to 5.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. For a game like Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014, the CPU's single-thread performance is critical, and the data reflects this: the 9600X scores 1,253 in 3DMark single-thread, 2,183.5 in Cinebench R23 single-core, and a 4,570 Passmark single-thread score, placing it in the 81st percentile versus all CPUs.

The relation between cores and this game's results becomes apparent when examining the measured FPS across settings. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 329 FPS, which suggests the CPU is not a bottleneck even at extreme frame rates. The 6-core design with 12 threads handles Minimum's workload efficiently; the game likely does not utilize all threads heavily, but the high boost clock ensures snappy response. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 2,456 versus the max-thread score of 7,590 shows that the CPU scales well, but for this title, the single-core and lightly-threaded performance matters more.

Benchmark data reinforces this interpretation. The Ryzen 5 9600X's nearest rivals in average score include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE (29,656, 0.2% faster) and the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H (29,868, 0.5% faster), but these are 8-core parts. The fact that a 6-core CPU trades blows with them suggests Minimum does not heavily reward additional cores beyond six, instead favoring clock speed and IPC. The 5.40 GHz boost clock is the key asset here, enabling the high FPS ceilings observed at lower resolutions.

At higher resolutions like 4K, the CPU's role diminishes, as the GPU becomes the limiting factor. The consistent FPS scaling from 1080p to 1440p to 4K at each settings tier indicates the CPU maintains a stable foundation, allowing the GPU to flex its muscles. There is no measured data showing CPU-bound stutter or frame drops, and the min FPS values (e.g., 214 at 1080p Medium) stay reasonably close to averages, suggesting consistent frame pacing.

Overall, the 9600X's 6-core, 12-thread configuration with a high boost clock provides ample headroom for Minimum, ensuring that the GPU is the primary determinant of performance across all tested settings. Its 65 W TDP and AM5 socket make it a power-efficient choice, though the measured results are what matter most for this analysis.

Settings Recommendations

Examining the measured FPS rows, the best experience depends on the target resolution and desired smoothness. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 211 FPS average, which is well above the 144 Hz refresh rate common on gaming monitors. However, the Ultra preset at 161 FPS still provides a smooth experience for 144 Hz displays, and the jump from High to Ultra costs 23.7% performance (from 211 to 161 FPS). For competitive play, the Low preset at 329 FPS offers maximum responsiveness, but the visual sacrifice may not be worth it for a game like Minimum, which likely benefits from higher fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the High preset hits 136 FPS, making it the sweet spot for 144 Hz monitors. The Medium preset at 162 FPS is also viable, but High offers a better balance of visuals and speed. Ultra at 104 FPS is playable but dips below the 144 Hz threshold, which might cause noticeable judder for sensitive players. The Low preset at 212 FPS is overkill unless chasing maximum frame rates.

For 3840x2160, the situation shifts. The High preset at 73 FPS is borderline for 60 Hz displays but may cause tearing on higher refresh panels. The Medium preset at 87 FPS with a min of 74 FPS provides a more stable experience for 60 Hz, while Low at 114 FPS is the only settings tier that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS with headroom. Ultra at 56 FPS is below 60 FPS and should be avoided for smooth gameplay.

The data suggests that the Medium preset is the most balanced across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium (252 FPS) offers a 19.4% improvement over High (211 FPS) with minimal visual difference. At 1440p, Medium (162 FPS) is 19.1% faster than High (136 FPS), and at 4K, Medium (87 FPS) is 19.2% faster than High (73 FPS). This consistent ~19% gain from High to Medium implies that High settings include some expensive effects that can be dialed back without major visual impact.

For the best overall experience, the recommendation is to use Medium settings at any resolution, as it provides the highest FPS while maintaining reasonable visual quality. If the display is 60 Hz, 4K Medium (87 FPS) is excellent. For 144 Hz gaming, 1440p Medium (162 FPS) or 1080p High (211 FPS) are both strong choices, depending on whether resolution or settings fidelity matters more.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER ranks 449th out of 3,712 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the top 12.1% of all configurations. This is a strong showing, indicating that the pairing is well-suited for this title. The rank reflects the measured FPS data across all resolutions and settings, and the consistency of performance at high frame rates contributes to the favorable position.

The 449th rank out of 3,712 combos means that roughly 3,263 configurations perform worse, while 448 perform better. Given that many of those higher-ranked combos likely include more expensive or newer hardware, this result underscores the efficiency of the 9600X and RTX 4070 Ti SUPER pairing. The CPU's 81st percentile and the GPU's 76th percentile both support the notion that this combo sits above average, and their synergy in Minimum yields a top-12% result.

The rank also suggests that the combo is not held back by a significant bottleneck. If the CPU were too weak, the FPS at 1080p Low (329 FPS) would be lower, and if the GPU were insufficient, the 4K Ultra score (56 FPS) would be worse. Instead, the measured FPS scales predictably with resolution and settings, indicating a balanced system. The 6-core CPU with a 5.40 GHz boost clock pairs well with the 16 GB GDDR6X memory and 8448 shading units of the GPU.

Compared to other combos in the database, this rank places the system in the upper echelon for Minimum. The game's 2014 release date means it is not extremely demanding by modern standards, but the high frame rates achieved show that the combo has headroom for more intensive titles. This rank is a point of reference for potential buyers, showing that the 9600X and RTX 4070 Ti SUPER combination delivers excellent performance in this genre.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using a 5 nm process from TSMC, featuring 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus with 672.3 GB/s bandwidth. Its boost clock runs at 2610 MHz, and it includes 8448 shading units, 264 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The GPU's percentile versus all GPUs is 76, with an average benchmark score of 31,087, placing it near the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31,676, 1.9% higher) and just above the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 (31,206, 0.4% lower).

In Minimum, the GPU's role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases. At 1080p, the GPU is not the primary limiter, as evidenced by the 329 FPS at Low settings, which is likely constrained by the CPU's ability to issue draw calls. However, as resolution climbs to 1440p and 4K, the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth take center stage. The 16 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for this game, and the 672.3 GB/s bandwidth ensures no texture thrashing occurs even at 4K Ultra.

The measured FPS data reveals the GPU's scaling characteristics. At 4K, dropping from Ultra (56 FPS) to High (73 FPS) yields a 30.4% improvement, while High to Medium (87 FPS) adds another 19.2%. The Low preset at 4K (114 FPS) is 103.6% faster than Ultra, showing that the GPU has significant headroom when visual effects are reduced. This pattern indicates that the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is capable of high frame rates at 4K, but only at lower settings.

The GPU's 16 GB VRAM is a key asset for Minimum, as the game's textures and effects at Ultra settings likely consume significant memory. The fact that the 4K Ultra preset achieves 56 FPS average suggests that the GPU is compute-bound rather than memory-bound, as the 672.3 GB/s bandwidth is ample for this scenario. The 44.10 TFLOPS FP32 performance provides the raw compute needed for the game's rendering, and the 250.6 GPixel/s pixel rate ensures efficient rasterization.

The nearest rival data for the GPU shows it is competitive with older high-end cards, but the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER's modern architecture delivers better efficiency. In Minimum, the GPU's performance is the deciding factor at 4K, where the 104 FPS at 1440p Ultra drops to 56 FPS at 4K Ultra, a 46.2% reduction. This highlights the GPU's role as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, which is expected given the game's age and the CPU's strength.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings tiers. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 329 FPS, while Medium hits 252 FPS with a min of 214 FPS and max of 290 FPS. High delivers 211 FPS, and Ultra drops to 161 FPS. This represents a 51.1% reduction from Low to High and a 23.7% drop from High to Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 212 FPS, Medium reaches 162 FPS (min 138, max 187), High hits 136 FPS, and Ultra settles at 104 FPS. The scaling from Low to High is 35.8% slower, and High to Ultra is 23.5% slower. Comparing 1080p to 1440p at the same settings, Low drops by 35.6% (329 to 212 FPS), Medium by 35.7% (252 to 162 FPS), High by 35.5% (211 to 136 FPS), and Ultra by 35.4% (161 to 104 FPS).

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 114 FPS, Medium reaches 87 FPS (min 74, max 101), High hits 73 FPS, and Ultra drops to 56 FPS. The reduction from Low to High is 36.0%, and High to Ultra is 23.3%. Comparing 1440p to 4K, Low drops by 46.2% (212 to 114 FPS), Medium by 46.3% (162 to 87 FPS), High by 46.3% (136 to 73 FPS), and Ultra by 46.2% (104 to 56 FPS).

The consistency of these percentages across settings is notable. The ratio of FPS between Low and High is consistently around 1.56x at each resolution, while the ratio between High and Ultra is consistently around 1.31x. This suggests that the settings presets have a uniform impact on GPU load, regardless of resolution, indicating that the game's rendering pipeline scales predictably.

The min FPS data, available only for Medium settings, shows that at 1080p the min is 214 FPS (85% of average), at 1440p the min is 138 FPS (85% of average), and at 4K the min is 74 FPS (85% of average). This consistent 85% ratio indicates stable frame pacing across resolutions, with no anomalous spikes or drops.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals important insights about the limiting component. At Low settings, the FPS drops from 329 at 1080p to 212 at 1440p (a 35.6% reduction) and then to 114 at 4K (a 46.2% reduction from 1440p). This scaling pattern is consistent with GPU-bound behavior, as the number of pixels increases by 2.25x from 1080p to 1440p and by 4x from 1080p to 4K. The FPS does not drop proportionally to pixel count, indicating that the GPU has some headroom and is not purely fill-rate limited.

At Ultra settings, the FPS drops from 161 at 1080p to 104 at 1440p (35.4% reduction) and then to 56 at 4K (46.2% reduction from 1440p). This is nearly identical to the Low settings scaling, suggesting that the GPU's load scales uniformly with resolution, regardless of settings complexity. The 46.2% drop from 1440p to 4K at all settings tiers indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the CPU's contribution becomes negligible.

The fact that the percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistently around 35.5% across all settings, and from 1440p to 4K is consistently around 46.2%, points to the GPU being the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain flat as resolution increases, since the CPU workload is independent of resolution. Instead, the FPS scales inversely with pixel count, confirming GPU-bound behavior.

This analysis implies that the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is well-utilized in Minimum, especially at higher resolutions. The 16 GB VRAM and 672.3 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to handle the game's data demands at 4K, and the GPU's compute resources are the determining factor. For users with 1080p or 1440p displays, the CPU's high boost clock ensures that frame rates remain high, but at 4K, the GPU's performance ceiling is the key constraint.

The resolution scaling data also suggests that the combo is balanced for this game, as there is no point where the CPU becomes a bottleneck at lower resolutions, nor does the GPU fail to scale at higher resolutions. The 56 FPS at 4K Ultra is the lowest measured value, but it is still playable, and the 114 FPS at 4K Low shows that the GPU has significant headroom for users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity.