Minimum

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT pairing delivers a highly capable 1080p and 1440p experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. The data indicates that while the CPU provides immense headroom, the GPU becomes the primary constraint as resolution and settings increase, with the measured frame rates revealing a clear performance hierarchy across the tested configurations.

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

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), operating on the AMD Socket AM5 platform. Its base clock is 4.40 GHz, boosting up to 5.50 GHz, with a substantial 128 MB of L3 cache. These specifications place it in the top 91st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,762. In synthetic testing, its performance scales effectively with thread count, scoring 12,490 in 3DMark with 16 threads, 9,002 with 8 threads, and 13,795 with maximum threads. Its single-thread performance is also strong, with a 3DMark single-thread score of 1,269 and a Geekbench single-core score of 3,041.

For a game released in 2014 like Minimum, the 9900X3D’s high clock speeds and robust single-thread capabilities are far more critical than its multi-threaded might. The benchmark results suggest that even at 1080p with Low settings, where the game’s demands on the CPU are highest, the processor is not a bottleneck. The measured 204 FPS average at 1080p Low is significantly higher than the 100 FPS at 1080p Ultra, indicating the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU’s performance headroom is further evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 47,737, which is over 7x its single-core score of 6,739, showing it can handle any background tasks or game logic demands with ease.

When compared to its nearest rivals, the 9900X3D’s average score of 54,762 is marginally higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (55,093, -0.6% delta) and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54,053, 1.3% delta). It also leads the Intel Xeon 6505P (53,701, 2% delta) and Intel Core i7-14700F (53,620, 2.1% delta) by a small margin. In the context of this game, this performance parity among top-tier CPUs reinforces the conclusion that the choice of processor has a negligible impact on the final frame rate. The data shows that the 9900X3D is an exceptionally powerful component that will not limit the RX 6700 XT in Minimum.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture (Navi 22 chip) and features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. Its base clock is 2321 MHz, with a boost clock of 2581 MHz and a game clock of 2424 MHz. The card’s compute power is rated at 13.21 TFLOPS FP32, with 2,560 shading units and 64 ROPs. It holds a 72nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27,425. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2,435, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 93,500.

In the context of Minimum, the GPU is clearly the dominant factor in determining performance. The frame rates scale predictably with both resolution and graphical settings, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario. The 12 GB VRAM capacity is more than sufficient for this game, as memory size is not a reported bottleneck. The card’s raw throughput, rather than its memory capacity, is what drives the observed FPS differences. For example, the 384.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is ample for a 2014 title, but the GPU’s shading and rasterization capabilities are what limit performance when settings are increased.

The RX 6700 XT’s performance is closely matched with its nearest rivals, showing a near-tie with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (27,435, 0% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (27,565, -0.5% delta). It is slightly ahead of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell (27,135, 1.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27,839, -1.5% delta). This positioning suggests that the RX 6700 XT provides a consistent performance level that is appropriate for 1080p and 1440p gaming in this title, but it will struggle to maintain high frame rates at 4K with maximum settings.

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

The measured FPS data for Minimum shows a clear and consistent scaling pattern across resolutions, confirming the GPU-bound nature of this pairing. At 1080p with Medium settings, the average FPS is 156. Moving to 1440p, the average drops to 101 FPS, a 35.3% reduction. At 2160p (4K), the average further drops to 54 FPS, a 65.4% reduction from the 1080p figure. This scaling is directly proportional to the increase in pixel count, which is the expected behavior when the GPU’s rendering throughput is the limiting factor.

The trend is even more pronounced at Ultra settings. The 1080p Ultra average is 100 FPS, which drops to 64 FPS at 1440p (a 36% reduction) and then to 35 FPS at 4K (a 65% reduction from 1080p). The frame rate drop from 1440p to 4K is particularly steep, indicating that the RX 6700 XT’s compute resources are saturated by the 4K pixel workload. The difference between the 1440p and 4K results at all settings suggests that 4K gaming is only feasible with lower settings, as the 71 FPS average at 4K Low is the only 4K configuration that approaches playable smoothness.

This scaling behavior definitively shows that the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is not the bottleneck. If the CPU were limiting, the frame rates would remain relatively flat across resolutions, as the CPU’s workload does not change significantly with resolution. Instead, the FPS drops sharply with each increase in resolution, which is the hallmark of a GPU that is working at its maximum capacity. The 9900X3D has ample headroom, as evidenced by its high benchmark scores, and is simply waiting for the GPU to deliver frames.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured data, the optimal balance of visual quality and performance for this combo is the Medium preset at both 1080p and 1440p. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers an average of 156 FPS, which is a significant jump from the 131 FPS of High. The jump from Medium to Low (204 FPS) offers a smaller marginal gain of 48 FPS, but at the cost of reduced visual fidelity. The Medium preset provides a high enough frame rate to fully utilize a high-refresh-rate monitor while maintaining better visual quality than Low.

At 1440p, the Medium preset again proves to be the sweet spot, with an average of 101 FPS. This is a very playable frame rate for a third-person shooter. The High preset at 85 FPS is also viable, but the 16 FPS drop from Medium to High may be noticeable. The Ultra preset at 64 FPS is playable but begins to sacrifice the smoothness that is beneficial in fast-paced action.

For 4K, the data suggests that Ultra is not a viable option, with an average of only 35 FPS. The High preset (46 FPS) is also marginal. The Medium preset (54 FPS) is the most balanced choice for 4K, offering a playable frame rate, while the Low preset (71 FPS) is the only way to achieve a smoother experience. However, the significant visual compromise at 4K Low may not be worth it, making Medium the recommended preset for 4K if a 60 FPS target can be relaxed to a "playable" standard. Ultimately, the Medium preset across all tested resolutions offers the most consistent and well-rounded performance.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Minimum with this CPU and GPU combo?*

A: The data shows the best experience is at 2560x1440 with Medium settings, delivering an average of 101 FPS. While 1080p yields higher frame rates (up to 204 FPS on Low), 1440p offers a strong balance of visual clarity and smooth performance. 4K is playable but requires Medium or Low settings to stay above 50 FPS.

Q: How much faster is 1080p compared to 4K at the same settings?

A: At Medium settings, the average FPS at 1080p is 156, which is nearly three times higher than the 54 FPS average at 4K. This represents a 65.4% drop in average frame rate when moving from 1080p to 4K.

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

A: The benchmark results indicate the GPU is the limiting factor. Frame rates scale significantly with resolution and settings, which is the classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU's high benchmark scores and the fact that FPS drops as resolution increases confirm the GPU is the performance constraint.

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

A: At 1440p, the Low preset achieves an average of 132 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves an average of 64 FPS. This is a 68 FPS difference, showing that the Ultra settings impose a significant load on the GPU, halving the frame rate compared to Low.

Q: Is the RX 6700 XT comparable to any specific NVIDIA GPU based on the data?

A: According to the nearest rivals data, the RX 6700 XT has an average benchmark score (27,425) that is essentially identical to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (27,435, 0% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 (27,565, -0.5% delta). This indicates a very close performance parity in synthetic benchmarks.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo at 1080p Medium?

A: The measured data for 1920x1080 with Medium settings lists a minimum FPS of 133. This is the only configuration with a recorded minimum, and it shows that even the lowest frame rate is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

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

The following table details the exact average FPS measurements for each tested configuration. For the Medium settings, the minimum and maximum FPS are also provided, offering a range of performance. All other settings only have an average FPS recorded.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: Average 204 FPS
• Medium: Average 156 FPS, Minimum 133 FPS, Maximum 180 FPS
• High: Average 131 FPS
• Ultra: Average 100 FPS

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: Average 132 FPS
• Medium: Average 101 FPS, Minimum 86 FPS, Maximum 116 FPS
• High: Average 85 FPS
• Ultra: Average 64 FPS

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: Average 71 FPS
• Medium: Average 54 FPS, Minimum 46 FPS, Maximum 62 FPS
• High: Average 46 FPS
• Ultra: Average 35 FPS

The data shows a clear progression: across all settings, the average FPS drops as resolution increases. The Medium settings provide the most complete data, with min and max values that indicate stable performance. For instance, at 1080p Medium, the frame rate fluctuates between 133 and 180 FPS, a range of 47 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range narrows to 30 FPS (86-116), and at 4K Medium, it narrows further to 16 FPS (46-62). This suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU is more consistently saturated, leading to less variability in frame times.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination is ranked 1501 out of 2939 tested combos for Minimum. This places the combo in the 51st percentile, meaning it performs better than just over half of all tested system configurations. This ranking is a holistic measure that considers the combined performance of the CPU and GPU across the game’s benchmark suite.

This mid-pack ranking is an interesting result, given the individual performance of the components. The CPU is in the 91st percentile, and the GPU is in the 72nd percentile. The fact that the combo rank is lower than both individual component percentiles suggests that the pairing is not optimized for this specific game. The high-end CPU is paired with a mid-range GPU, and in a game like Minimum that is heavily GPU-bound, the CPU’s potential is largely untapped. The ranking indicates that there are many other tested combinations that achieve higher frame rates, likely those pairing this GPU or a similar one with a less powerful CPU, or those pairing this CPU with a more powerful GPU.

The data implies that while this combo is fully capable of playing the game well, it is not a top-tier combination in the benchmark database's rankings. The system’s performance is constrained by the GPU, and the powerful CPU does not boost the combo's rank as much as it would in a more CPU-intensive title. The rank of 1501 out of 2939 serves as a reminder that the overall system balance is crucial, and this specific pairing prioritizes CPU headroom over raw gaming frame rates.