Minimum

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X brings eight physical cores and sixteen threads to this test, running from a 3.80 GHz base clock up to a 4.70 GHz boost. This is a Zen 3 part built on TSMC's 7 nm process, with a 32 MB L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support delivering 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. In synthetic benchmarks, the processor posts a multi-threaded Cinebench R23 score of 23,571 and a single-core score of 3,327, while its Geekbench multicore result reaches 10,220. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 7,586 and max-thread score of 7,578 are nearly identical, suggesting the chip's scaling plateaus beyond sixteen threads — which is expected given its physical thread count.

For a game like Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014, the CPU's role is largely about maintaining a stable frame delivery floor rather than pushing raw frame rates. The benchmark data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the combo reaches 83.3 FPS average, which is the highest result in the entire measured set. This indicates that when the GPU is not heavily burdened, the Ryzen 7 5800X has ample headroom to feed frames. The CPU's percentile ranking of 84 among all tested processors places it comfortably in the upper tier. Compared to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 7 5800X sits within a very tight band: it is 0.3% ahead of the Ryzen 7 5800, 0.4% behind the Ryzen 5 8500GE, 0.4% behind the Intel Core i7-13700H, and 0.8% behind the Intel Core i5-12600KF. These deltas are minor, meaning the 5800X's computational capability is effectively on par with those alternatives for this game's workload.

The CPU's 105 W TDP and 4,150 million transistors on a 74 mm² die represent a dense, efficient design. Its 3DMark single-thread score of 943 and Passmark single-thread score of 3,445 reflect strong per-core performance, which matters for older game engines that may not fully utilize many threads. In Minimum, the data shows that moving from 1080p Low to 1080p Ultra drops the average FPS from 83.3 to 38.0, a reduction of 45.3 FPS. That 45.3 FPS gap is largely attributable to GPU load, but the CPU must still maintain frame pacing. Given that the processor's multithreaded Passmark score is 27,732 and its integer math score is 94,969, there is no indication of a CPU bottleneck at any tested setting.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture part with 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It runs at a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is listed at 2001 MHz, translating to 8 Gbps effective. This GPU's pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s, texture rate is 93.24 GTexel/s, and FP32 throughput is 2.984 TFLOPS. Its 75 W TDP and lack of external power connectors make it a modest card, and its launch MSRP was $149.

The GTX 1650's percentile ranking among all GPUs is 43, placing it below the median. Its nearest rivals show very small performance deltas: it is 0.4% behind the RTX 3050 A Mobile, 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon 550X, 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P2200, and 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100. This clustering means the GTX 1650's raw compute is nearly indistinguishable from those peers in aggregate benchmarks. The Passmark G3D score of 7,880 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 39,112 provide context for its gaming capability.

In Minimum, the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus become the primary constraints at higher resolutions. The measured FPS data shows a steep drop-off when moving from 1440p to 4K. At 1440p Low, the combo averages 49.6 FPS, but at 4K Low it falls to 29.6 FPS — a 20.0 FPS decline. Similarly, at 1440p Ultra the average is 26.1 FPS, while 4K Ultra yields just 12.9 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is particularly telling: 12.9 FPS is below playable thresholds, and it highlights that the GTX 1650's 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for 4K rendering in this title. The GPU's DirectX 12 Passmark score of 35 is notably low, and while Minimum supports DirectX 12 (the GPU lists API support for DirectX 12 (12_1)), the card's overall compute capacity limits its ability to leverage that API efficiently at high pixel counts.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear resolution scaling pattern. At 1080p Low, the average is 83.3 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 49.6 FPS, a reduction of 33.7 FPS or roughly 40.5%. At 4K Low, the average falls further to 29.6 FPS, another 20.0 FPS decline. The same pattern holds across other settings. For High settings, the progression is 53.6 FPS at 1080p, 35.7 FPS at 1440p, and 18.2 FPS at 4K. Medium settings go from 60.2 FPS at 1080p to 40.3 FPS at 1440p to 20.6 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings show 38.0 FPS at 1080p, 26.1 FPS at 1440p, and 12.9 FPS at 4K.

These drops are consistent with a GPU-bound scenario. The ratio of FPS decline between resolutions is roughly proportional to the increase in pixel count. Going from 1080p to 1440p increases pixels by about 78%, and the FPS drops by roughly 35-40% depending on settings. Going from 1440p to 4K increases pixels by about 125%, and FPS drops by another 40-50%. This pattern indicates that the GTX 1650's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors, not the CPU. If the processor were the bottleneck, we would expect FPS to remain relatively flat across resolutions at lower settings, which is not the case here — even at Low settings, 4K FPS is less than half of 1080p FPS.

The data also shows diminishing returns from lowering settings at 4K. At 4K, the difference between Low (29.6 FPS) and Ultra (12.9 FPS) is 16.7 FPS. At 1080p, that same Low-to-Ultra gap is 45.3 FPS. This compression at 4K suggests the GPU is hitting a hard performance ceiling regardless of settings, as the pixel throughput demands exceed the card's 53.28 GPixel/s pixel rate. The 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth is also likely saturated at 4K, as evidenced by the relatively small gains from reducing graphical fidelity.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This particular combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1,682 out of 1,733 tested combos in Minimum. That places it in the bottom 2.9% of all combinations tested, which is a strikingly low position given the CPU's strength. The rank reflects the entire system's performance, and the GTX 1650's weak 43rd percentile GPU ranking drags the combo down significantly, despite the CPU's 84th percentile standing.

The disparity between the CPU and GPU rankings is substantial. The Ryzen 7 5800X outperforms 84% of all CPUs, while the GTX 1650 outperforms only 43% of all GPUs. In a game like Minimum, which appears to be GPU-limited based on the resolution scaling analysis, the combo's rank is essentially determined by the graphics card. The CPU's high synthetic scores — Cinebench R23 multi-core of 23,571, Passmark multithread of 27,732, and 3DMark max-thread of 7,578 — do not translate into a high in-game rank because the GPU cannot keep up.

When compared to other combos in the database, this pairing's rank of 1,682 suggests that most other tested systems deliver higher average FPS. The measured FPS data supports this: even at the best case of 1080p Low, the combo only achieves 83.3 FPS, which is modest by modern standards. The 4K Ultra result of 12.9 FPS is particularly poor, and any combo ranking higher would likely show better 4K performance. The GPU's nearest rivals, such as the RTX 3050 A Mobile with a delta of -0.4%, would not meaningfully change this ranking, as the performance differences among these GPUs are minimal in aggregate benchmarks.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this CPU-GPU pair?

A: The highest average FPS comes from 1080p Low at 83.3 FPS. For a balance of quality and performance, 1080p Medium at 60.2 FPS or 1080p High at 53.6 FPS are the only settings that maintain framerates above 50 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The resolution scaling data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. FPS drops proportionally with pixel count increases, and even at 4K Low the combo only reaches 29.6 FPS, which is well below the 1080p Low result of 83.3 FPS.

Q: How does this combo perform at 4K resolution?

A: 4K performance is poor across all settings. Ultra averages 12.9 FPS, High averages 18.2 FPS, Medium averages 20.6 FPS, and Low averages 29.6 FPS. None of these are playable framerates for a third-person shooter.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, Low averages 83.3 FPS while Ultra averages 38.0 FPS, a difference of 45.3 FPS. Medium sits between at 60.2 FPS, and High is close to Medium at 53.6 FPS.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 5800X compare to its nearest rival CPUs?

A: The Ryzen 7 5800X is 0.3% ahead of the Ryzen 7 5800, 0.4% behind the Ryzen 5 8500GE, 0.4% behind the Intel Core i7-13700H, and 0.8% behind the Intel Core i5-12600KF in average benchmark scores.

Q: What is the GPU's VRAM capacity and how does it relate to 4K performance?

A: The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 128.1 GB/s bandwidth. At 4K, the resulting 12.9 FPS on Ultra and 29.6 FPS on Low suggest the memory subsystem is insufficient for high-resolution rendering.

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

The measured FPS data for this combo covers three resolutions and four settings levels, with all values representing average FPS.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the results are as follows: High settings average 18.2 FPS, Low settings average 29.6 FPS, Medium settings average 20.6 FPS, and Ultra settings average 12.9 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 16.7 FPS, with Ultra being the lowest result in the entire dataset.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), the averages are: High at 35.7 FPS, Low at 49.6 FPS, Medium at 40.3 FPS, and Ultra at 26.1 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra spread here is 23.5 FPS, which is wider than at 4K, indicating that the GPU has a bit more headroom at this resolution to differentiate between settings.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the averages are: High at 53.6 FPS, Low at 83.3 FPS, Medium at 60.2 FPS, and Ultra at 38.0 FPS. This resolution shows the largest Low-to-Ultra spread at 45.3 FPS, and it is the only resolution where any setting exceeds 60 FPS (Low at 83.3 FPS and Medium at 60.2 FPS).

Across all twelve measured configurations, the highest average FPS is 83.3 at 1080p Low, and the lowest is 12.9 at 4K Ultra. The data shows a consistent ordering where Low produces the highest FPS, followed by Medium, then High, then Ultra, at every resolution. The relative gaps between settings shrink as resolution increases, confirming the GPU-bound nature of the workload at higher pixel counts. The combo's overall rank of 1,682 out of 1,733 reflects these generally modest framerates, particularly the sub-30 FPS results at 4K and the sub-40 FPS results at 1440p Ultra.