Minimum

# Minimum with Intel Core i5-10400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti

This pairing combines a 6-core, 12-thread Comet Lake processor with a 12 GB Ampere flagship, producing results that swing dramatically depending on resolution and settings. The data reveals a combo that is clearly GPU-bound at 4K, CPU-bound at 1080p, and remarkably well-balanced in between — though the 2014 title's engine shows its age in unexpected ways.

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

The Intel Core i5-10400F brings 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Its 12 MB shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support (42.7 GB/s bandwidth) position it as a solid mid-range desktop part from the Comet Lake generation. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU achieves a single-thread score of 688 in 3DMark, 146 in Cinebench R15 single-core, and 609 in Cinebench R20 single-core — figures that suggest modest per-core performance by modern standards.

The multi-threaded results tell a more interesting story. The i5-10400F scores 4,748 in 3DMark's 16-thread test and 4,735 in max-threads, while Cinebench R23 multi-core reaches 10,283. The passmark multithread score of 12,115 and geekbench multi-core of 6,257 indicate that this 6-core part scales reasonably well with threaded workloads, but the game in question — a 2014 third-person shooter — likely does not leverage all 12 threads effectively. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 1,350 compared to the 4-thread score of 2,560 shows that scaling efficiency drops as thread count increases, which is typical for older game engines.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 68 places it above most processors in the database, with nearest rivals including the Intel Xeon 6756E (0.2% higher average score) and AMD EPYC 7552 (0.5% higher). The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C sits 0.6% below, while the Intel Core 7 160UL is 0.3% lower in average score. These tight margins suggest the i5-10400F is competitively positioned in raw compute, but the single-thread performance — where older games often bottleneck — shows a passmark single-thread score of 2,541 and geekbench single-core of 1,420.

At 1080p with Low settings, the combo reaches 271 FPS average, which is the highest frame rate in the entire measured set. This suggests that even at this extreme, the CPU is not fully saturated, or the game's engine has a frame ceiling. The drop from Low to Ultra at 1080p (271 down to 136 FPS) is substantial, but the fact that Ultra still delivers 136 FPS indicates the CPU can handle the game's worst-case draw calls without collapsing. The 2.90 GHz base clock is rarely the limiting factor; rather, the 4.30 GHz boost is what carries the high-refresh scenarios.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is built on the GA102 chip with 10,240 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output pipelines. Its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory runs at 19 Gbps effective across a 384-bit bus, yielding 912.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The base clock of 1365 MHz boosts to 1665 MHz, and the card maintains a pixel rate of 186.5 GPixel/s with a texture rate of 532.8 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput of 34.10 TFLOPS places this GPU firmly in the high-end tier, though its 350 W TDP and 750 W suggested PSU indicate substantial power requirements.

Benchmark results show the RTX 3080 Ti achieving a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5,077, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 170,037, and a Vulkan score of 192,697. The passmark G3D score of 26,896 and GPU compute score of 15,282 further confirm its strong raw performance. With an 83rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, it sits near the top of the database — though its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (0.8% higher average score) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (2% higher), which is notable given the generational gap.

At 4K Ultra, this GPU produces only 47 FPS average, which is surprisingly low for such a powerful card. The 12 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for a 2014 title, so the limitation is not memory capacity. Rather, the game's rendering pipeline at Ultra settings appears to be extremely demanding on the GPU's compute resources, dropping below 60 FPS. At 4K Low, the 3080 Ti delivers 96 FPS — a 49 FPS jump from Ultra — which suggests that the Ultra preset introduces effects that disproportionately tax the Ampere architecture.

The GPU's memory bandwidth of 912.4 GB/s is ample for 4K textures, but the measured FPS at 4K High (62 FPS) versus 1080p High (178 FPS) shows a 116 FPS difference. This is a clear indication that at 4K, the GPU becomes the primary constraint, with the CPU's role diminishing as resolution increases.

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

The measured data provides a clear picture of how this combo scales across resolutions. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 271 at 1080p to 179 at 1440p (a 34% reduction) and then to 96 at 4K (a 46% reduction from 1440p). This steep decline suggests that even at Low settings, the GPU is heavily taxed at higher resolutions — the 3080 Ti's raw power is being consumed by pixel throughput rather than advanced effects.

At High settings, the scaling is similar: 178 FPS at 1080p, 115 FPS at 1440p (35% drop), and 62 FPS at 4K (46% drop from 1440p). The consistency of these percentage drops across Low and High settings indicates that resolution scaling is largely independent of graphical complexity — the GPU's pixel processing rate is the dominant factor, not the specific settings applied.

Medium settings show the same pattern: 212 FPS at 1080p, 137 FPS at 1440p (35% drop), and 74 FPS at 4K (46% drop). The Ultra preset, however, tells a slightly different story. From 1080p Ultra (136 FPS) to 1440p Ultra (87 FPS) is a 36% reduction, and from 1440p to 4K Ultra (47 FPS) is a 46% reduction. The Ultra preset's additional effects (likely including higher shadow resolution, ambient occlusion, and post-processing) amplify the GPU load, but the percentage scaling remains remarkably consistent.

The fact that 1080p Low (271 FPS) is nearly double 1080p Ultra (136 FPS) suggests that the game's Ultra preset at 1080p is where the GPU starts to become the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the CPU may be the bottleneck — the 271 FPS ceiling could be a game engine limit or a CPU limitation, as the i5-10400F's single-thread performance begins to show its age. The data implies that this combo is CPU-bound at 1080p Low, balanced at 1080p Medium/High and 1440p, and firmly GPU-bound at 4K across all settings.

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

1920x1080: The lowest resolution tested shows the highest frame rates, with Low settings hitting 271 FPS average. Medium settings produce 212 FPS average with a minimum of 180 and maximum of 244 FPS, indicating some frame pacing variance. High settings yield 178 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 136 FPS. The gap between Medium and High (34 FPS) is smaller than the gap between High and Ultra (42 FPS), suggesting that the Ultra preset adds computationally expensive effects that disproportionately impact performance.

2560x1440: At 1440p, Low settings deliver 179 FPS average, which remains above 144 Hz refresh rates. Medium settings produce 137 FPS average with a minimum of 116 and maximum of 157 FPS — a 41 FPS variance that could be noticeable on high-refresh displays. High settings drop to 115 FPS, and Ultra falls to 87 FPS. The 1440p results show that this combo can still deliver smooth gameplay at High settings (115 FPS) but Ultra pushes below the 90 FPS threshold, which may be preferable for competitive play.

3840x2160: At 4K, the GPU's limitations become apparent. Low settings achieve 96 FPS average, which is playable but not high-refresh territory. Medium settings produce 74 FPS average with a minimum of 63 and maximum of 85 FPS — this range indicates occasional dips that could be felt during intense action. High settings yield 62 FPS average, which is just above the 60 FPS standard. Ultra settings drop to 47 FPS average, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold and would be noticeable in a fast-paced third-person shooter.

The Medium settings at each resolution include min/max FPS data, which provides insight into frame consistency. At 1080p Medium, the range is 180-244 FPS (64 FPS spread). At 1440p Medium, the range is 116-157 FPS (41 FPS spread). At 4K Medium, the range is 63-85 FPS (22 FPS spread). Interestingly, the absolute variance shrinks as resolution increases, but the relative variance (as a percentage of average FPS) remains similar — approximately 30% at 1080p, 30% at 1440p, and 30% at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti ranks 1,013 out of 3,712 tested combos in this game. That places it in the top 27% of all tested configurations, which is respectable but not elite. The rank of 1,013 suggests that there are 1,012 other combos that deliver better performance in Minimum, many of which likely feature newer CPUs with higher single-thread performance or GPUs with more modern architectures.

The CPU's 68th percentile ranking and the GPU's 83rd percentile ranking would suggest a combo that should rank higher than 1,013. However, the game's age and its likely dependence on single-thread CPU performance may be dragging the combo down. The i5-10400F's passmark single-thread score of 2,541 and geekbench single-core of 1,420 are modest by current standards, and the game's engine may not scale well with the 12 threads available.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (0.8% higher average score) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (2% higher), which are both newer architectures. The fact that the RTX 3080 Ti sits below the RTX 5070 in average benchmark score, despite being a higher-tier card at launch, suggests that the game may not fully utilize the 3080 Ti's Ampere-specific features.

The combo rank of 1,013 out of 3,712 means that approximately 73% of tested combos perform worse, but it also means 27% perform better. For a 2014 game, this rank indicates that the combo is more than capable of running the game smoothly at most settings, but it is not optimized for absolute top-tier performance — likely due to the CPU's single-thread limitations at high frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Minimum?

A: The highest average FPS is 271, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Does this combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K with Ultra settings?

A: No, at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 47, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance compare to its multi-thread performance in this game?

A: The CPU shows a passmark single-thread score of 2,541 versus a multithread score of 12,115, indicating that multi-threaded workloads are well-served, but the game's likely dependence on single-thread performance means the 3DMark single-thread score of 688 may be more relevant for frame rate limits.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Medium and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium settings produce 137 FPS average, while Ultra settings produce 87 FPS — a difference of 50 FPS.

Q: Is this combo better ranked in the database for CPU or GPU performance?

A: The GPU ranks in the 83rd percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU ranks in the 68th percentile among all CPUs, indicating the GPU is the stronger component relative to its peers.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded at 1080p Medium settings?

A: The minimum FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings is 180, with a maximum of 244 and an average of 212.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal experience depends on the target resolution. For 1080p displays, Medium settings at 212 FPS average provide the best balance between visual quality and performance — the 180 FPS minimum ensures smooth gameplay even in demanding scenes, while the 244 FPS maximum leaves headroom for high-refresh monitors. High settings at 178 FPS are also viable, but the 34 FPS drop from Medium may not justify the visual gains.

At 1440p, High settings at 115 FPS average are the sweet spot. This delivers above-100 FPS gameplay that is smooth on most displays, while Medium settings at 137 FPS offer a safer margin for 144 Hz monitors. Ultra at 87 FPS is playable but may exhibit dips below 60 FPS in intense moments, making it less ideal for competitive play.

For 4K, Medium settings at 74 FPS average with a minimum of 63 FPS are the best choice — this stays above 60 FPS at all times, providing a consistent experience. High settings at 62 FPS average are borderline, with potential dips below 60 FPS. Ultra at 47 FPS is not recommended for this game, as the frame rate is too low for a fast-paced third-person shooter.

The data suggests that this combo is best utilized at 1080p with Medium-to-High settings or 1440p with High settings, where it delivers frame rates well above the 60 FPS standard. At 4K, Medium settings provide the most stable experience, while Ultra should be avoided unless visual fidelity takes priority over gameplay smoothness.