Minimum

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

The measured FPS data for Minimum with the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution climbs. At 1080p Low, the combo delivers 66 FPS average; at 1440p Low, that drops to 42 FPS — a 36% reduction. Moving to 4K Low, the average falls to 23 FPS, which is roughly one-third of the 1080p Low result. This pattern strongly indicates that the GTX 1050 Ti is the dominant bottleneck, as the resolution scaling penalty is far larger than what a CPU-bound scenario would typically produce.

The High settings preset tells a similar story: 42 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 15 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 15 FPS, and from 1440p to 4K another 12 FPS. Interestingly, the absolute FPS loss between consecutive resolutions is relatively consistent, suggesting the GPU's rendering workload scales predictably with pixel count. However, the percentage losses are severe — 4K High delivers only 35.7% of the 1080p High frame rate.

Ultra settings make the situation even more pronounced. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 32 FPS; at 1440p Ultra, 21 FPS; and at 4K Ultra, just 11 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is barely playable by any standard, and the progression from 1080p to 4K represents a 65.6% performance collapse. This is textbook GPU-limited behavior — the 12-core Ryzen 9 9900X3D with its 5.50 GHz boost clock is not the constraint here.

What does this imply about the limiting component? The data points unambiguously to the GPU. A CPU bottleneck would manifest as relatively flat FPS across resolutions, since the CPU workload per frame doesn't scale with pixel count. Instead, we see dramatic FPS erosion at higher resolutions, which is the signature of a GPU that runs out of pixel throughput and memory bandwidth. The GTX 1050 Ti's 112.1 GB/s memory bandwidth and 2.138 TFLOPS FP32 performance are simply insufficient for 4K rendering in this title.

The Medium preset data, which includes min and max FPS readings, further illustrates the strain. At 1080p Medium, the average is 50 FPS with a min of 43 and max of 58. At 1440p Medium, the average falls to 32 FPS (min 28, max 37). At 4K Medium, the average is 17 FPS (min 15, max 20). The min-to-max spread narrows at higher resolutions — from 15 FPS at 1080p to 5 FPS at 4K — which suggests that frame time consistency actually improves when the GPU is fully saturated, even though overall performance plummets.

# 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), built on TSMC's 4 nm process. Its base clock is 4.40 GHz and boost clock reaches 5.50 GHz. The CPU has 128 MB of L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. In synthetic benchmarks, this chip scores 47,737 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 6,739 in single-core, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 22,884 and single-core of 3,041.

Given this processing power, the Ryzen 9 9900X3D is overqualified for Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014. The game's CPU demands are nowhere near what this processor can deliver. The FPS data confirms this: even at 1080p Low, where the GPU has the least work to do, the average is only 66 FPS. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see much higher frame rates at low resolutions, likely well above 100 FPS, given the CPU's 91st percentile ranking among all processors.

The benchmark results show that this CPU's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (avg score 55,093, delta -0.6%), the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54,053, delta +1.3%), and the Intel Core i7-14700F (53,620, delta +2.1%). These are all strong desktop processors, yet none of them would meaningfully change the FPS in this game because the GPU bottleneck is so severe.

The CPU's 12 cores and 24 threads are irrelevant for this title's performance, as the data shows no scenario where CPU capability translates into higher FPS. The PassMark multi-thread score of 56,154 and 3DMark max-thread score of 13,795 indicate massive headroom, but Minimum cannot exploit it because the GTX 1050 Ti caps the frame rate. The single-thread performance — PassMark single-thread score of 4,646 and Cinebench R23 single-core of 6,739 — is also far beyond what a 2014 game would need.

This combination creates an interesting analytical question: is there any resolution/settings configuration where the CPU starts to matter? The data suggests no. Even at 1080p Low, the 66 FPS average is modest, and the GPU's 25th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms it sits in the lower performance tier. The CPU's 91st percentile ranking is a stark contrast — one component is near the top, the other near the bottom.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a Pascal-architecture GPU built on Samsung's 14 nm process, with a chip size of 132 mm² and 3,300 million transistors. Its base clock is 1291 MHz with a boost of 1392 MHz, and memory runs at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The card has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 112.1 GB/s bandwidth. It features 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with pixel rate of 44.54 GPixel/s and texture rate of 66.82 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.138 TFLOPS.

The GPU's 25th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it in the lower quartile, and its average benchmark score of 4,193 is only slightly above the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4,170, delta +0.6%) and NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4,151, delta +1%). This is a GPU designed for 1080p gaming at modest settings, not for high-resolution or high-fidelity workloads.

In Minimum, the GTX 1050 Ti's limitations are exposed clearly. The 4 GB VRAM capacity is workable for 1080p, but at 4K, the frame buffer and bandwidth constraints become severe. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (11 FPS average) is below playable thresholds, and even 4K Low (23 FPS) is marginal. The GPU's DirectX 12 benchmark score of 26 (PassMark) and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 suggest weak modern API performance, though Minimum from 2014 likely uses older APIs where the card performs relatively better.

The GPU's memory bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s is a critical constraint at higher resolutions. The data shows that 4K Medium averages 17 FPS with a min of 15 and max of 20 — the narrow range indicates the GPU is running at its absolute limit, with no headroom for frame rate variability. The 1080p Medium range (43 min, 58 max) shows more variability, suggesting the GPU has some capacity to burst when scene complexity varies.

The texturing and pixel rates (66.82 GTexel/s and 44.54 GPixel/s) are the raw throughput limits. At 4K, the pixel count is 8.3 million per frame, and at 11 FPS Ultra, the GPU is filling about 91 million pixels per second — well below its theoretical 44.54 GPixel/s peak. This indicates the bottleneck is not raw pixel fill but likely memory bandwidth and shader complexity. The FP32 throughput of 2.138 TFLOPS is also modest, limiting the card's ability to handle modern lighting and post-processing effects even at lower resolutions.

# FAQ

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

A: Based on the measured data, 1080p is the only viable resolution. At 1080p Low the average is 66 FPS, and even at 1080p Ultra the average is 32 FPS. The 1440p and 4K results (42 FPS and 23 FPS at Low respectively) fall below smooth-playability thresholds.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X3D has an average benchmark score of 54,762, which is 0.6% below the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (55,093), 1.3% above the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54,053), and 2.1% above the Intel Core i7-14700F (53,620). These are all close scores, indicating the CPU is competitive with its peers.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has an average benchmark score of 4,193, which is 0.6% above the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4,170), 1% above the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4,151), 1.1% below the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4,241), and 1.8% below the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (4,268). All rivals are within a narrow band.

Q: What FPS can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: The measured data shows an average of 32 FPS at 2560x1440 with Medium settings, with a minimum of 28 FPS and maximum of 37 FPS. This is borderline playable but will be noticeable in fast-paced action.

Q: Why is the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K so severe?

A: The data shows FPS falling from 66 at 1080p Low to 23 at 4K Low, a 65% reduction. This is caused by the GTX 1050 Ti's limited memory bandwidth (112.1 GB/s) and pixel throughput (44.54 GPixel/s), which cannot sustain 4K rendering workloads.

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 9900X3D wasted in this combination?

A: Yes, from a gaming performance perspective. The CPU's 91st percentile ranking and high multi-thread scores (Cinebench R23 multi-core 47,737) far exceed what Minimum requires, but the GPU's 25th percentile ranking caps overall performance.

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

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 66 FPS average
• Medium: 50 FPS average (min 43, max 58)
• High: 42 FPS average
• Ultra: 32 FPS average

At 1080p, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce 66 FPS average, which is the highest measured value across all configurations. Medium drops to 50 FPS with a 15 FPS spread between min and max. High settings yield 42 FPS, and Ultra brings the average down to 32 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is 16 FPS, Medium to High is 8 FPS, and High to Ultra is 10 FPS.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 42 FPS average
• Medium: 32 FPS average (min 28, max 37)
• High: 27 FPS average
• Ultra: 21 FPS average

At 1440p, all settings produce sub-60 FPS results. Low averages 42 FPS, which is a 36% reduction from 1080p Low. Medium averages 32 FPS with a narrow 9 FPS range (28-37). High delivers 27 FPS, and Ultra falls to 21 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1440p shows a 21 FPS total drop, with the largest single-step decline being 10 FPS from Medium to High.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 23 FPS average
• Medium: 17 FPS average (min 15, max 20)
• High: 15 FPS average
• Ultra: 11 FPS average

At 4K, the combo struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low averages 23 FPS, Medium drops to 17 FPS (min 15, max 20), High is 15 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 11 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is only 12 FPS, showing that the GPU is so constrained that quality settings have diminishing impact. The Medium preset at 4K has the tightest range (5 FPS spread), indicating consistent but very low performance.

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

The data reveals a clear trade-off between visual quality and playability. If the target is 60 FPS, no settings/resolution combination achieves it — the highest measured value is 66 FPS at 1080p Low, which is the only configuration above 60 FPS. At 1080p, the Low preset (66 FPS) is the only one that clears this threshold, but Medium (50 FPS) is close enough for smooth gameplay with reduced quality.

For players prioritizing frame rate at 1080p, Low is the only choice that guarantees 60+ FPS. However, the jump to Medium costs 16 FPS (down to 50) while providing better visual fidelity. Given that the game is a third-person shooter from 2014, the visual differences between Low and Medium may be less impactful than the frame rate loss, making Low the recommended preset for competitive play.

At 1440p, all presets fall below 60 FPS. The best option is Low at 42 FPS, which is playable but not smooth. Medium at 32 FPS is marginal, and High (27 FPS) and Ultra (21 FPS) are likely to feel sluggish during action sequences. If 1440p is a hard requirement, Low is the only sensible choice. The 10 FPS difference between Low and Medium at 1440p (42 vs 32) is significant enough that the quality gain may not justify the performance hit.

At 4K, none of the presets are truly playable. The best result is Low at 23 FPS, which is below the standard 30 FPS minimum for playability. Medium (17 FPS), High (15 FPS), and Ultra (11 FPS) are all effectively slideshows. The data suggests that 4K should be avoided entirely with this combo, as even the lowest settings cannot reach acceptable frame rates.

The Medium preset at 1080p (50 FPS) offers the best balance between quality and performance. It provides a 15 FPS range (43-58 min-max) that accommodates scene complexity variations, and the 50 FPS average is close enough to 60 that most players will find it acceptable. The alternative — dropping to Low for 66 FPS — sacrifices quality for a 32% frame rate gain, which may be worthwhile for competitive play but is not necessary for casual gaming.

# How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti combination ranks 2,895 out of 2,939 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the bottom 1.5% of all tested configurations — a remarkably poor showing that reflects the GPU's severe bottleneck.

The rank of 2,895 out of 2,939 means that only 44 combos perform worse. This is striking because the CPU component is exceptional — the Ryzen 9 9900X3D sits at the 91st percentile among all CPUs and has a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 47,737. The GPU, however, is at the 25th percentile among all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 4,193 is barely above the lowest-tier integrated graphics solutions.

The data indicates that this combo's ranking is almost entirely determined by the GTX 1050 Ti. In a game like Minimum, which is not computationally demanding by modern standards, a high-end CPU cannot compensate for a GPU that lacks the raw throughput for smooth frame delivery. The combo's FPS results — 66 FPS at 1080p Low being the peak — are consistent with what a low-end GPU would produce regardless of CPU strength.

This ranking has implications for anyone considering a similar pairing. The 2,895th position out of 2,939 combos suggests that nearly any GPU from the past decade would outperform this configuration. Even the GPU's nearest rivals (AMD Radeon R5 M330, NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, Quadro K3000M, AMD Radeon Vega 3) are within 1.8% of its benchmark score, meaning they would produce nearly identical in-game results.

The overall picture is one of extreme imbalance. A 12-core, 24-thread Zen 5 processor with 128 MB of L3 cache and a 5.50 GHz boost clock is paired with a 4 GB Pascal GPU from 2016. The CPU's benchmark scores (Geekbench multi-core 22,884, PassMark multi-thread 56,154) are elite, while the GPU's scores (PassMark G3D 6,340, 3DMark Steel Nomad 305) are entry-level. This mismatch produces the low ranking and explains why the FPS data shows GPU-bound behavior at every resolution and settings level.