Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and Intel Arc B390 pairing delivers a strictly playable experience only at 1080p with lower presets, and the data shows a hard ceiling imposed by the graphics side of the combo. This is a combination where the CPU has ample headroom for the workload, but the GPU—an integrated part of the Panther Lake platform—cannot translate that headroom into high frame rates at higher resolutions. The benchmark results indicate a system that is fundamentally unbalanced for this title, with the measured FPS dropping off a cliff as resolution increases.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a desktop-class processor built on the 7 nm Zen 2 architecture (codename Matisse) for the AMD Socket AM4 platform. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The 65 W TDP and the unlocked multiplier indicate a chip that is both power-efficient and flexible for tuning. The cache layout includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 32 MB of L3 cache, which is a healthy pool for gaming workloads. Memory support is DDR4 via a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, which is more than sufficient for a game from this era.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 3700X posts scores that place it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 34260, which is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 (34222, deltaPct 0.1) and the AMD EPYC 4244P (34220, deltaPct 0.1), and it is only 0.2% behind the Intel Core i5-13450HX (34333). This places the 3700X in a very competitive mid-range-to-high-end tier for processing power. The multi-threaded performance is strong, with a Cinebench R15 multicore score of 2092, a Geekbench multicore score of 8899, and a Passmark multithread score of 22458. For a game like Minimum, which is a third-person shooter from 2014, this level of CPU performance is far beyond what is required to feed frames to a modern GPU.

However, the measured FPS in this combo shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system produces an average of 95 FPS, which suggests the CPU can handle the game's logic and draw calls easily. The single-core performance, indicated by a Geekbench singlecore score of 1593 and a Cinebench R15 singlecore score of 204, is solid for older titles that may rely on one or two threads. The data strongly suggests that the 3700X is sitting idle for much of the test, waiting on the GPU to deliver frames. The bottleneck is clearly elsewhere, as the CPU’s raw capability is not being fully utilized to push frame rates into the triple digits at higher settings.

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

The Intel Arc B390 is a significant contrast to the CPU. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Panther Lake chip, and fabricated on Intel's 3 nm process. Its clock speeds are a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2500 MHz. The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it uses the host system's DDR4 memory, with bandwidth that is "System Dependent." This is a crucial detail; the GPU has no dedicated VRAM, which severely limits its performance in graphics-intensive tasks.

The Arc B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 24 raster output units (ROPs). It also includes 12 ray tracing cores. The theoretical pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 7.680 TFLOPS. Its benchmark presence is minimal, with a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. This places the GPU in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, which is extremely low. Its nearest rivals are entry-level discrete cards from over a decade ago: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, deltaPct 1.3), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, deltaPct 1.5), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, deltaPct 2.5), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, deltaPct 2.7). The Arc B390 is only slightly ahead of these ancient parts, which indicates its performance class is that of a very basic display adapter rather than a gaming GPU.

This performance class is reflected in the measured FPS. At 4K High, the combo averages just 21 FPS, which is unplayable. Even at 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 46 FPS. The GPU is the dominant bottleneck in every scenario. The lack of dedicated memory and the low fill rate compared to modern discrete cards mean that the Arc B390 struggles with the pixel and texture throughput required at higher resolutions and settings. The data shows that the GPU's capability is the single largest constraint on system performance.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The overall ranking for this specific CPU and GPU combination in Minimum is 2602 out of 2939 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 12% of all configurations tested. This is a poor result, but it is not surprising given the GPU's low percentile ranking. The rank reflects that the Arc B390 is holding back the system significantly; the CPU is capable of much more, but the combo cannot escape the GPU's limitations.

When looking at the components individually, the disparity is stark. The CPU's average benchmark score of 34260 puts it near the top of its class, but the GPU's average score of 1482 puts it near the very bottom. The combo rank of 2602 is a direct consequence of this mismatch. The data suggests that pairing a high-end CPU with this integrated GPU creates a system that is far less effective than the sum of its parts for gaming. The CPU's potential is wasted, and the GPU's weaknesses are exposed. This rank indicates that most other CPU and GPU pairings tested for this game will deliver higher frame rates, making this a configuration to avoid for serious gaming.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system's capabilities and limits. At 1080p, the results are as follows:

• Low: 95 FPS average
• Medium: 72 FPS average (min 62, max 83)
• High: 61 FPS average
• Ultra: 46 FPS average

Moving to 1440p, the frame rates drop significantly:

• Low: 61 FPS average
• Medium: 47 FPS average (min 40, max 54)
• High: 39 FPS average
• Ultra: 30 FPS average

At 4K (3840x2160), the system becomes largely unplayable:

• Low: 33 FPS average
• Medium: 25 FPS average (min 21, max 29)
• High: 21 FPS average
• Ultra: 16 FPS average

These numbers tell a consistent story. The only configuration that consistently hits the 60 FPS mark is 1080p Low. The 1080p High preset also hits exactly 61 FPS, but the average is barely above the line. At 1440p, only the Low preset manages to stay above 60 FPS, with an average of 61. Every other preset and resolution combination falls below the 60 FPS threshold that is generally considered the baseline for smooth gameplay in a shooter. The 4K results are all well below 30 FPS, making the game feel like a slideshow. The min and max FPS readings for the Medium presets show a variance of about 8-10 FPS, indicating some frame pacing inconsistency, but the averages are low enough that this is not the primary concern.

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

The performance degradation across resolutions is severe and reveals the GPU bottleneck. From 1080p Low to 1440p Low, the average FPS drops from 95 to 61, a reduction of 34 FPS or roughly 36%. From 1440p Low to 4K Low, the average drops from 61 to 33, another 28 FPS reduction, or about 46%. The trend is consistent across all settings. For example, on the High preset, the averages are 61 FPS at 1080p, 39 FPS at 1440p, and 21 FPS at 4K. This shows a near-linear scaling of performance with the number of pixels, which is a classic sign of a pixel-throughput-limited GPU.

If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rates would remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU workload (game logic, physics, draw calls) does not change significantly with resolution. Instead, the massive drop in FPS as the resolution increases shows that the GPU is struggling to fill pixels. The Arc B390's low pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and its reliance on system memory for bandwidth are the primary causes. The data indicates that the system is heavily GPU-bound at all resolutions, but the effect becomes more pronounced as the resolution climbs. The CPU is not the issue; the GPU simply cannot keep up with the rendering demands of higher resolutions.

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

Given the measured data, the only reasonable recommendation for a playable experience is to use the Low preset at 1080p. This is the only configuration that provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, with an average of 95 FPS. This gives the player enough headroom to avoid noticeable frame drops during intense combat sequences in this third-person shooter. The 1080p High preset is borderline, averaging 61 FPS, but the data suggests that any slight increase in scene complexity could push it below 60 FPS, making it a riskier choice.

At 1440p, the Low preset is the only viable option, with an average of 61 FPS. This is playable but leaves no headroom. Using the Medium preset at 1440p drops the average to 47 FPS, which will feel noticeably less smooth. The Ultra and High presets at 1440p are not recommended, as they fall to 30 and 39 FPS, respectively. For 4K, no preset is recommended for playable frame rates. The Low preset at 33 FPS is the highest achievable, but it is below the threshold for a smooth experience in a fast-paced game. The Medium preset at 4K is slightly better than High or Ultra, but still unplayable.

In short, the best experience per the measured rows is achieved by setting the resolution to 1920x1080 and the quality preset to Low. This will provide a frame rate that is high enough to be responsive. If a player insists on higher visual quality, the 1080p High preset is the absolute maximum that should be attempted, and they should accept that the frame rate will hover just at the edge of 60 FPS. The data clearly shows that sacrificing resolution and settings is the only way to get a smooth experience from this hardware combination.