Minimum

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the AMD Radeon 8060S sits at rank 1,677 out of 2,939 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the 43rd percentile of all configurations. This is a mid-pack result for a flagship mobile APU, which is telling: despite the CPU's elite standing (95th percentile among all CPUs), the integrated GPU holds this combo back from top-tier performance. The data shows a combo that is competitive but not dominant, with roughly 57% of tested systems outperforming it in this specific title.

Benchmark results indicate that this pairing's positioning is more about balance than raw speed. The CPU's average benchmark score of 77,740 places it within 1.6% of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX and just 1.7% behind the Intel Core i9-14900K in aggregate CPU tests. Yet the GPU's 87th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average score of 55,757, puts it in a different league than the CPU—a discrepancy that becomes apparent in Minimum's frame rates. The Radeon 8060S is effectively the bottleneck in most scenarios, as the CPU has far more headroom than the GPU can exploit.

What's notable is how close the GPU sits to discrete rivals. The Radeon 8060S trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 by just 0.6% in average GPU benchmark score and leads the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB by a mere 0.1%. This suggests the integrated solution is punching well above its weight class, but in Minimum specifically, the measured FPS reveals that sustained gaming performance doesn't always mirror synthetic benchmark parity.

GPU Role

The Radeon 8060S is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture with 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. It also features 40 ray tracing cores, though Minimum—a third-person shooter from 2014—likely doesn't stress RT workloads heavily. The GPU's base clock runs at 1,295 MHz with a boost clock of 2,900 MHz, delivering 14.85 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. This is a substantial amount of raw throughput for an integrated part, and it shows in the game's lower resolution results.

Memory configuration is unusual: the GPU uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," meaning performance scales with the CPU's memory subsystem. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 provides quad-channel LPDDR5X support with 256.0 GB/s of peak bandwidth, which is generous for an APU but still below what discrete GPUs typically access. In Minimum, this shared memory architecture means the GPU competes with the CPU for bandwidth, potentially capping performance in memory-intensive scenes.

The GPU's 87th percentile ranking among all GPUs is respectable, but its nearest rivals reveal a mixed picture. It's virtually tied with the Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (0.1% delta) and the RTX 5080 (-0.6% delta), while sitting 1.7% ahead of the Radeon Pro W5700X and 2.8% ahead of the RTX 4080. These are all discrete cards with dedicated VRAM, so the fact that an integrated GPU keeps pace in synthetic tests is remarkable—yet the measured FPS in Minimum at 4K shows its limits, with Ultra settings dropping to just 32 FPS average.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K tells a clear story about which component limits performance. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 187 FPS average; at 1440p Low, it drops to 121 FPS (-35%); at 4K Low, it falls to 65 FPS (-46% from 1440p). This steep decline as resolution increases is classic GPU-bound behavior—the CPU has ample headroom, but the Radeon 8060S simply cannot maintain frame rates as pixel count grows.

The pattern holds across all settings. At High settings, 1080p yields 120 FPS, 1440p drops to 78 FPS (-35%), and 4K falls to 42 FPS (-46%). Ultra settings show even more severe scaling: 92 FPS at 1080p, 59 FPS at 1440p (-36%), and 32 FPS at 4K (-46%). The consistent ~35% drop from 1080p to 1440p and ~46% drop from 1440p to 4K across every quality preset indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions—the CPU's workload doesn't scale with resolution, so the GPU bears the entire burden.

This scaling behavior has implications for gameplay. At 1080p, the combo delivers playable to excellent frame rates across all settings. At 1440p, it remains fluid at Low (121 FPS) and Medium (92 FPS), but High drops to 78 FPS and Ultra to 59 FPS. At 4K, even Low settings produce only 65 FPS average, and Ultra is borderline unplayable at 32 FPS. The data suggests that 1440p is the practical ceiling for this combo if you want consistent 60+ FPS, and 1080p is where it truly shines.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers strong results across all presets. Low settings produce 187 FPS average, Medium hits 143 FPS (with min/max of 122/165), High reaches 120 FPS, and Ultra still manages 92 FPS. These numbers indicate a smooth experience at 1080p regardless of quality settings—even Ultra stays above 90 FPS, which is more than adequate for a third-person shooter from 2014.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance remains respectable but starts to show strain. Low settings yield 121 FPS, Medium drops to 92 FPS (min/max 79/106), High falls to 78 FPS, and Ultra sits at 59 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 62 FPS, a wider spread than at 1080p where it's 95 FPS—suggesting that as resolution increases, the GPU becomes more sensitive to quality settings, but the absolute ceiling for Ultra is still barely above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the integrated GPU's limitations become pronounced. Low settings produce 65 FPS average, Medium drops to 50 FPS (min/max 42/57), High falls to 42 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 32 FPS. Only Low settings at 4K approach playability, and even that is marginal. The medium preset's min FPS of 42 indicates occasional dips below 45 FPS, which could be noticeable in fast-paced combat scenarios. Ultra at 4K is effectively a slideshow, with frame rates below what most players would find acceptable for a shooter.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset is the only one with recorded min/max values (122/165 at 1080p, 79/106 at 1440p, 42/57 at 4K), suggesting it's the most stable in terms of frame pacing. The absence of min/max data for other presets doesn't necessarily mean they're less stable, but the available data indicates Medium offers consistent performance with a ~30% variance between min and max at each resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the Medium preset at 1080p offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. At 143 FPS average with a minimum of 122 FPS, it stays well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides headroom for demanding scenes. The 1440p Medium preset (92 FPS average, 79 min) is also viable if you prefer higher resolution, though the min FPS dips closer to 75, which is still comfortable for most displays.

For players prioritizing frame rate above all else, 1080p Low at 187 FPS is the clear choice—this is the highest measured average across all configurations. However, Low settings likely sacrifice visual fidelity that matters in a game like Minimum, where environmental detail can affect gameplay awareness. The 1080p High preset (120 FPS) is a strong middle ground, offering improved visuals while maintaining triple-digit frame rates.

At 1440p, the choice is starker. Low (121 FPS) and Medium (92 FPS) are both playable, but High (78 FPS) and Ultra (59 FPS) fall short of the 60 FPS target on paper. If you have a 144Hz 1440p monitor, you'll want to stick with Low or Medium; if you're on a 60Hz display, High is acceptable but Ultra is borderline. At 4K, only Low (65 FPS) is recommended—Medium (50 FPS) and above will likely feel sluggish in a shooter where reaction time matters.

The data suggests that Medium settings provide the most consistent experience across all resolutions, with the smallest proportional gap between average and minimum FPS. This makes it the safest choice for unpredictable gameplay moments, as the min FPS recorded (42 at 4K, 79 at 1440p, 122 at 1080p) indicates the floor is higher relative to the average than with other presets.

CPU Role

The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on Zen 5 architecture (Strix Halo), with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. It's built on a 4nm TSMC process with 64 MB of shared L3 cache and 1 MB L2 per core. This is a monstrous CPU for a mobile part, with a 95th percentile ranking among all CPUs and an average benchmark score of 77,740—placing it within 1.6% of the Threadripper PRO 9945WX and 2% ahead of the Ryzen 9 8945HX.

In Minimum, the CPU's role is largely to feed the GPU without becoming a bottleneck. The game is from 2014, so single-thread performance matters more than multi-core scaling, and the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 delivers strong single-core results: 2,044 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 4,147 in Passmark single-thread. These scores place it firmly in high-end territory, and the data shows no evidence of CPU limitation in the measured FPS—the frame rates scale with resolution and settings in a way that's characteristic of GPU-bound workloads.

The CPU's multi-threaded prowess (35,314 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 20,992 in Geekbench multi-core) is overkill for Minimum, but it ensures that any background tasks or streaming overhead won't impact gaming performance. The 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth from quad-channel LPDDR5X is also critical, as the GPU relies on system memory—this bandwidth figure is likely what allows the Radeon 8060S to approach discrete GPU performance in synthetic tests, though it still falls short in sustained gaming loads.

The CPU's nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks include the Intel Core i9-14900K (-1.7% delta) and the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P (1.6% delta), which are both desktop or server parts. This indicates the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is truly desktop-class in a mobile form factor, yet in Minimum, the GPU's 87th percentile ranking means the CPU's extra headroom goes unused. Players would see no meaningful FPS gain from a faster CPU in this title—the Radeon 8060S is the definitive limiting factor.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1080p provides the most comfortable experience, with all settings above 90 FPS average. At 1440p, only Low and Medium maintain 60+ FPS, while 4K is only playable at Low settings (65 FPS average).

Q: How does the Radeon 8060S compare to discrete GPUs in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Radeon 8060S has an average benchmark score of 55,757, placing it 0.1% ahead of the Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB and 0.6% behind the RTX 5080. It also leads the Radeon Pro W5700X by 1.7% and the RTX 4080 by 2.8%.

Q: Is the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 CPU a bottleneck in this game?

A: No. The CPU ranks in the 95th percentile among all CPUs with an average score of 77,740, and the FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K shows GPU-bound behavior. The CPU has significant headroom that the integrated GPU cannot fully utilize.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1440p Ultra settings?

A: The measured data shows 59 FPS average at 2560x1440 Ultra. This is just below the 60 FPS target, so you may experience minor dips below 60 in demanding scenes, though it remains playable on a 60Hz display.

Q: How much performance drops when moving from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 120 at 1080p to 78 at 1440p (a 35% reduction), then to 42 at 4K (a 46% reduction from 1440p). This steep scaling indicates the GPU is the limiting component.

Q: Which settings preset offers the most stable frame pacing?

A: Medium is the only preset with recorded min/max FPS values at all resolutions. At 1080p, it ranges from 122 to 165 FPS; at 1440p, 79 to 106 FPS; at 4K, 42 to 57 FPS. The relatively narrow range suggests stable performance.