Minimum

# Minimum Performance Analysis: AMD Ryzen 7 5700X3D + Intel Arc B390

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X3D and Intel Arc B390 represents a pairing where the CPU is clearly the dominant component in the overall system, while the GPU operates in a lower performance tier. Benchmark results for Minimum, a third-person shooter released in 2014, show that this combo delivers playable frame rates at 1080p with lower settings, but struggles as resolution and graphical demands increase. The data indicates a system where the Intel Arc B390, with its system-shared memory architecture and 80 W TDP, becomes the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions, while the 8-core, 16-thread Ryzen 7 5700X3D provides ample processing headroom. This analysis examines the measured FPS across three resolutions and four settings presets, contextualizes the combo's rank among 2,939 tested combinations, and provides actionable settings recommendations based solely on the provided data.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 2,602 out of 2,939 tested combinations in Minimum, placing it in the bottom 11.5% of all tested pairings. This low percentile position (the CPU sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks at the 9th percentile among all GPUs) reflects the massive performance disparity between the two components. The rank suggests that while the Ryzen 7 5700X3D is a capable processor, the Intel Arc B390 holds the entire system back in this title.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,482 points places it just 1.3% above the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1,463), 1.5% above the GeForce 800M (1,460), 2.5% above the GT 625 OEM (1,446), and 2.7% above the GT 710 (1,443). These rival comparisons are telling: the Arc B390 performs in the same bracket as decade-old entry-level discrete GPUs and integrated graphics solutions. The nearest rival, the GT 520MX, is within 1.3% of the Arc B390's score, indicating that the performance delta between these GPUs is negligible in synthetic benchmarks.

On the CPU side, the Ryzen 7 5700X3D's average benchmark score of 24,709 places it effectively tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X3D (24,728, delta -0.1%), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX (24,822, delta -0.5%), the Intel Core i5-12450HX (24,576, delta +0.5%), and the Intel Core i5-11600 (24,563, delta +0.6%). The largest performance gap among these rivals is only 1.1% (from the Ryzen 9 5900HX to the i5-11600), demonstrating that the 5700X3D sits squarely in the middle of a tightly clustered group of mid-range processors. This CPU performance is entirely adequate for Minimum, but the GPU's 9th percentile ranking drags the combined result down substantially.

The combo's rank is particularly notable given the game's age (released in 2014). A 2014 third-person shooter should theoretically run well on modern hardware, yet the Arc B390's limited capabilities — evidenced by its sub-30 FPS at 4K on any settings preset — prevent the system from achieving high frame rates at higher resolutions. The data shows that the CPU is not the bottleneck; rather, the GPU's performance ceiling defines the overall experience.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, manufactured on Intel's 3 nm process. It features 1,536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, along with 12 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2,500 MHz, producing a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is rated at 7.680 TFLOPS for FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS for FP16 (2:1 ratio).

Memory is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM. The memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent," meaning the GPU relies on the host system's DDR4 memory (which the Ryzen 7 5700X3D supports in dual-channel configuration at 51.2 GB/s). This shared-memory architecture has direct implications for Minimum's performance, particularly at higher resolutions where texture data and frame buffers demand more memory bandwidth.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,482 points places it at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, with its nearest rivals being the GT 520MX (1,463), GeForce 800M (1,460), GT 625 OEM (1,446), and GT 710 (1,443). These deltas are small — the largest is 2.7% — suggesting that the Arc B390's performance is essentially equivalent to these older entry-level parts in synthetic testing.

In Minimum, the GPU's role is clearly the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 95 FPS, which drops to 61 FPS at 1440p Low and 33 FPS at 4K Low. This pattern persists across all settings presets, with the GPU struggling to maintain playable frame rates at 4K. The Ultra preset at 4K yields only 16 FPS, which is barely a slideshow. The GPU's 24 ROPs and 48 TMUs are insufficient for the demands of 4K rendering in this title, even with the game's 2014-era graphics. The boost clock of 2,500 MHz helps at lower resolutions, but the system-shared memory bandwidth becomes a bottleneck as resolution increases.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends heavily on the target resolution and the user's frame rate expectations.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 95 FPS average, which is the highest frame rate measured across all configurations. Medium achieves 72 FPS (with a minimum of 62 FPS and maximum of 83 FPS), while High reaches 61 FPS. Ultra drops to 46 FPS. For users targeting 60+ FPS at 1080p, Medium is the recommended preset — it provides a comfortable 72 FPS average with a 62 FPS minimum, ensuring consistent performance above the 60 FPS threshold. Low offers more headroom for users with high-refresh-rate displays, but Medium provides a better visual experience while still maintaining smooth gameplay. High is also viable at 61 FPS, but the margin above 60 FPS is thin, and frame dips could become noticeable. Ultra at 46 FPS is playable but not ideal for competitive play.

At 2560x1440, the situation changes. Low delivers 61 FPS, exactly at the 60 FPS target. Medium drops to 47 FPS (minimum 40, maximum 54), and High falls to 39 FPS. Ultra yields only 30 FPS. For 1440p, the Low preset is the only configuration that reliably hits 60 FPS. Medium is acceptable for users who prefer visual quality over frame rate, but 47 FPS is below the smoothness threshold for many players. High at 39 FPS and Ultra at 30 FPS are marginal for a third-person shooter, though the game's slower pacing might make 30 FPS tolerable for some.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. Low delivers 33 FPS, Medium 25 FPS (minimum 21, maximum 29), High 21 FPS, and Ultra 16 FPS. The 4K experience is limited to 30 FPS or below across all settings. For users with 4K displays, the Low preset provides the best playable experience at 33 FPS, though this is below the standard for smooth gameplay. Medium at 25 FPS is borderline playable for single-player experiences, but High and Ultra are effectively unplayable.

The overall recommendation is Medium at 1080p (72 FPS average) as the best balance of visual quality and performance, with Low at 1440p (61 FPS) as the fallback for higher-resolution displays. 4K gaming is not recommended with this GPU, as even Low settings produce only 33 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), for a total of twelve configurations.

At 1920x1080: Low delivers 95 FPS average. Medium produces 72 FPS with a minimum of 62 and maximum of 83. High achieves 61 FPS. Ultra yields 46 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline, with Ultra representing a 51.6% reduction from Low. The Medium preset's minimum of 62 FPS indicates that even in demanding scenes, the system stays above 60 FPS, making it the most consistent 1080p option. High at 61 FPS matches the Medium minimum, suggesting that High may occasionally dip below 60 FPS in complex scenes.

At 2560x1440: Low delivers 61 FPS. Medium produces 47 FPS (minimum 40, maximum 54). High achieves 39 FPS. Ultra yields 30 FPS. The 1440p results show a more pronounced drop-off than 1080p. Low at 61 FPS is the only preset that maintains 60 FPS, but it does so barely. Medium's minimum of 40 FPS indicates significant frame dips, which could cause stuttering. High at 39 FPS and Ultra at 30 FPS are both below 40 FPS, making them marginal for gameplay.

At 3840x2160: Low delivers 33 FPS. Medium produces 25 FPS (minimum 21, maximum 29). High achieves 21 FPS. Ultra yields 16 FPS. The 4K results are uniformly poor. Even Low at 33 FPS is below the 60 FPS target by a wide margin, and Ultra at 16 FPS is barely interactive. The Medium preset's narrow range of 21-29 FPS suggests the GPU is consistently struggling with 4K rendering regardless of scene complexity.

Across all resolutions, the Low preset provides the highest frame rates, followed by Medium, High, and Ultra in descending order. The delta between Low and Ultra is consistent: 49 FPS at 1080p, 31 FPS at 1440p, and 17 FPS at 4K. This diminishing gap at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes the bottleneck earlier in the settings progression, with resolution increases having a more significant impact than settings changes.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior reveals critical information about the system's bottleneck. From 1080p Low (95 FPS) to 1440p Low (61 FPS), the frame rate drops by 35.8%. From 1440p Low to 4K Low (33 FPS), the drop is 45.9%. The total drop from 1080p Low to 4K Low is 65.3%, meaning the system retains only 34.7% of its 1080p performance at 4K.

For Medium settings, the progression is 72 FPS (1080p) → 47 FPS (1440p) → 25 FPS (4K). This represents drops of 34.7% and 46.8% respectively, with a total drop of 65.3% from 1080p to 4K. The High preset shows 61 FPS → 39 FPS → 21 FPS, with drops of 36.1% and 46.2%, totaling 65.6%. Ultra moves from 46 FPS → 30 FPS → 16 FPS, with drops of 34.8% and 46.7%, totaling 65.2%.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings presets is remarkable. Every preset loses approximately 35% from 1080p to 1440p and approximately 46% from 1440p to 4K, with a total loss of about 65%. This uniform scaling pattern indicates that the bottleneck is resolution-dependent rather than settings-dependent. The Intel Arc B390's system-shared memory and limited ROP count (24) are the likely culprits — as pixel count increases, the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are overwhelmed regardless of the quality settings.

The 4K-to-1080p ratio of roughly 2.9x (95 FPS vs 33 FPS at Low) is close to the theoretical 4x pixel count difference but falls short, indicating that the GPU does not scale perfectly with pixel count. This sub-linear scaling suggests that additional bottlenecks (memory bandwidth, TMU throughput) come into play at 4K. The data strongly indicates that the GPU is the limiting component at all resolutions, as the Ryzen 7 5700X3D's 8 cores and 16 threads provide more than enough processing power for a 2014 game at any resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1080p gaming with this combo?

A: Medium at 1920x1080 delivers 72 FPS average with a 62 FPS minimum, providing the best balance of visual quality and performance. Low achieves 95 FPS for higher refresh rates, while High (61 FPS) and Ultra (46 FPS) are viable but offer diminishing returns.

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K?

A: The data shows 4K performance is limited — even Low settings produce only 33 FPS average. Medium yields 25 FPS, High 21 FPS, and Ultra 16 FPS. None of these configurations reach the 60 FPS target, making 4K gaming impractical with this GPU.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,482 is 1.3% higher than the GT 520MX (1,463), 1.5% higher than the GeForce 800M (1,460), 2.5% higher than the GT 625 OEM (1,446), and 2.7% higher than the GT 710 (1,443). These rivals are within a 2.7% performance range.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU is clearly the limiting component. The CPU ranks at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks at the 9th percentile. The consistent ~65% FPS drop from 1080p to 4K across all settings presets indicates resolution-dependent scaling, which points to GPU limitations rather than CPU constraints.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with this combo?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings deliver 61 FPS average. Medium produces 47 FPS (minimum 40, maximum 54), High achieves 39 FPS, and Ultra yields 30 FPS. Only the Low preset maintains 60 FPS at 1440p.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 5700X3D compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The 5700X3D's average benchmark score of 24,709 is within 0.6% of the Ryzen 5 7600X3D (24,728, delta -0.1%), Ryzen 9 5900HX (24,822, delta -0.5%), Core i5-12450HX (24,576, delta +0.5%), and Core i5-11600 (24,563, delta +0.6%). The largest difference among these five CPUs is 1.1%.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X3D is a desktop processor from the 5000 series, based on the Zen 3 architecture (codename Vermeer) and manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The CPU includes 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and a substantial 96 MB of shared L3 cache. The TDP is rated at 105 W, and the processor uses the AMD Socket AM4 interface.

The 96 MB L3 cache is a notable feature of the X3D series, providing a significant advantage in games that benefit from large cache pools. The CPU supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory, which is uncommon for desktop processors. The chip has 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes and no integrated graphics, meaning the system relies entirely on the discrete Intel Arc B390 for display output.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 5700X3D achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22,366 and a single-core score of 3,157. Geekbench results show 11,086 multicore and 1,849 single-core. Passmark results include a multithread score of 26,318, a single-thread score of 2,970, and a physics score of 2,686. The 3DMark results scale from 804 single-thread to 6,764 at 16 threads and 6,755 at max threads, indicating near-linear scaling from 16 to max threads.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 24,709 places it at the 77th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are all within a 1.1% performance band: the Ryzen 5 7600X3D at 24,728 (-0.1%), Ryzen 9 5900HX at 24,822 (-0.5%), Core i5-12450HX at 24,576 (+0.5%), and Core i5-11600 at 24,563 (+0.6%). This clustering suggests that the 5700X3D delivers performance comparable to these mid-range and upper-mid-range processors.

In the context of Minimum, the CPU's role is to feed frames to the GPU. Given the game's 2014 release date and the CPU's strong multi-threaded performance (Cinebench R20 multicore score of 9,393), the 5700X3D is more than capable of handling the game's physics, AI, and game logic at any resolution. The measured FPS data confirms this — the uniform ~65% performance drop from 1080p to 4K across all settings presets is a GPU limitation, not a CPU one. The CPU's 16 threads and 96 MB L3 cache provide ample headroom, and the data shows no signs of CPU bottlenecking at any tested configuration. The launch MSRP for this processor is $249, though pricing discussions are beyond the scope of this analysis.