Minimum

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

The measured FPS data for this AMD Ryzen 7 5700 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination in Minimum reveals a classic resolution-scaling pattern, but with some notable deviations that hint at where the performance bottleneck shifts. Starting at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 179 FPS average. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings drops that to 116 FPS, a reduction of 63 FPS or roughly 35%. Continuing to 3840x2160 at Low yields 62 FPS, another 54 FPS drop, representing a further 47% decline from the 1440p figure.

The scaling under High settings tells a similar story but with different magnitudes. At 1080p High, the average is 115 FPS. At 1440p High, it falls to 74 FPS (a 41 FPS drop), and at 4K High, it reaches 40 FPS (a 34 FPS drop from 1440p). The percentage losses are consistent: approximately 36% from 1080p to 1440p, and 46% from 1440p to 4K. This consistency across settings suggests the scaling is resolution-driven rather than settings-driven.

The Medium preset shows the most complete data set, with min and max FPS recorded at every resolution. At 1080p Medium, the average is 137 FPS with a range of 117 to 158. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 88 FPS, with the range compressing to 75-102. At 4K Medium, the average is 48 FPS, with a range of 41-55. The frame-time consistency, as measured by the gap between min and max, narrows as resolution increases — at 1080p the spread is 41 FPS, at 1440p it is 27 FPS, and at 4K it is 14 FPS. This narrowing suggests that at higher resolutions, the system is more consistently bound by a single component, likely the GPU, rather than experiencing intermittent CPU-related stalls.

Ultra settings produce the lowest frame rates across the board. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 88 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it is 57 FPS. At 4K Ultra, it falls to 30 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 31 FPS (35%), and from 1440p to 4K is 27 FPS (47%). The pattern holds consistently: every settings tier shows roughly a one-third loss going from 1080p to 1440p, and roughly a one-half loss going from 1440p to 4K.

The data implies that the RTX 5050 is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions. The GPU's memory bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s and 8 GB of GDDR6 memory are modest by current standards, and the pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s suggests that pushing 4K resolution — which requires four times the pixel throughput of 1080p — will tax the render output units heavily. The fact that Low settings at 4K still only reach 62 FPS, while Low settings at 1080p reach 179 FPS, indicates that even with minimal graphical load, the resolution itself is the hurdle.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 brings 8 cores and 16 threads to this pairing, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It is built on the Zen 3 architecture using the Cezanne codename, fabricated on a 7 nm process by TSMC. The CPU's cache configuration includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3 cache. For a game released in 2014, this is an overwhelming amount of computational headroom.

The benchmark data for this CPU shows strong multi-threaded performance. In Cinebench R23, it scores 20655 in multi-core and 2916 in single-core. In 3DMark's 16-thread test, it achieves 6628, while the 8-thread test scores 5585 and the 4-thread test scores 3382. The single-thread 3DMark score is 901. The PassMark multi-thread score is 24303, with single-thread at 3296. The Geekbench multi-core score is 9959 and single-core is 1907.

The 3DMark thread-scaling data is particularly revealing for gaming analysis. The jump from 2 threads (1762) to 4 threads (3382) represents a near-doubling, and the jump from 4 to 8 threads (5585) is another substantial gain. However, the increase from 8 threads to 16 threads (6617) is modest — only about 18% — and the max-threads score of 6617 is nearly identical to the 16-thread score of 6628. This suggests that beyond 8 threads, the CPU has little additional performance to offer in most workloads, which aligns with how a 2014-era game engine would utilize resources.

In Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014, the CPU is unlikely to be the bottleneck at any resolution. The evidence lies in the FPS scaling: if the CPU were limiting performance, we would expect to see similar frame rates regardless of resolution. Instead, the data shows FPS dropping substantially as resolution increases — from 179 FPS at 1080p Low to 62 FPS at 4K Low. This 117 FPS difference cannot be attributed to CPU limitations; rather, it demonstrates that the GPU is being pushed progressively harder while the CPU sits with headroom to spare.

The CPU's 65 W TDP and Socket AM4 compatibility make it a power-efficient choice, and its 78th percentile ranking among all CPUs places it comfortably above average. The nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score include the Intel Xeon D-2752TER at 25530 (a -0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 7640U at 25485 (+0.1%), the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H at 25550 (-0.1%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5825U at 25446 (+0.3%). The tight clustering of these scores — all within a fraction of a percent — indicates that the Ryzen 7 5700 is performing exactly in line with expectations for its class.

The data suggests that in this game, the CPU's 16 threads are more than sufficient. The PassMark physics score of 984 and the extended instructions score of 21945 indicate strong computational throughput that would handle game logic, AI, and physics calculations without breaking a sweat. The single-core performance, as measured by the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2916, is adequate for the lightly-threaded rendering tasks that games from this era typically present.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture using the GB207 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It features 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. The base clock is 2317 MHz with a boost clock of 2572 MHz. Memory consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 2500 MHz, rated as 20 Gbps effective.

The GPU's compute capabilities are substantial for its class. FP32 performance is rated at 13.17 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 13.17 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The texture rate is 205.8 GTexel/s and the pixel rate is 82.30 GPixel/s. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 2502. The PassMark G3D score is 17326, with a DirectX 12 score of 66, DirectX 11 score of 150, DirectX 10 score of 103, and DirectX 9 score of 186. The Geekbench OpenCL score is 90334 and Vulkan score is 89381.

The measured FPS data in Minimum paints a clear picture of the GPU's role. At 1080p, the GPU has enough headroom to push very high frame rates — 179 FPS at Low settings and 115 FPS at High settings. These numbers suggest that the GPU is not the limiting factor at this resolution, or at least not severely so. However, the 4K results tell a different story. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is exactly 30, which is a common threshold for playability. At 4K High, it is 40 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it is 48 FPS. Even at 4K Low, the average is only 62 FPS.

The GPU's 8 GB VRAM capacity is worth scrutiny for 4K gaming. While Minimum released in 2014 and likely has modest VRAM requirements, the resolution alone increases memory pressure. The 128-bit memory bus and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but at 4K, the bandwidth becomes a limiting factor. The pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s means the GPU can theoretically fill 82.3 million pixels per second, but 4K resolution requires processing approximately 8.3 million pixels per frame just for the back buffer, and with multiple render targets and post-processing effects, the effective pixel throughput demand rises.

The performance hierarchy across settings at each resolution is consistent. At 1080p, the spread from Low (179 FPS) to Ultra (88 FPS) is 91 FPS. At 1440p, the spread from Low (116 FPS) to Ultra (57 FPS) is 59 FPS. At 4K, the spread from Low (62 FPS) to Ultra (30 FPS) is 32 FPS. The narrowing spread at higher resolutions indicates that as pixel count increases, the GPU becomes the dominant constraint, and settings adjustments have diminishing returns.

The GPU's percentile ranking of 66 among all GPUs places it in the upper two-thirds of the field. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (avg score 21153, -0.6% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237, -1%), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713, +1.6%), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21379, -1.6%). These comparisons show the RTX 5050 performing in the same tier as several older or lower-tier cards, which contextualizes its 4K limitations.

# FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo in Minimum?*

A: The highest measured average FPS is 179, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that exceeds 175 FPS in the measured data.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Minimum?*

A: At 3840x2160, the best result is 62 FPS at Low settings. Medium settings yield 48 FPS, High yields 40 FPS, and Ultra yields 30 FPS. Playable frame rates are possible at Low and Medium, but High and Ultra dip below the commonly desired 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Which resolution provides the best balance of visual quality and performance?

A: The 2560x1440 resolution with Medium settings offers 88 FPS average with a range of 75-102 FPS. This provides smooth gameplay while maintaining higher visual fidelity than 1080p. The 1440p High setting at 74 FPS is also viable.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to its nearest rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 5050 has an average benchmark score of 21035. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, scores 21153, which is a -0.6% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 8970M scores 21237 (-1%), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT scores 20713 (+1.6%), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile scores 21379 (-1.6%).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the GPU appears to be the limiting factor, but not severely. The 179 FPS at Low settings and 137 FPS at Medium settings indicate the GPU is capable of high frame rates. The CPU's 16 threads provide ample headroom, as evidenced by the modest performance gain from 8 to 16 threads in 3DMark benchmarks (5585 to 6617).

Q: What is the frame time consistency at 1440p Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 Medium settings, the average FPS is 88 with a minimum of 75 and maximum of 102. This 27 FPS spread indicates moderate frame time variance, which is acceptable for smooth gameplay.

# Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For players prioritizing smooth gameplay at 1920x1080, the Medium preset at 137 FPS average (117-158 range) provides an excellent balance between visual quality and performance. The High preset at 115 FPS is also viable, and even Ultra at 88 FPS remains above the 60 FPS threshold for comfortable play.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the recommended choice, delivering 88 FPS average with a 75-102 FPS range. This configuration maintains fluid motion while offering significantly higher visual fidelity than 1080p. The High preset at 74 FPS is acceptable for players who prefer higher graphical detail, but the 57 FPS Ultra result dips below 60 FPS, which may introduce noticeable stutter on displays with variable refresh rates.

For 3840x2160, the data suggests that Medium settings (48 FPS) are the practical ceiling for a consistent experience, though players with less demanding standards may accept High at 40 FPS. The Low preset at 62 FPS is the only 4K configuration that exceeds 60 FPS, but the visual compromise may not be worth the resolution gain for most users. The Ultra preset at 30 FPS is borderline playable but likely below acceptable standards for a third-person shooter requiring responsive aiming.

The frame time data, available only for Medium settings, reveals that consistency improves at higher resolutions. The 1080p Medium range of 117-158 FPS (41 FPS spread) narrows to 75-102 FPS (27 FPS spread) at 1440p and further to 41-55 FPS (14 FPS spread) at 4K. This suggests that the Medium preset produces more stable frame pacing as resolution increases, likely because the GPU becomes the sole bottleneck, eliminating CPU-related frame hitches.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for this combo in Minimum is as follows:

At 1920x1080:

• Low settings: 179 FPS average
• Medium settings: 137 FPS average, with minimum 117 and maximum 158
• High settings: 115 FPS average
• Ultra settings: 88 FPS average

At 2560x1440:

• Low settings: 116 FPS average
• Medium settings: 88 FPS average, with minimum 75 and maximum 102
• High settings: 74 FPS average
• Ultra settings: 57 FPS average

At 3840x2160:

• Low settings: 62 FPS average
• Medium settings: 48 FPS average, with minimum 41 and maximum 55
• High settings: 40 FPS average
• Ultra settings: 30 FPS average

The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at each settings tier shows percentage losses of approximately 35% (Low: 179 to 116), 36% (Medium: 137 to 88), 36% (High: 115 to 74), and 35% (Ultra: 88 to 57). From 1440p to 4K, the losses are approximately 47% (Low: 116 to 62), 45% (Medium: 88 to 48), 46% (High: 74 to 40), and 47% (Ultra: 57 to 30).

The settings scaling at each resolution shows the cost of moving from Low to Ultra. At 1080p, the drop from Low to Ultra is 91 FPS (179 to 88). At 1440p, the drop is 59 FPS (116 to 57). At 4K, the drop is 32 FPS (62 to 30). The diminishing absolute cost of higher settings at higher resolutions reinforces that pixel throughput, not graphical features, is the dominant performance factor.

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 combination ranks 1764 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the 60th percentile of all tested configurations. This means roughly 40% of tested combos perform better in this game, while 60% perform worse.

This ranking is notable given the individual component standings. The CPU ranks in the 78th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 66th percentile among all GPUs. The combined rank of 1764 (60th percentile) is lower than either individual component percentile, suggesting that the pairing in this specific game does not achieve the full potential of its parts. The discrepancy may be attributed to the game's age — released in 2014 — and its likely inability to fully utilize the RTX 5050's modern architecture features, or the GPU's relative weakness at higher resolutions that dominate the ranking methodology.

The CPU's nearest rivals in average benchmark score are all within 0.3% of its 25517 average, indicating that the processor is well-matched to its peers. The GPU's nearest rivals span a slightly wider range, from -1.6% to +1.6% delta, showing more variability in its performance class. The fact that the combo ranks at 1764 out of 2939 suggests that there is room for improvement — either a stronger GPU would boost the ranking significantly, or a stronger CPU would provide marginal gains given the game's apparent GPU-bounded nature at higher resolutions.

Given the measured FPS data, the ranking reflects the combo's ability to deliver playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p across all settings, with 4K requiring compromises. The 4K Ultra result of exactly 30 FPS is a hard boundary that likely influences the ranking negatively when compared to combos that can maintain higher frame rates at that resolution. The data indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming at high refresh rates or 1440p gaming at standard refresh rates, with 4K as a secondary consideration for less demanding titles or with settings reduced.