Minimum

The pairing of an Intel Core i5-12400 with an AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT delivers a powerful 1080p and 1440p experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. The measured data shows this combo ranks 617th out of 1733 tested combinations, placing it in the upper third of all systems. At 1440p, the system comfortably exceeds 100 FPS on High settings, while 4K remains playable only with settings adjustments. The results reveal a system that is primarily GPU-bound at higher resolutions but capable of extreme frame rates at 1080p, making it a versatile choice for competitive play and high-refresh-rate monitors.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark data provides a clear hierarchy of performance across four presets. For players prioritizing smoothness, the Low preset delivers exceptional frame rates: 260.7 FPS at 1080p, 163.4 FPS at 1440p, and 86.5 FPS at 4K. These figures indicate that Low settings are overkill for most displays, providing headroom far beyond typical 144Hz or 165Hz monitors.

The Medium preset offers a compelling balance, reducing frame rates by roughly 23% compared to Low across all resolutions (200.7 vs 260.7 at 1080p; 128.7 vs 163.4 at 1440p; 69.8 vs 86.5 at 4K). This preset maintains high playability while presumably improving visual fidelity. High settings continue the trend, with 166.9 FPS at 1080p and 109.9 FPS at 1440p, making it the best choice for 144Hz gaming at those resolutions.

The Ultra preset imposes a significant performance penalty, dropping frame rates to 123.9 FPS at 1080p, 78.4 FPS at 1440p, and 42 FPS at 4K. The step from High to Ultra costs roughly 26% performance at 1080p (166.9 to 123.9) and 29% at 1440p (109.9 to 78.4). Given that High already delivers strong visuals, Ultra appears to be a demanding option that only makes sense for players who prioritize maximum image quality over frame rate. The data suggests High is the optimal preset for most users, offering a 52% performance advantage over Ultra at 1440p while likely delivering near-identical visual results in a 2014 title.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is the dominant component in this system for Minimum, particularly at higher resolutions. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth provides ample headroom for texture-heavy scenes. The GPU's boost clock of 2250 MHz and game clock of 2015 MHz, combined with 4608 shading units, drive the measured performance. The card posts a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3689 and a Passmark G3D score of 24980, placing it in the 87th percentile of all GPUs.

The GPU's influence is most apparent in the scaling between presets. At 4K, the difference between Low and Ultra is 44.5 FPS (86.5 vs 42), a 106% performance swing that indicates the GPU is fully taxed by higher settings. At 1080p, the same preset swing shows a 136.8 FPS difference (260.7 vs 123.9), but the absolute frame rates remain high, suggesting the GPU still has excess capacity even at Ultra. The card's 20.74 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 288.0 GPixel/s pixel rate explain why it can sustain high frame rates even in demanding scenarios, though the 2014 game engine may not fully utilize modern features like DirectX 12 Ultimate support.

FAQ

Q: Can this system maintain 144 FPS at 1440p?

A: Yes, but only with the right settings. The Medium preset delivers 128.7 FPS, while High achieves 109.9 FPS. To hit 144 FPS, players must use Low settings, which produce 163.4 FPS at 1440p.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with this combo?

A: At 4K, the system delivers 86.5 FPS on Low and 69.8 FPS on Medium, which are playable for most titles. High drops to 58.5 FPS, while Ultra falls to 42 FPS, which may feel sluggish for a fast-paced third-person shooter.

Q: How does the RX 6800 XT compare to its nearest rivals in this game?

A: The RX 6800 XT's average benchmark score of 49982 is 2.6% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER (48704) and 0.5% higher than the Intel Arc A550M (49737). It trails the NVIDIA RTX A1000 by 1.7% (50826).

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p with maximum settings?

A: Ultra settings produce 123.9 FPS at 1080p. This is sufficient for 120Hz displays but falls short of 144Hz monitors, requiring a drop to High settings (166.9 FPS) for full refresh-rate utilization.

Q: Does the CPU limit performance at any resolution?

A: At 1080p Low settings, the system reaches 260.7 FPS, which likely approaches the CPU's practical limit for this game engine. The i5-12400's 6 cores and 12 threads with a 4.40 GHz boost clock provide strong single-thread performance, but extreme frame rates can expose CPU bottlenecks.

Q: How much performance is lost between Medium and Ultra at 1440p?

A: The drop from Medium (128.7 FPS) to Ultra (78.4 FPS) represents a 39% performance loss. This is a substantial cost for the visual improvements Ultra provides.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all presets. Low settings achieve 260.7 FPS, Medium produces 200.7 FPS, High reaches 166.9 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 123.9 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a 52% reduction in frame rate, highlighting the substantial cost of maximum settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance scales predictably. Low settings yield 163.4 FPS, Medium delivers 128.7 FPS, High provides 109.9 FPS, and Ultra manages 78.4 FPS. The 1440p results represent roughly 63-67% of the 1080p numbers across presets, consistent with the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the system becomes more constrained. Low settings produce 86.5 FPS, Medium drops to 69.8 FPS, High falls to 58.5 FPS, and Ultra limps to 42 FPS. The 4K results are approximately 33-34% of the 1080p figures, reflecting the fourfold increase in pixel count. The data shows that 4K gaming is only viable with Low or Medium settings, while 1440p offers the best balance of visual quality and frame rate.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 1440p reduces frame rates by approximately 37% across all presets (260.7 to 163.4 for Low, 200.7 to 128.7 for Medium, 166.9 to 109.9 for High, 123.9 to 78.4 for Ultra). This scaling is roughly proportional to the 78% increase in pixel count, indicating the GPU is the primary limiting factor.

The step from 1440p to 4K is more punishing, with frame rates dropping by 47-49% (163.4 to 86.5 for Low, 128.7 to 69.8 for Medium, 109.9 to 58.5 for High, 78.4 to 42 for Ultra). This steeper decline suggests that at 4K, the RX 6800 XT's 16 GB memory and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth become more critical, and the GPU's compute resources are stretched further. The pattern indicates the system is GPU-bound at all resolutions, with the CPU providing sufficient headroom even at 1080p Low where frame rates exceed 260 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 plays a supporting role in Minimum, providing enough processing power to avoid bottlenecking the RX 6800 XT in most scenarios. Its 6 cores and 12 threads with a 2.50 GHz base clock and 4.40 GHz boost clock deliver strong single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2249 and a 3DMark single-thread score of 910. The processor's 18 MB of shared L3 cache helps maintain consistent frame pacing.

In multi-threaded workloads, the i5-12400 achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15935 and a Passmark multithread score of 18747, placing it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-9700 (0.1% faster), Intel Core i7-8700 (0.2% slower), and Intel Core i5-11600K (0.4% slower), indicating the i5-12400 is competitively positioned for gaming workloads.

The 1080p Low result of 260.7 FPS suggests the CPU approaches its limits at extreme frame rates, but for typical gaming scenarios at 1440p or 4K, the processor has ample headroom. The 65W TDP and 10 nm process node make it an efficient choice, though its locked multiplier prevents overclocking. For a 2014 title like Minimum, the i5-12400's architecture is more than sufficient, with the GPU clearly dictating overall performance based on the resolution scaling data.