Minimum

Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter, presents a fascinating case study in how an older game scales with modern hardware. The measured data for the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 combination reveals a system that is more than capable of delivering a fluid experience at most settings, but also exposes its limitations when pushed to the extreme. The benchmark results show a wide performance envelope, from a highly playable 153.8 FPS at 1080p Low to a barely playable 25.1 FPS at 4K Ultra, indicating a performance curve that is heavily influenced by both resolution and graphics preset.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is a desktop processor from the 3000 series, built on the Zen 2 architecture and codenamed Matisse. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. This configuration is supported by a 32 MB L3 cache, which is typically beneficial for gaming workloads. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 28631 places it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, positioning it as a strong performer for its generation. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i5-12600, scores 28654, a negligible delta of -0.1%, suggesting the Ryzen 7 3700X is essentially performance-equivalent to that chip in synthetic benchmarks.

In the context of Minimum’s measured FPS, the CPU’s role appears to be that of a robust foundation that does not bottleneck the GPU at mainstream resolutions. The fact that the 3700X sits at the 85th percentile means it has significant headroom for handling game logic and physics. The data shows that at 1080p, the combination achieves 153.8 FPS on Low settings, which is a very high frame rate that demands strong per-core performance. This suggests that the 3700X’s boost clock of 4.40 GHz is sufficient to feed the RTX 2060 effectively at this resolution. The single-core performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2694, is a critical factor for games that are not heavily multi-threaded, and the results indicate it is up to the task. The processor’s 65W TDP and 7 nm process node also imply efficient operation, though this is a secondary consideration to its performance output.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is a Turing-architecture GPU with 1920 shading units and 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. Its base and boost clocks are 1365 MHz and 1680 MHz, respectively. The GPU has an average benchmark score of 16074, placing it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs. This is a mid-range standing, and its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7600S, scores 15996 with a delta of 0.5%, indicating they are closely matched in overall compute performance. The RTX 2060’s 6 GB of VRAM is a key specification for Minimum, as the benchmark results show a significant performance drop at 4K Ultra settings.

The GPU’s influence on the measured FPS is most evident when examining the scaling from 1080p to 4K. At 1080p Low, the GPU is able to push 153.8 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, this falls to 25.1 FPS, a massive reduction. This steep drop-off points to the GPU being the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions and settings. The 4K High result of 34 FPS and 4K Medium of 42.6 FPS further illustrate this, as the RTX 2060 struggles to maintain a smooth frame rate beyond 1440p. The data suggests that while the GPU has enough compute power for 1080p and 1440p gaming, its 6 GB VRAM and overall throughput are insufficient for the demands of 4K Ultra in this title. The FP32 performance of 6.451 TFLOPS, while respectable, is clearly taxed by the increased pixel count at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested hardware combinations for Minimum, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 holds the rank of 1415 out of 1733 total combos. This places it in the lower half of all systems tested, which might seem surprising given the component's individual benchmark scores. However, this rank is relative to all other CPU-GPU pairings, many of which will include more modern and powerful components, so a rank of 1415 is not an indication of poor performance but rather a reflection of the competitive field. The rank indicates that a significant number of other combinations deliver higher average frame rates.

This positioning suggests that while this combo is a competent pairing, it is not a top-tier performer in the context of Minimum. The data implies that the system is more aligned with achieving high frame rates at 1080p or maintaining decent performance at 1440p, rather than competing with flagship setups that can handle 4K Ultra with ease. The rank also underscores the balance between the CPU and GPU; they are well-matched for mid-range gaming, with neither component being a drastic outlier in performance relative to the other. The fact that the data is measured, not estimated, adds weight to this assessment, confirming that the system's real-world performance aligns with its mid-pack ranking.

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

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at the system's performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the combo performs admirably, with a Low preset yielding 153.8 FPS, Medium at 117.2 FPS, High at 101.6 FPS, and Ultra at 76.5 FPS. These numbers show that 1080p is clearly this system's sweet spot, as even the Ultra preset maintains a frame rate well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops, but remains respectable. The Low preset delivers 99.3 FPS, Medium 78.3 FPS, High 63.3 FPS, and Ultra 52 FPS. The 1440p results show that the system can handle a higher resolution, but the Ultra preset begins to approach the edge of playability, dipping below 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the limitations of the hardware become apparent. The Low preset is the only one that remains playable, achieving 51.8 FPS. Medium drops to 42.6 FPS, High to 34 FPS, and Ultra to a mere 25.1 FPS. These figures illustrate a clear performance hierarchy, where the cost of increasing resolution is substantial. The performance gap between 1080p and 4K is significant, with the 1080p Low score of 153.8 FPS being nearly three times higher than the 4K Low score of 51.8 FPS. This data indicates that for a consistent 60+ FPS experience, the user must stick to 1080p or be selective with settings at 1440p.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for a consistently smooth 60+ FPS experience with this hardware?

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all presets, including Ultra at 76.5 FPS, exceed 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset falls to 52 FPS, so 1080p is the safest bet for an unbroken 60+ FPS experience.

Q: How does the system perform at 4K with the Low preset?

A: The benchmark results show that the system achieves an average of 51.8 FPS at 3840x2160 with the Low preset. This is technically playable but does not maintain a steady 60 FPS, indicating that 4K gaming is only feasible with significant compromises to visual quality.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more likely to be the bottleneck at higher resolutions?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor. The steep drop in FPS from 1440p to 4K, where the High preset falls from 63.3 FPS to 34 FPS, is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's strong 85th percentile ranking implies it has enough headroom to keep up.

Q: How much of a performance increase is seen when dropping from Ultra to Low at 1080p?

A: The measured FPS at 1080p Ultra is 76.5 FPS, while at 1080p Low it is 153.8 FPS. This represents a substantial increase of 77.3 FPS, effectively doubling the frame rate by lowering the preset.

Q: How does this combo's rank in Minimum compare to its individual component benchmarks?

A: The combo is ranked 1415 out of 1733 systems in Minimum. While the CPU is in the 85th percentile and the GPU is in the 58th percentile of all components, their combined ranking is lower, indicating that other pairings in the database achieve higher frame rates in this specific game.

Q: What is the difference in performance between the High and Medium presets at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset achieves an average of 63.3 FPS, while the Medium preset achieves 78.3 FPS. The difference is 15 FPS, which can be a meaningful margin for maintaining a smoother frame rate.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal settings for this hardware depend heavily on the user's target resolution. For a 1080p display, the Ultra preset at 76.5 FPS provides the best visual experience while still delivering a very smooth frame rate. If a higher refresh rate is a priority, the High preset at 101.6 FPS offers an excellent balance, sacrificing some visual fidelity for a substantial FPS gain. There is little reason to use the Low or Medium presets at 1080p, as the system has ample performance for the higher quality settings.

At 2560x1440, the High preset at 63.3 FPS is the recommended choice for a near-60 FPS experience with good visuals. The Medium preset at 78.3 FPS is a viable alternative for those who prioritize a higher frame rate. The Ultra preset at 52 FPS is best avoided, as it dips below the 60 FPS threshold. For 4K, the data suggests that gaming is not a comfortable experience on this system. The Low preset at 51.8 FPS is the only option that approaches playability, and even then, it is not ideal for fast-paced action. For the best overall experience, sticking to 1440p High or 1080p Ultra is advised.

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

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals a clear story about system balance. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS across all settings drops by roughly one-third. For instance, the Low preset falls from 153.8 FPS to 99.3 FPS, a reduction of 54.5 FPS. This is a significant but expected decline, as the GPU must render more than 1.7 times the pixels. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is even more dramatic. The Low preset drops from 99.3 FPS to 51.8 FPS, a reduction of 47.5 FPS. This non-linear decline is a strong indicator that the GPU is becoming the primary bottleneck.

The pattern is consistent across all presets: the jump from 1440p to 4K causes a larger relative FPS loss than the jump from 1080p to 1440p. For example, the Ultra preset loses 24.5 FPS going from 1080p to 1440p (76.5 to 52), but then loses another 26.9 FPS going from 1440p to 4K (52 to 25.1). This suggests that the RTX 2060’s processing power and 6 GB of VRAM are being saturated at the 4K resolution, particularly at higher quality settings. The data indicates that the CPU has enough performance to handle the increased load, but the GPU simply cannot keep pace with the pixel-pushing demands of 4K. The system is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the GPU's limitations become the defining factor at 4K.