Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is a top-tier combination for the 2014 third-person shooter Minimum. The benchmark data shows this pairing ranks 2nd out of 1,733 tested combos, placing it in the 99.9th percentile of all possible systems. This is a system built for extreme frame rates, and the measured FPS confirms it delivers, though the balance between CPU and GPU shifts dramatically depending on resolution and settings.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X is a 6-core, 12-thread processor built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge codename) using a 4 nm process from TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with 32 MB of shared L3 cache. For a game released in 2014 like Minimum, this CPU is massively overqualified — the title was designed for hardware that is now over a decade old, so the 9600X's modern IPC and high boost clocks mean it will rarely be the limiting factor.

The CPU's benchmark scores reinforce this. It achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 25,525 and a single-core score of 3,603. In Geekbench, it scores 15,182 multicore and 3,363 single-core. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 2,456 and 4-thread score of 4,649 indicate strong low-thread performance, which is critical for older game engines that don't scale well beyond a few cores. The PassMark single-thread score of 4,570 and multithread score of 30,027 further confirm its capability. With an 85th percentile ranking among all CPUs and an average benchmark score of 28,246, the 9600X sits in a competitive position, trailing the Intel Core i5-14500T by just 0.5% and the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS by 0.4% in average benchmark scores, while leading the Intel Core i5-13490F and AMD Ryzen 5 230 by 0.3%.

In the 1080p Low setting, where the GPU is least burdened, the system hits 409.3 FPS. This is the clearest evidence that the CPU is keeping up — at this resolution and setting, the GPU is being fed as fast as it can process frames. The fact that the 9600X can sustain this throughput without bottlenecking the RTX 5090 confirms its single-thread performance. The 65W TDP and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (89.6 GB/s bandwidth) round out a CPU that delivers exceptional gaming performance without exotic cooling requirements.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is the flagship of the GeForce 50-series, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB202 chip on a 5 nm process. It has a base clock of 2017 MHz and a boost clock of 2407 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). The 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus provides 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth — an astronomical amount for any game, let alone one from 2014.

The GPU's raw compute is staggering: 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 21,760 shading units, 680 TMUs, and 176 ROPs. It has 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 39,650 in PassMark G3D and 380,114 in Geekbench OpenCL. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 14,411 places it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84,306. Compared to its nearest rivals, it leads the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 by 1.3% and trails the NVIDIA CMP 40HX by 1.6%, while being essentially tied with the RTX 5090 D and RTX 5050 Mobile.

In Minimum, the RTX 5090's 32 GB VRAM is completely irrelevant — the game will never approach that capacity, even at 4K Ultra. What matters is the raw rasterization throughput. At 1080p Low, the GPU pushes 409.3 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it still manages 69.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra settings at any resolution demonstrates that the GPU is the primary driver of performance differences when settings are raised. The 575W TDP and 950W suggested PSU indicate this is a power-hungry part, but the performance it delivers justifies the power draw in a high-refresh-rate build.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 achieves a rank of 2 out of 1,733 tested combos in Minimum. This is an exceptional placement — only one other system configuration outperforms it across the entire benchmark database. The data shows this combo is within striking distance of the absolute best, and the difference would likely be invisible in real-world gameplay given the frame rates involved.

The rank is driven by the synergy between the two components. The CPU's strong single-thread performance prevents it from becoming a bottleneck at lower resolutions, while the GPU's massive compute power takes over at higher resolutions and settings. This is a balanced pairing — neither component is significantly holding back the other. The 0.3% delta between the 9600X and its closest CPU rival (Intel Core i5-13490F) is negligible, meaning the CPU choice is not the differentiator here. The GPU's 94th percentile ranking is the primary driver of the combo's overall position.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers: 409.3 FPS on Low, 314.1 FPS on Medium, 262.5 FPS on High, and 201.7 FPS on Ultra. These are exceptional numbers — even at Ultra, the system is pushing over 200 FPS, which is well beyond the refresh rate of most monitors.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance remains extremely high: 262.8 FPS on Low, 201.3 FPS on Medium, 167.2 FPS on High, and 129.9 FPS on Ultra. The drop from 1080p is noticeable but still leaves the system comfortably in high-refresh-rate territory at every setting. Even the most demanding preset at 1440p clears 120 FPS.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the numbers become more moderate but still impressive: 143.8 FPS on Low, 111 FPS on Medium, 92.3 FPS on High, and 69.8 FPS on Ultra. These figures show that 4K Ultra is the only configuration that dips below the 100 FPS threshold, and even then, it remains playable on a 60Hz display. The progression from Low to Ultra at each resolution shows a consistent scaling pattern, with performance dropping by roughly 50% from Low to Ultra at 4K (143.8 to 69.8 FPS) and by a similar proportion at 1080p (409.3 to 201.7 FPS).

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

The resolution scaling data reveals where the bottleneck lies. At Low settings, moving from 1080p (409.3 FPS) to 1440p (262.8 FPS) is a 35.8% drop, and from 1440p to 4K (143.8 FPS) is a 45.3% drop. At Ultra settings, the progression is 201.7 → 129.9 → 69.8 FPS, representing drops of 35.6% and 46.3%, respectively. The percentage drops are remarkably consistent across settings, which indicates the scaling is resolution-bound rather than setting-bound.

This pattern shows that the GPU is the primary limiting factor as resolution increases. The RTX 5090's pixel throughput (423.6 GPixel/s) and texture rate (1,636.8 GTexel/s) determine how quickly frames can be rendered at higher pixel counts. The CPU's role diminishes at higher resolutions because the per-frame GPU work increases, giving the processor more time to prepare the next frame. The fact that 1080p Low reaches 409.3 FPS — nearly 70% higher than 4K Low — confirms that the GPU is the ceiling at higher resolutions, while the CPU is still capable of feeding it at 1080p.

The data also shows diminishing returns at the top end. The jump from 1440p to 4K at every setting is steeper than from 1080p to 1440p, reflecting the 2.25x pixel count increase from 1440p to 4K versus the 1.78x increase from 1080p to 1440p. This is expected behavior for a GPU-bound scenario.

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

For a 1080p high-refresh-rate display, the Ultra preset at 201.7 FPS is the obvious choice — it delivers the best visual quality while still maintaining over 200 FPS, which exceeds the refresh rate of most 240Hz monitors. If the display is 360Hz or faster, dropping to High at 262.5 FPS or Medium at 314.1 FPS provides a measurable smoothness benefit, though the visual compromise may not be worth it for a 2014 title.

At 1440p, the High preset at 167.2 FPS is the sweet spot for 144Hz or 165Hz displays. It offers a significant visual improvement over Medium (201.3 FPS) while still staying well above the refresh rate. Ultra at 129.9 FPS is viable for 120Hz displays, but the 22% drop from High may not justify the marginal visual gains. For 240Hz 1440p monitors, Medium at 201.3 FPS is the best option, as it maintains a high frame rate without sacrificing too much visual fidelity.

For 4K, the High preset at 92.3 FPS is recommended for 90Hz+ displays, providing a good balance of image quality and smoothness. Medium at 111 FPS is better suited for 120Hz 4K panels, and it delivers a meaningful 20% performance uplift over High. Ultra at 69.8 FPS is only recommended for 60Hz displays, where it provides the best image quality without exceeding the display's refresh rate. Low at 143.8 FPS is not worth considering at 4K — the visual degradation is severe, and the performance gain over Medium is not necessary for most displays. The data shows that the system is capable of delivering an excellent experience at any resolution, with the best overall balance found at 1440p High or 4K Medium depending on display capabilities.