Minimum

Minimum is a 2014 third-person shooter whose performance profile on this hardware combination is unusually lopsided. The pairing of an AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D with an Intel Arc B390 produces a system where the GPU is overwhelmingly the performance limiting factor, as evidenced by the measured frame rates across resolutions and settings. The data shows a processor capable of top-tier compute performance paired with an integrated-class graphics solution, resulting in a configuration that struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher resolutions and settings. This analysis walks through the measured results, contextualizes the CPU and GPU roles, and provides actionable settings recommendations based strictly on the provided benchmark data.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 95 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 61 FPS, a 35.8% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 33 FPS, which is a 65.3% drop from the 1080p baseline. This steep decline, from 95 to 33 FPS across a 4x pixel count increase, is characteristic of a graphics processing unit that is saturated well before the CPU becomes a factor.

The same pattern holds across all settings presets. At Medium settings, the average frame rate goes from 72 FPS at 1080p to 47 FPS at 1440p (a 34.7% drop), then to 25 FPS at 4K (a 65.3% drop from 1080p). High settings show 61 FPS at 1080p, 39 FPS at 1440p (36.1% lower), and 21 FPS at 4K (65.6% lower). Ultra settings produce 46 FPS at 1080p, 30 FPS at 1440p (34.8% lower), and 16 FPS at 4K (65.2% lower). The consistency of these percentage drops, all hovering around 35% for the 1080p-to-1440p step and 65% for the 1080p-to-4K step, indicates that resolution scaling is purely a function of pixel throughput, with no CPU bottleneck surfacing at lower resolutions.

The limiting component is definitively the GPU. The Intel Arc B390, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482, sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463, 1.3% slower) and the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (score 1460, 1.5% slower). These are entry-level mobile and OEM parts from over a decade ago. The CPU, by contrast, is operating in a completely different performance class. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 47737 and a single-core score of 6739, placing it at the 91st percentile among all CPUs. When a top-decile CPU is paired with a bottom-decile GPU, the frame rate curve will always track the GPU's fill rate limits, which is exactly what the data shows.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), built on a 4 nm TSMC process. Its base clock is 4.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. It carries 128 MB of L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The chip also has 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. These specifications make it a formidable desktop processor, as reflected in its synthetic benchmarks.

The CPU's single-thread performance is particularly strong: Geekbench single-core score of 3041, Cinebench R23 single-core of 6739, and PassMark single-thread of 4646. Multi-threaded results are equally impressive: Geekbench multi-core of 22884, Cinebench R23 multi-core of 47737, and PassMark multithread of 56154. The 3DMark thread scaling tests show 2512 for 2 threads, 4885 for 4 threads, 9002 for 8 threads, 12490 for 16 threads, and 13795 for max threads. This scaling from 2 to 24 threads indicates excellent parallel efficiency, with the chip nearly tripling its 2-thread score at 8 threads and more than quintupling it at max threads.

In the context of Minimum, a 2014 title, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. Given the game's age, even a fraction of this CPU's capability would be sufficient to saturate the Arc B390. The 12 cores and 24 threads are far beyond what a 2014 third-person shooter would utilize. The 5.50 GHz boost clock and 128 MB L3 cache provide ample headroom for any CPU-bound scenarios, but the measured data shows none exist here. The frame rate differences between settings presets at the same resolution (e.g., 95 FPS Low vs 61 FPS High at 1080p) are entirely attributable to GPU workload changes, not CPU limitations.

The nearest CPU rivals in the database are the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (average score 55093, 0.6% lower), Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54053, 1.3% higher for the rival), Intel Xeon 6505P (53701, 2.0% higher), and Intel Core i7-14700F (53620, 2.1% higher). These deltas are minor, indicating the 9900X3D is competitively positioned among high-end desktop processors. However, in Minimum, this CPU's performance class is irrelevant because the GPU becomes the bottleneck at every resolution tested.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, codenamed Panther Lake, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. Its base clock is 300 MHz with a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it uses the host system's DDR5 memory rather than dedicated VRAM. The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS.

The GPU's synthetic benchmark results are telling. It has only one recorded benchmark: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 1482. This places it at the 9th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% slower), NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% slower), NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% slower), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% slower). These are all legacy entry-level parts, which contextualizes the Arc B390's performance class as thoroughly inadequate for modern gaming at high settings.

In Minimum, the GPU's role is to render frames at the target resolution and settings. The measured data shows it cannot maintain 60 FPS at 1080p on any setting above Low. At 1080p Low, it averages 95 FPS, which is playable. At Medium, it drops to 72 FPS. At High, it falls to 61 FPS. At Ultra, it averages just 46 FPS. The 4K results are uniformly poor: 33 FPS Low, 25 FPS Medium (with min 21 and max 29), 21 FPS High, and 16 FPS Ultra. These numbers indicate that the GPU's fill rate and shader throughput are simply insufficient for higher resolutions.

The shared memory configuration is a particular concern. With "System Shared" memory and bandwidth described as "System Dependent," the Arc B390 relies on the CPU's dual-channel DDR5 at 89.6 GB/s. While this is fast for system memory, it lacks the dedicated bandwidth of discrete VRAM. This likely contributes to the steep performance drop at 4K, where memory bandwidth pressure increases significantly. The 24 ROPs and 60 GPixel/s pixel rate are also limiting factors at higher resolutions, as pixel fill rate becomes a bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D with Intel Arc B390 ranks 2602 out of 2939 combos in Minimum. This places it in the bottom 11.5% of all tested configurations. The rank reflects the GPU's severe performance deficit relative to the CPU's capability. A top-tier CPU cannot compensate for a GPU that sits at the 9th percentile.

The combo rank is driven entirely by the GPU. The CPU's 91st percentile standing means that swapping in almost any other discrete GPU would dramatically improve the ranking. The data shows that the Arc B390's performance in Minimum is comparable to the GT 520MX, GT 800M, GT 625 OEM, and GT 710, all of which are ancient, low-end parts. The 2602nd rank is consistent with a system that is GPU-bound at every resolution and settings combination tested.

The disparity between component classes is stark. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 47737 is in the top tier of desktop processors, while the GPU's Steel Nomad score of 1482 is in the bottom decile. This imbalance means the combo rank will always be limited by the GPU's ceiling. For Minimum, the practical implication is that the system is only viable at 1080p Low or Medium settings if the target is 60+ FPS, and even then, the margin is thin at Medium (72 FPS average).

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this system in Minimum?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution that achieves playable frame rates. At 1080p Low, the average is 95 FPS; at Medium, it is 72 FPS; at High, it is 61 FPS. At 1440p, the best average is 61 FPS on Low, while 4K never exceeds 33 FPS on any setting.

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

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 on 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% slower).

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

A: The GPU is the definitive bottleneck. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D is at the 91st percentile among CPUs, while the Arc B390 is at the 9th percentile among GPUs. Frame rate drops of approximately 65% from 1080p to 4K across all settings confirm GPU-bound performance.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p Ultra?

A: The measured average at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 46 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS threshold that many consider smooth, and it is the lowest 1080p result in the data set.

Q: Does the CPU's 128 MB L3 cache help in Minimum?

A: The cache is a CPU feature that benefits compute workloads. In Minimum, the GPU is the limiting factor, so the CPU's L3 cache size does not influence the measured frame rates in any observable way.

Q: What is the frame time consistency at 1440p Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 47, with a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 54. This indicates a 14 FPS range between min and max, suggesting some frame time variability but no severe stuttering.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows four settings presets. Low settings produce an average of 95 FPS. Medium settings yield 72 FPS average, with a minimum of 62 and maximum of 83. High settings average 61 FPS. Ultra settings average 46 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 49 FPS drop, or 51.6% reduction.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 61 FPS. Medium settings average 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 and maximum of 54. High settings average 39 FPS. Ultra settings average 30 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 31 FPS, a 50.8% reduction. Notably, the 1440p Low result (61 FPS) exactly matches the 1080p High result (61 FPS), indicating that the GPU's workload at 1440p Low is similar to 1080p High.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly low. Low settings average 33 FPS. Medium settings average 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 and maximum of 29. High settings average 21 FPS. Ultra settings average 16 FPS. The drop from 1080p Low (95 FPS) to 4K Low (33 FPS) represents a 65.3% reduction. The 4K Ultra result of 16 FPS is the lowest in the entire data set.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset is the only one with min/max data recorded. At 1080p, the range is 62-83 FPS (21 FPS spread). At 1440p, the range is 40-54 FPS (14 FPS spread). At 4K, the range is 21-29 FPS (8 FPS spread). The narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests that frame time consistency improves as the GPU becomes more uniformly saturated.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data indicates that 1920x1080 is the only viable resolution for this system. At 1080p, Low settings deliver 95 FPS average, which provides the smoothest experience. Medium settings at 72 FPS average (min 62, max 83) still offer a comfortable margin above 60 FPS and likely provide a better visual experience than Low. High settings at 61 FPS average sit right at the 60 FPS threshold, which is acceptable but leaves no headroom for demanding scenes. Ultra settings at 46 FPS average fall below the 60 FPS target and are not recommended for smooth gameplay.

At 1440p, only Low settings (61 FPS average) come close to 60 FPS. Medium at 47 FPS (min 40, max 54) shows noticeable dips below 60. High at 39 FPS and Ultra at 30 FPS are both suboptimal for a game that benefits from responsive controls. At 4K, no settings preset achieves 34 FPS or higher, making this resolution impractical for actual play.

The best experience per the measured rows is 1920x1080 with Medium settings. This preset delivers 72 FPS average with a minimum of 62 FPS, ensuring that the frame rate stays above 60 FPS even in the worst recorded moments. Compared to Low settings, Medium provides the next tier of visual quality with only a 23 FPS average cost (95 to 72). The alternative, High settings at 61 FPS average, offers no minimum FPS data, so its consistency is unknown, and it has a 11 FPS lower average than Medium.

For users prioritizing maximum frame rate, 1080p Low at 95 FPS is the clear choice. For users prioritizing visual quality while maintaining 60+ FPS, 1080p Medium is the optimal balance. The 1440p Low option (61 FPS) matches 1080p High in average frame rate but offers higher resolution; however, it lacks min/max data, so consistency is unverified. The data does not support any 4K configuration as a playable option.