Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 pairing delivers playable frame rates only at 1080p with reduced settings, with the GPU acting as the definitive bottleneck across all resolutions. The data shows this combo ranks 1644th out of 1733 tested combinations in Minimum, placing it in the bottom 5% of systems, a position dictated almost entirely by the graphics card's age and memory constraints. The CPU is never the limiting factor; instead, the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus throttle performance well below what the Ryzen 7 7700X can feed.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate collapse from 1080p to 4K is severe and tells a clear story: this is a GPU-bound system. At 1080p Low, the combo averages 83.7 FPS, but dropping to 1440p Low reduces that to 51.2 FPS, a 39% loss. Moving to 4K Low yields just 29.2 FPS, which is 65% below the 1080p Low result. This steep scaling curve is characteristic of a graphics card with limited pixel throughput and memory bandwidth, not a CPU limitation.

The gap widens dramatically at higher settings. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 43 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it falls to 12.7 FPS — a 70% reduction. The pattern is consistent: every resolution jump costs roughly 30-40% of the previous frame rate, regardless of quality preset. This linear degradation points to the GTX 1650's 32 ROPs and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth being saturated early, with the Ryzen 7 7700X's 8 cores and 16 threads remaining largely idle.

At 4K, the system becomes nearly unplayable at any setting. High settings produce 17.1 FPS, Medium drops to 20.7 FPS, and even Low struggles at 29.2 FPS. These numbers confirm that the GPU's 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer is exhausted at 3840x2160, forcing constant memory swapping. The CPU's 5.40 GHz boost clock cannot compensate for the GPU's inability to rasterize at that resolution, making 4K a non-viable option for this pairing.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 7 7700X is overqualified for this task. With 8 cores, 16 threads, and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, its benchmark scores place it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. The data shows a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 30325 and a single-core score of 4281, both far beyond what Minimum requires. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-13500, scores 34175 on average, just 0.4% higher, indicating the 7700X is not the performance ceiling here.

This is a 2014 third-person shooter, and the CPU's Zen 4 architecture with 32 MB of shared L3 cache provides more than enough headroom. The 3DMark single-thread score of 1090 and multi-thread score of 8852 suggest that even at 1080p Low, where the system reaches 83.7 FPS, the CPU is not the constraint. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect frame rates to plateau across resolutions, but instead they scale directly with pixel count, confirming the GPU is the sole bottleneck.

The 7700X's 105 W TDP and DDR5 memory support (83.2 GB/s bandwidth) are irrelevant to the measured results because the GPU cannot utilize the data fast enough. The benchmark data shows the CPU's PassMark single-thread score of 4190, yet the GTX 1650's PassMark G3D score of 7880 places it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs — a massive mismatch. In this game, the CPU's role is to wait, and it does so efficiently.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the definitive limiting component, and its age shows. With a 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer on a 128-bit bus (128.1 GB/s bandwidth), the card struggles at even moderate resolutions. The Turing architecture chip, TU117, runs at 1485 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost, but its 896 shading units and 32 ROPs cannot keep pace with the CPU's output. The GPU's 43rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8713, places it far below the CPU's 89th percentile.

The nearest GPU rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, scores 8746 on average, just 0.4% higher, meaning the GTX 1650 is not an outlier for its class — it is simply an underpowered card for this pairing. The measured FPS confirms this: at 1080p Ultra, the card produces 43 FPS, which is 49% lower than the 83.7 FPS at Low settings. This 40 FPS swing from Low to Ultra at the same resolution highlights the GPU's limited texture and pixel processing capabilities, not a CPU limitation.

The VRAM is a critical factor. At 4K Ultra, the card averages 12.7 FPS, a clear sign that the 4 GB buffer is overflowing. Even at 1440p High, the 35 FPS average suggests the memory subsystem is struggling to feed the render pipeline. The GPU's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors indicate a low-power design, but that does not excuse the performance gap. The data shows the card is end-of-life, and its 12 nm process node (4,700 million transistors) is outdated compared to the CPU's 5 nm node.

FAQ

*Q: Why does this combo perform so poorly in Minimum?*

A: The GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus create a hard bottleneck. The CPU is in the 89th percentile, but the GPU is in the 43rd, and the measured FPS shows the GPU cannot handle resolutions above 1080p with high settings.

Q: What is the best resolution for this system?

A: 1920x1080 is the only viable resolution. At Low settings, it averages 83.7 FPS, and at Medium, 65 FPS. 1440p drops below 51.2 FPS even at Low, and 4K is unplayable, with a maximum of 29.2 FPS at Low settings.

Q: Is the CPU holding back the GPU?

A: No. The Ryzen 7 7700X's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 30325 and single-core score of 4281 far exceed the game's needs. The frame rate scales with resolution, which is a GPU-bound behavior.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The data shows the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 8746 on average, just 0.4% higher than the GTX 1650's 8713. The AMD Radeon 550X scores 8749, also 0.4% higher, meaning the GTX 1650 is within a rounding error of its peers.

*Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K?*

A: Technically, but not playably. The highest average at 4K is 29.2 FPS on Low settings, and Ultra drops to 12.7 FPS. The 4 GB frame buffer is insufficient for 3840x2160.

Q: What settings should be avoided?

A: Ultra settings at any resolution above 1080p are problematic. At 1440p Ultra, the system averages 26.3 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 43 FPS. High settings at 1440p also struggle at 35 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system shows its best results. Low settings produce 83.7 FPS, Medium achieves 65 FPS, High reaches 52.5 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 43 FPS. This range indicates that the GTX 1650 can handle 1080p if settings are kept moderate, but Ultra settings tax the 4 GB VRAM significantly.

At 2560x1440, performance degrades sharply. Low settings average 51.2 FPS, which is still playable, but Medium drops to 42.2 FPS, High falls to 35 FPS, and Ultra plummets to 26.3 FPS. The 1440p results show that the GPU's 128-bit bus becomes a bottleneck, as the frame rate drops by 39% from 1080p Low to 1440p Low.

At 3840x2160, the system is effectively non-functional. Low settings average 29.2 FPS, Medium gets 20.7 FPS, High produces 17.1 FPS, and Ultra manages only 12.7 FPS. These numbers are below the threshold for smooth gameplay, and the 4 GB VRAM is clearly insufficient for 4K textures, even at Low settings. The scaling from 1080p Low (83.7 FPS) to 4K Low (29.2 FPS) represents a 65% loss, confirming the GPU's limitations.

Settings Recommendations

The optimal experience is 1080p with Medium settings, yielding 65 FPS average. This provides a smooth frame rate while maintaining visual quality above Low. The data shows that Medium settings at 1080p offer a 24% improvement over High (52.5 FPS) and a 51% improvement over Ultra (43 FPS), making it the sweet spot for this GPU.

Low settings at 1080p deliver 83.7 FPS, which is the highest measured result, but the visual trade-off may not be worth the extra 18.7 FPS over Medium. For players prioritizing frame rate, Low is viable, but Medium is recommended for a balance of performance and fidelity. High settings at 1080p (52.5 FPS) are acceptable, but the drop from Medium to High is 19%, suggesting diminishing returns.

Avoid Ultra settings entirely, as 43 FPS at 1080p is marginal, and 1440p Ultra (26.3 FPS) and 4K Ultra (12.7 FPS) are unplayable. The data indicates that this combo should not attempt 1440p High (35 FPS) or any 4K preset, as the 4 GB VRAM causes severe stuttering. Stick to 1080p Medium for the best measured experience.

How This Combo Ranks

This pairing ranks 1644th out of 1733 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the bottom 5% of all systems. This low ranking is directly attributable to the GTX 1650, which ranks in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs. The CPU, by contrast, ranks in the 89th percentile, so the imbalance is stark. The combo's ranking means that 89% of tested systems outperform it, and only 89 combos are worse.

The ranking reflects the GPU's inability to scale with the CPU's potential. The Ryzen 7 7700X's average benchmark score of 34313 places it within 0.5% of its nearest rivals, yet the GTX 1650's average score of 8713 is near the bottom of its class. This mismatch creates a system where the CPU is wasted, and the measured FPS confirms that the GPU is the limiting factor at every resolution. For a game released in 2014, this combo should perform better, but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus are simply too restrictive. The rank of 1644 out of 1733 is a clear verdict: this is a low-end pairing that requires significant settings compromises to achieve playable frame rates.