Minimum

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a classic entry-level desktop combination, and in Minimum it lands near the very bottom of the database. The data shows this combo ranks 1655th out of 1733 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 5% of all systems. This is not a build for high-refresh-rate competitive play, but the measured frames reveal it can still deliver a playable experience at 1080p with the right settings. The GTX 1650’s 4 GB VRAM and the i5-11400F’s six cores are the defining factors here, and the benchmark results show a clear hierarchy across resolutions and presets.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combination consistently exceeds 60 FPS. At Low settings it averages 78.7 FPS, and at Medium it hits 61.5 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 drops the average to 55 FPS at Low, which is still playable but less smooth.

Q: Can this system handle Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: Barely. The measured average at 1920x1080 Ultra is 38.8 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold most players target. At 2560x1440 Ultra the average falls to 28 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Ultra it collapses to 12.4 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The GTX 1650’s average benchmark score is 8713. The nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, scores 8746 (0.4% higher), while the AMD Radeon 550X scores 8749 (0.4% higher). The NVIDIA Quadro P2200 is 0.5% lower at 8671, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is 0.5% higher at 8761. Essentially, performance is identical to these peers.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-11400F a bottleneck in this game?

A: Given the GPU’s low percentile ranking (43rd among all GPUs), the CPU is unlikely to be the primary constraint. The i5-11400F scores 14372 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2029 in single-core, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. In a 2014 title like Minimum, the CPU has ample headroom.

Q: What is the most demanding setting tested?

A: The 3840x2160 Ultra preset is the most punishing, yielding an average of only 12.4 FPS. This is less than half the frame rate of 3840x2160 High (19.5 FPS), showing a massive performance penalty for the Ultra preset at 4K.

Q: Is there a settings preset that balances quality and performance?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080 Medium, the combo averages 61.5 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS mark. This is the highest quality preset that maintains a smooth experience at the most common resolution, making it the sweet spot in the measured data.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the limiting factor in this configuration. Its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth, and the card operates at a base clock of 1485 MHz with a boost of 1665 MHz. The benchmark results show that this GPU’s performance is heavily dependent on resolution and preset. At 1920x1080, the card transitions from a playable 78.7 FPS at Low to a choppy 38.8 FPS at Ultra, a drop of roughly 51% from the lowest to highest preset. The pattern repeats at higher resolutions: at 2560x1440, Low yields 55 FPS while Ultra drops to 28 FPS, and at 3840x2160, Low produces 28.7 FPS while Ultra falls to 12.4 FPS.

The VRAM capacity of 4 GB is the likely culprit for the steep falloff at Ultra settings, especially at 4K where texture demands exceed what the card can comfortably hold. The GPU’s overall standing is modest, with a percentile ranking of 43rd among all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 8713. Its nearest rivals—the RTX 3050 A Mobile, Radeon 550X, Quadro P2200, and Radeon Pro WX 5100—all sit within 0.5% of its score, meaning the GTX 1650 is effectively the baseline for this performance tier. In Minimum, the GPU’s 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 53.28 GPixel/s pixel rate are sufficient for 1080p gaming but struggle to maintain frame rates as the resolution climbs.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s position in the database is stark: it ranks 1655th out of 1733 tested configurations. This places it in the bottom 5% of all systems, which is consistent with the GTX 1650’s low GPU percentile and the i5-11400F’s mid-range CPU standing. The disparity between the CPU’s 75th percentile ranking and the GPU’s 43rd percentile is notable—the processor is far more capable than the graphics card, meaning the GPU is the bottleneck in almost every scenario.

Compared to other combos in the database, this system is not designed for high-end play. The measured FPS data confirms that it can only reach 60+ FPS at 1080p with Low or Medium settings. The 1655th rank suggests that most other tested combinations, even those with similarly modest GPUs, outperform it in Minimum. However, the ranking is not a total failure: the combo does beat 78 other configurations, and the 1080p Low result of 78.7 FPS shows it is capable of smooth gameplay when settings are dialed back. For a 2014 third-person shooter, this is a functional, if unspectacular, pairing.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low averages 78.7 FPS, Medium averages 61.5 FPS, High averages 50.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 38.8 FPS. This is the only resolution where the combo exceeds 60 FPS, and it does so at both Low and Medium presets. The step from Medium to High costs 11.1 FPS, while the step from High to Ultra costs another 11.6 FPS, showing a consistent penalty for each quality tier.

At 2560x1440, performance drops significantly. Low averages 55 FPS, Medium averages 42 FPS, High averages 36.5 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 27 FPS, meaning the Ultra preset is nearly half the speed of Low. This resolution is playable only at Low, where the frame rate remains above 50 FPS. At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to remain playable at any setting. Low averages 28.7 FPS, Medium averages 24 FPS, High averages 19.5 FPS, and Ultra averages 12.4 FPS. None of these results reach 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum for a non-playable experience.

The data shows a clear trend: each resolution jump halves the available headroom, and each preset increase imposes a roughly 20-30% performance penalty. The most extreme example is the difference between 1920x1080 Low (78.7 FPS) and 3840x2160 Ultra (12.4 FPS), a 66.3 FPS gap that illustrates the GPU’s limitations at high pixel counts.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F is a six-core, twelve-thread processor based on the Rocket Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 14 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with 12 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 14372 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2029 in single-core, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 7579 and single-core of 1979. These numbers place the CPU in the 75th percentile of all processors, well above the GPU’s standing.

In Minimum, a title released in 2014, the CPU’s role is largely supportive. The game’s engine is not likely to stress all twelve threads, but the i5-11400F’s strong single-core performance (868 in 3DMark single-thread) ensures it can feed the GPU without becoming a bottleneck. The benchmark data supports this: at 1080p Low, the GPU is clearly the limit, as the combo achieves 78.7 FPS, which is a typical result for a GTX 1650 in a light load. The CPU’s 65 W TDP and dual-channel DDR4 memory support (51.2 GB/s bandwidth) are standard for this class, and its nearest rivals—the Ryzen 7 5700U, Core i7-1260P, Core Ultra 7 164U, and Core i5-1240U—all score within 0.2% of it, confirming its mid-range positioning. For this game, the CPU is not the constraint; the GPU is.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data points to a clear best choice: 1920x1080 with the Medium preset. This yields an average of 61.5 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay, while still providing better visual quality than Low. The Low preset at 1080p offers more headroom at 78.7 FPS, but the jump from Low to Medium only costs 17.2 FPS, making Medium the better balance of performance and fidelity. High at 1080p drops to 50.4 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold, so it is not recommended unless the player prioritizes visuals over smoothness.

For players with a 1440p monitor, the Low preset is the only viable option, averaging 55 FPS. Medium at 1440p drops to 42 FPS, which is playable but noticeably less fluid. At 4K, no preset is recommended, as even Low averages only 28.7 FPS, which is below the playable threshold. The Ultra presets at any resolution are best avoided—the 1080p Ultra result of 38.8 FPS and the 1440p Ultra result of 28 FPS are not worth the visual gains. The data shows that this combo’s sweet spot is 1080p Medium, with 1080p Low as a fallback for players who prioritize frame rate above all else.