Minimum

The pairing of the Intel Core i5-12400 with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER delivers a capable 1080p and 1440p experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. The data indicates that this combination is firmly mid-pack, ranking 1073 out of 1733 tested combos, placing it in the 62nd percentile of all tested systems. The benchmark results show a system that scales predictably with resolution and settings, with the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck as resolution increases.

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

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Alder Lake-S family, running on a 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The processor features 18 MB of shared L3 cache and a dual-channel memory bus supporting DDR4 and DDR5. Its benchmark scores are solid, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15935 and a single-core score of 2249. The PassMark single-thread score of 3456 and the 3DMark single-thread score of 910 indicate strong per-core performance.

In this game, the CPU appears to be more than sufficient. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 185.1 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate in the dataset. This suggests that at lower resolutions and settings, the CPU is not the limiting factor. The processor's 12 threads and high boost clock provide ample headroom for the game's logic and physics. The data implies that the i5-12400 is well-matched for this title, as the frame rates at 1080p are not CPU-bound even at the highest settings. The processor's performance relative to its nearest rivals is noteworthy; it is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-9700 and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i5-11600K, while being 0.2% behind the Intel Core i7-8700. These marginal differences in synthetic benchmarks suggest that in a game like Minimum, the CPU choice among these options would have a negligible impact on the final frame rate.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER is built on the 12 nm Turing architecture and features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 1605 MHz and a boost clock of 1770 MHz, with a memory clock of 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). It contains 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its raw compute power is rated at 9.062 TFLOPS for FP32 operations.

The GPU's role becomes increasingly apparent as the resolution and settings rise. The 8 GB VRAM is likely sufficient for this game, but the processing power of the TU104 chip is what drives the frame rate differences. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 18169 and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1651 show a mid-range to upper-mid-range performance tier. Compared to its nearest rivals, the RTX 2070 SUPER is 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z and 2.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5700. It is 0.5% behind the NVIDIA RTX A400 and 2.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile. The data shows that the GPU is the primary determinant of performance at higher settings, as the frame rates drop significantly when moving from Low to Ultra at the same resolution, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound scenarios.

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

The scaling of frame rates across resolutions tells a clear story about system balance. At 1080p High, the system produces 119.1 FPS, which drops to 76.9 FPS at 1440p High (a 35.4% reduction) and further to 41.5 FPS at 4K High (a 65.2% reduction from 1080p). This steep decline with increasing pixel count indicates that the GPU is the limiting component at higher resolutions. The CPU's performance is held constant across these tests, so the frame rate drop can be attributed almost entirely to the RTX 2070 SUPER's rendering workload.

The trend is consistent across all settings. At Low settings, the frame rates are 185.1 FPS at 1080p, 119.2 FPS at 1440p, and 64.7 FPS at 4K. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Low is a 35.6% drop, and from 1080p to 4K is a 65.1% drop. This consistency suggests that the GPU is the bottleneck at all resolutions, even at Low settings where the CPU could theoretically be more involved. The data implies that the i5-12400 provides enough processing power to keep up with the GPU at 1080p Low, but the GPU's limits are reached as the pixel count increases. The fact that the frame rate nearly triples from 4K Ultra (33.2 FPS) to 1080p Low (185.1 FPS) underscores the GPU's role as the primary constraint in this configuration.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and desired smoothness. For a standard 60 FPS target, 1440p High is a strong choice, delivering 76.9 FPS. This provides a significant visual upgrade over Low settings while maintaining a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. At 1440p, Ultra is a less attractive option, as it drops to 57.3 FPS, which may be noticeable in a fast-paced third-person shooter. The Medium preset at 1440p offers 94.7 FPS, which is 23.2% higher than High, making it a good alternative for players who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity.

At 1080p, the situation is more flexible. The High preset hits 119.1 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate monitors. The Ultra preset at 1080p still achieves 89.4 FPS, which is playable but a 24.9% reduction compared to High. Given the minimal visual differences between High and Ultra in many games, the data suggests that High is the sweet spot for 1080p, offering a 33.2% improvement over Ultra. The Medium preset at 1080p reaches 141.9 FPS, which is ideal for 144Hz displays. For 4K, the results are less favorable. The High preset yields 41.5 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. The Low preset at 4K produces 64.7 FPS, which is the only 4K setting that breaks 60 FPS. Therefore, for 4K gaming, Low settings are recommended to maintain playability, while High and Ultra are best avoided unless the player accepts lower frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i5-12400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks 1073 out of 1733 tested combos in Minimum. This puts it in the 38th percentile from the bottom, or 62nd percentile from the top, indicating a middle-of-the-pack performance. The ranking suggests that while this system is not a top-tier performer, it is far from being underpowered. The data implies that there are 660 combinations that perform worse, which means this setup is better than a significant portion of the tested hardware. However, it also means that 1072 combinations perform better, so there is ample room for improvement if higher frame rates are desired.

The ranking is a holistic measure that considers the combined performance of both components. Given the CPU's strong synthetic benchmarks (77th percentile among all CPUs) and the GPU's moderate standing (65th percentile among all GPUs), the overall rank of 1073 seems consistent with the expectation that the system is balanced but not exceptional. The deltaPct values for the CPU's nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of the i5-12400, suggesting that swapping the CPU for a similar-tier part would not significantly alter the combo's ranking. The GPU's nearest rivals also show small deltas (within 2.5%), further reinforcing the idea that this combo's rank is a stable representation of its performance class.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average FPS this combination can achieve in Minimum?*

A: The highest measured average FPS is 185.1, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this system maintain 60 FPS at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but only on Low settings, where it achieves 64.7 FPS. The Medium, High, and Ultra presets at 4K all fall below 60 FPS, with 51.3, 41.5, and 33.2 FPS respectively.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-12400 is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-9700 and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i5-11600K. It is 0.2% behind the Intel Core i7-8700 and 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX.

Q: What is the performance difference between High and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the High preset delivers 76.9 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers 57.3 FPS. This represents a 25.5% reduction in frame rate when moving from High to Ultra.

Q: Is the GPU or the CPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary limiter. At 1080p, moving from Low (185.1 FPS) to Ultra (89.4 FPS) results in a 51.7% drop in performance, which is a GPU workload characteristic. The CPU's strong single-thread scores suggest it is not the bottleneck.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank among all tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 1073 out of 1733 tested combinations, placing it in the upper-middle tier of all tested systems.

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

The following table lists the exact average FPS values measured for each resolution and settings preset.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS |

|---|---|---|

| 3840x2160 | High | 41.5 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 64.7 |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 51.3 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 33.2 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 76.9 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 119.2 |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 94.7 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 57.3 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 119.1 |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 185.1 |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 141.9 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 89.4 |

The data shows a clear pattern: at every settings level, the frame rate decreases as resolution increases. The most significant absolute drop is from 1080p Low (185.1 FPS) to 4K Low (64.7 FPS), which is a 65.1% reduction. The least significant relative drop is from 1080p Ultra (89.4 FPS) to 1440p Ultra (57.3 FPS), which is a 35.9% reduction. This suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth and compute capacity are the limiting factors, as the scaling is consistent across all presets. The 1080p Medium setting (141.9 FPS) and 1440p Low setting (119.2 FPS) are the best choices for high-refresh-rate gaming, while 4K is only viable on Low settings for a 60 FPS experience.