Minimum

Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter, shows a surprising performance profile on the Intel Core i5-12400 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination. The benchmark data reveals that this pairing is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, but at 1080p, the CPU becomes a significant bottleneck, preventing the RTX 4080 from reaching its full potential. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, interprets the role of each component, and provides actionable settings recommendations based strictly on the provided data.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic and reveals the classic transition from a CPU-limited to a GPU-limited scenario. At Ultra settings, the average frame rate falls from 174 FPS at 1920x1080 to 112 FPS at 2560x1440, and finally to 61 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 36% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 46% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The steep decline at 4K indicates that the rendering resolution is the dominant factor, with the GPU struggling to maintain high frame rates at the highest pixel count.

The scaling pattern shifts dramatically when looking at Low settings. At 1080p Low, the system achieves an average of 356 FPS, which is an exceptionally high number. However, this drops to 230 FPS at 1440p and 124 FPS at 4K. The 356 FPS figure at 1080p strongly suggests that the Intel Core i5-12400’s 6 cores and 12 threads are the limiting factor, as the GPU is clearly capable of producing far more frames than the CPU can feed it. The difference between 1080p and 1440p at Low settings is 126 FPS, a 35% drop, which is far larger than the 1080p to 1440p drop at Ultra (62 FPS, a 36% drop), but the absolute numbers are much higher, pointing to the CPU cap being lifted as resolution increases.

At Medium settings, the trend continues. The system delivers 273 FPS at 1080p, 176 FPS at 1440p, and 95 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 1440p is 97 FPS, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is 81 FPS. This suggests that even at Medium settings, the CPU is still a factor at 1080p, but by 4K, the GPU is the primary bottleneck. The data shows that the most efficient scaling occurs when moving from 1440p to 4K, where the workload shifts almost entirely to the GPU, resulting in a more predictable performance drop.

The limiting component is clearly resolution-dependent. At 1080p, the system is heavily CPU-bound, as evidenced by the 356 FPS Low result. At 4K, the system is GPU-bound, with all settings showing significant frame rate reductions. The 1440p resolution appears to be the sweet spot where the balance between CPU and GPU load is more even, allowing for high frame rates without the CPU bottleneck seen at 1080p.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is a high-end graphics card with 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. Its architecture is Ada Lovelace, built on a 5 nm process, with a boost clock of 2505 MHz. The benchmark results show that this GPU is capable of delivering very high frame rates in Minimum, but its performance is often constrained by the CPU at lower resolutions.

The GPU’s role is most clearly defined at 4K resolution. At 3840x2160, the RTX 4080 produces an average of 61 FPS at Ultra settings, 79 FPS at High, 95 FPS at Medium, and 124 FPS at Low. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a performance reduction of 63 FPS, or roughly 51% of the Low setting’s performance. This indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at this resolution, as the CPU is likely not the limiting factor given the high pixel count.

The VRAM capacity and memory bandwidth are substantial. The 16 GB frame buffer is more than sufficient for Minimum’s textures and geometry at any resolution, and the 716.8 GB/s bandwidth ensures that the GPU can feed its 9728 shading units efficiently. The GPU’s pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s support its ability to handle high resolutions, but the data shows that it still struggles to maintain playable frame rates at 4K Ultra, which is a demanding preset.

In the context of the overall benchmark, the RTX 4080 ranks in the 86th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54247. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER, which has a score of 54209, a delta of 0.1%. This indicates that the RTX 4080 is essentially performance-equivalent to its direct successor, despite having a slightly lower average score. The GPU is also compared to the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X, which scores 54828, a delta of -1.1%, meaning the RTX 4080 is slightly slower in this aggregate benchmark.

The clock speeds are also a factor. The base clock is 2205 MHz, boosting to 2505 MHz. These high clocks, combined with the 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power, allow the GPU to process the game’s shaders and effects quickly. However, the measured FPS at 4K Ultra (61 FPS) suggests that the game’s most demanding settings, such as high-resolution shadows and post-processing, are still taxing for this GPU, even with its substantial compute resources.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The benchmark data clearly shows that this CPU is a bottleneck at 1080p resolution, particularly at lower settings where the GPU is not fully utilized.

The most telling evidence of the CPU bottleneck is the 1080p Low result of 356 FPS. This is an extremely high frame rate, but it is likely near the maximum that the CPU can produce in this game. The 1080p Ultra result of 174 FPS is significantly lower, indicating that the GPU is still doing more work at Ultra, but the CPU is still limiting the overall output. The difference between 1080p Low and 1080p Ultra is 182 FPS, which shows that the settings have a large impact on the GPU workload, but the CPU’s maximum frame output is the ceiling.

In multi-threaded benchmarks, the i5-12400 scores 15989 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 18747 in Passmark multithread. Its single-thread performance is also strong, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2257. These scores suggest that the CPU is capable of handling the game’s logic and draw calls, but the 6 physical cores may not be enough to fully saturate the RTX 4080 at 1080p. The CPU’s percentile rank is 72, meaning it outperforms 72% of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 18683.

The processor’s nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database are the AMD EPYC 7643, which scores 18697 (a delta of -0.1%), and the Intel Core i7-1355U, which scores 18730 (a delta of -0.3%). This places the i5-12400 in the same performance tier as these other processors, despite the EPYC being a server chip and the i7 being a mobile chip. The i5-12400 is also 0.9% faster than the Intel Core i3-14100F, which scores 18519.

At 1440p, the CPU’s role becomes less critical. The 1440p Low result of 230 FPS is still high, but it is significantly lower than the 1080p Low result, indicating that the GPU is now taking on a larger share of the workload. The 1440p Ultra result of 112 FPS is also lower than the 1080p Ultra result, further confirming that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor as resolution increases. The CPU’s boost clock of 4.40 GHz and its 12 threads are sufficient to keep frame rates high at 1440p, but not to the extreme levels seen at 1080p.

The CPU’s memory support for DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel bus, also influences performance. While the specific memory bandwidth is not listed, the dual-channel configuration provides adequate bandwidth for the game. The CPU’s 10 nm process node and 65 W TDP are also notable, but the benchmark data shows that its raw compute power is the primary factor in its gaming performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the maximum average FPS achievable at 1080p with this hardware?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 356 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the peak performance recorded in the data.

Q: Is the system capable of playing Minimum at 4K Ultra settings smoothly?

A: No. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 61, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, but it is very close. The minimum FPS for this setting is not listed, but the average suggests it may be borderline.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 compare to its direct successor in aggregate benchmarks?

A: The RTX 4080 has an average benchmark score of 54247, while its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER, has a score of 54209. The delta is 0.1%, meaning the RTX 4080 is essentially equal in performance.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 2560x1440?

A: At 2560x1440, the average FPS at Low settings is 230, while at Ultra settings it is 112. This represents a 118 FPS, or roughly 51%, reduction in performance when moving from Low to Ultra.

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

A: The data indicates the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p. The 1080p Low result of 356 FPS is likely near the CPU’s maximum output, as the GPU is not fully utilized at such high frame rates.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values recorded for Medium settings?

A: For Medium settings, the minimum FPS is 232 at 1920x1080, 149 at 2560x1440, and 80 at 3840x2160. These are the only settings with recorded minimum FPS values.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience depends on the user’s resolution and preference for frame rate versus visual fidelity. For a balance of performance and quality, High settings at 2560x1440 are the optimal choice, delivering an average of 148 FPS. This provides a smooth, high-refresh-rate experience while maintaining good visual quality, and it avoids the CPU bottleneck seen at 1080p.

For users with a 4K display, the Medium preset at 3840x2160 is the recommended setting. It achieves an average of 95 FPS, with a minimum of 80 FPS, ensuring a consistently playable experience. The jump to High settings at 4K reduces the average to 79 FPS, which is still playable, but the Medium preset offers a better balance with its higher minimum frame rate. Ultra at 4K is not recommended, as the 61 FPS average is too close to the edge of smoothness.

At 1080p, the High preset is the best choice for most users, providing an average of 229 FPS. This is well above the refresh rate of most monitors and avoids the extreme CPU bottleneck seen at Low settings, which produces an average of 356 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1080p, at 174 FPS, is also viable, but it offers diminishing returns for the performance cost. The Medium preset at 1080p, at 273 FPS, is a strong option for competitive play, but it sacrifices some visual quality.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact average FPS for each resolution and settings combination. Minimum and maximum FPS values are only provided for Medium settings.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

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

| 3840x2160 | High | 79 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 124 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 95 | 80 | 109 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 61 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 148 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 230 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 176 | 149 | 202 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 112 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 229 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 356 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 273 | 232 | 313 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 174 | - | - |

Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently provides the highest average FPS, followed by High, Medium, and Ultra in that order. The gap between Low and Ultra is most pronounced at 1080p, with a difference of 182 FPS, and least pronounced at 4K, with a difference of 63 FPS. This pattern reinforces the conclusion that the CPU bottleneck is most severe at 1080p, while the GPU becomes the primary constraint at 4K. The Medium settings provide the only min/max data, showing a consistent range of frame rates across all three resolutions.