Minimum

Minimum is a 2014 third-person shooter that scales aggressively across resolutions and settings on the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D combination. The measured data shows a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-limited at 4K, but transitions to a more balanced or CPU-influenced state at 1080p, where frame rates reach levels that exceed most high-refresh displays. This analysis breaks down the exact performance envelope of this pairing, interpreting the scores and deltas to provide actionable settings guidance.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic and clearly identifies the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 430 at 1920x1080 to 277 at 2560x1440, a reduction of 153 FPS (or roughly 36%). Moving further to 3840x2160, the average drops to 149 FPS, which is a 281 FPS (or about 65%) decrease from the 1080p figure. This steep decline is typical of a game where pixel throughput, rather than CPU logic, becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings presets. For High settings, the average FPS goes from 276 at 1080p, to 178 at 1440p, and finally to 96 at 4K. This represents a 65% reduction from 1080p to 4K, nearly identical to the Low preset's drop. The Ultra preset shows the same trend, with averages of 210 FPS at 1080p, 136 FPS at 1440p, and 73 FPS at 4K. The consistency of this ~65% drop between 1080p and 4K across all presets indicates that the RTX 5090 D's rendering load scales predictably with pixel count, and the Ryzen 9 9900X is not the primary constraint in the 4K resolution segment.

However, the gap between 1080p and 1440p is smaller, at roughly 35-36% across all settings. This suggests that at 1080p, the CPU begins to play a more significant role. The 430 FPS average at Low 1080p is exceptionally high, and while the data does not explicitly state the CPU's frame time limit, the diminishing returns from 1080p to 1440p (a smaller absolute FPS drop than from 1440p to 4K) imply that the CPU is helping to sustain those high frame rates at the lowest resolution. The data suggests that for Maximum refresh rate gaming at 1080p, the platform is capable of pushing frame rates well beyond typical monitor refresh rates, but the scaling curve shows that the GPU is the component that will dictate performance as resolution increases.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average frame rate achievable in Minimum with this hardware?

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 430, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the peak measured performance in the dataset.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 5090 D compared to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 77,712. It is 1.1% faster than the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT (which scores 76,904) but 1.6% slower than the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (which scores 78,940). It also trails the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB and 16 GB models by 2.1% and 2.4% respectively.

Q: Does the CPU present a bottleneck at any resolution?

A: Data indicates the CPU is not a bottleneck at 4K, where the GPU handles the load. At 1080p, the high frame rates (e.g., 430 FPS on Low) suggest the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU, but the performance scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a smaller drop than 1440p to 4K, implying the CPU's influence is more substantial at the lower resolution.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops from 277 on Low to 136 on Ultra. This is a 141 FPS (or roughly 51%) decrease, showing a significant performance cost for maximum visual fidelity.

Q: Is the 32 GB VRAM on the RTX 5090 D sufficient for this game?

A: The fact pack does not include VRAM usage metrics for Minimum. However, given the game's 2014 release date and the GPU's 32 GB GDDR7 memory, it is qualitatively safe to say that VRAM capacity is not a limiting factor in any of the measured scenarios.

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 9900X compare to the Intel Core i9-14900 in overall CPU benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X has an average benchmark score of 57,498. The Intel Core i9-14900 scores 58,115, making the Intel part 1.1% faster. The AMD chip is also 0.1% slower than the AMD EPYC 9015 and 0.2% faster than the AMD EPYC 7313.

Settings Recommendations

For 4K gaming, the data strongly suggests that Ultra settings are not the optimal choice for a smooth experience. The average FPS of 73 at 3840x2160 on Ultra is below the 96 FPS average on High. While the data does not specify a target refresh rate, the 23 FPS difference between these presets is substantial. High settings provide a 31.5% improvement in average frame rate over Ultra (96 vs 73), making it the best balance of visual quality and performance for a 60 FPS or higher target. Low settings at 4K yield 149 FPS, which is playable on high-refresh displays, but the visual compromise is likely significant.

At 1440p, the choice is more nuanced. Medium settings deliver a 212 FPS average, which is a 56% increase over Ultra's 136 FPS. High settings offer 178 FPS, a 30.9% increase over Ultra. For players with 144Hz or 165Hz monitors, Medium provides enough headroom to stay comfortably above the refresh rate, while High also stays above 144Hz but with less margin. Low at 277 FPS is excessive for most displays and suggests a preference for maximum frame rates over visual quality. The Ultra preset at 136 FPS is suitable for 120Hz displays but will not fully saturate a 144Hz panel.

For 1080p, the hardware is so powerful that even Ultra settings achieve a 210 FPS average. This makes Ultra the recommended preset for 1080p gaming, as it provides the highest visual quality while still delivering frame rates that exceed most high-refresh monitors (144Hz, 240Hz). Medium and High are also viable, offering 329 FPS and 276 FPS respectively, but the visual uplift from Ultra is preferable when the performance cost is only a 119 FPS drop from Medium. Low at 430 FPS is only relevant for competitive scenarios where every frame counts and visual fidelity is irrelevant.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 430 FPS average.
• Medium: 329 FPS average, with a minimum of 280 FPS and a maximum of 379 FPS.
• High: 276 FPS average.
• Ultra: 210 FPS average.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 277 FPS average.
• Medium: 212 FPS average, with a minimum of 180 FPS and a maximum of 244 FPS.
• High: 178 FPS average.
• Ultra: 136 FPS average.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 149 FPS average.
• Medium: 114 FPS average, with a minimum of 97 FPS and a maximum of 131 FPS.
• High: 96 FPS average.
• Ultra: 73 FPS average.

The data shows a clear pattern: the Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, indicating that it was the focus of more detailed frame time analysis. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 280 FPS and maximum of 379 FPS show a 99 FPS variance, which is a 30% swing from the average. At 1440p Medium, the variance is 64 FPS (180 to 244), and at 4K Medium, it is 34 FPS (97 to 131). This suggests that as resolution increases, frame pacing becomes more consistent, with the gap between minimum and maximum shrinking proportionally to the average.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is the dominant component in this pairing. Its 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus provides a massive 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's high pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s are directly responsible for the frame rates observed at 4K, where pixel throughput is the primary bottleneck. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the GPU produces 73 FPS, while at 4K Low, it produces 149 FPS, a 104% increase. This 76 FPS difference highlights how sensitive the GPU is to shader and texture complexity, rather than resolution alone.

The GPU's synthetic benchmark scores provide context for its performance. With an average score of 77,712 and a percentile ranking of 92 among all GPUs, it is a top-tier part, but the nearestRivals data shows it is not the absolute fastest. It is 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT but 1.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT. The fact that it trails some older Tesla P100 accelerator cards by 2.1-2.4% in the Passmark G3D benchmark suggests that raw compute performance is not always indicative of gaming frame rates, where driver optimization and feature support matter. The GPU's boost clock of 2407 MHz, which is 390 MHz higher than its base clock of 2017 MHz, indicates a healthy thermal and power headroom for sustained gaming loads, as evidenced by the consistent frame rates across the measured scenarios.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X plays a supporting role, but it is crucial for achieving the highest frame rates at 1080p. With 12 cores and 24 threads, a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, and a 64 MB L3 cache, it has ample processing power for game logic and draw calls. The fact that the 1080p Low preset hits 430 FPS shows that the CPU can feed the GPU at extremely high frame rates. However, the CPU's synthetic benchmark scores suggest it is not the primary driver of performance in this game.

The CPU's average benchmark score is 57,498, which is only 0.1% lower than the AMD EPYC 9015 and 0.2% higher than the AMD EPYC 7313. It is 1.1% slower than the Intel Core i9-14900. These are close margins, but the CPU's real-world gaming performance is better indicated by its 3DMark scores. The 3DMark max threads score of 13,929 is only 11% higher than the 16-thread score of 12,552, showing that the game likely does not scale perfectly with the CPU's 24 threads. The single-thread score of 1,286 in 3DMark and 353 in Cinebench R15 single-core show strong single-core performance, which is often more critical for older game engines.

The data implies that at 4K, the CPU is largely idle, waiting for the GPU to render frames. At 1440p, the CPU begins to contribute more, but the GPU still dominates. At 1080p, the CPU's single-thread performance and high boost clock are likely what allow the system to reach 430 FPS on Low settings. The transition from 277 FPS at 1440p Low to 430 FPS at 1080p Low is a 153 FPS jump, which is a 55% increase. This significant gain indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor at 1080p; otherwise, the frame rate would plateau. Instead, the data shows a smooth scaling that is consistent with the GPU's pixel throughput capabilities, meaning the CPU has more than enough headroom to avoid becoming a bottleneck in this title.