Minimum

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB delivers a playable but constrained experience in Minimum, a third-person shooter released in 2014. Benchmark results show this combo ranks 3265th out of 3712 tested combinations, placing it in the lower tier of systems for this title. The data reveals a system where the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the CPU provides ample headroom even at lower settings. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, examines the roles of the processor and graphics card, and offers practical recommendations based strictly on the observed numbers.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 120 FPS at 1080p to 78 FPS at 1440p, then further down to 42 FPS at 4K. That represents a 35% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and another 46% drop from 1440p to 4K. This steep decline indicates that the GPU is the limiting component, as resolution scaling directly impacts pixel throughput, which is handled almost entirely by the graphics card.

At Medium settings, the pattern holds: 92 FPS at 1080p, 59 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 1440p is 33 FPS, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is 27 FPS. The High preset shows similar behavior, with 77 FPS at 1080p, 50 FPS at 1440p, and 27 FPS at 4K. Interestingly, the Ultra preset drops from 59 FPS at 1080p to 38 FPS at 1440p and finally to 20 FPS at 4K, showing the most dramatic relative loss at the highest resolution.

The fact that FPS scales almost linearly with the number of pixels—4K has roughly four times the pixels of 1080p—suggests that the RTX 3050 4 GB is being pushed to its absolute limit. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, is not showing signs of being the bottleneck here, as the frame rate drops are too consistent with pure GPU workload scaling. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see smaller differences between 1440p and 4K, since the GPU would be waiting on the processor at lower resolutions. Instead, the data shows the GPU struggling more as resolution increases, which is the classic signature of a graphics-bound scenario.

The implication is that for this combo, 1080p is the sweet spot where the GPU can maintain high frame rates, while 1440p requires dropping settings to achieve playable performance, and 4K is only viable at Low settings with a modest 42 FPS average.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB is built on the Ampere architecture using an 8 nm process from Samsung, with a chip size of 200 mm² and 8,700 million transistors. It features 2048 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units, along with 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. The base clock runs at 1545 MHz, boosting to 1740 MHz, while the memory operates at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed. The 4 GB of GDDR6 memory sits on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s.

The 4 GB VRAM capacity is a critical factor in this game's results. At 4K resolution with High settings, the average FPS drops to 27, which is barely playable. The Low preset at 4K yields 42 FPS, but the gap between Low and Medium at 4K (42 to 32 FPS) suggests that memory bandwidth or capacity constraints are kicking in as texture quality increases. The 192.0 GB/s bandwidth is modest by modern standards, and at 4K with higher settings, the GPU may be spending time swapping data in and out of the relatively small 4 GB frame buffer.

The pixel rate of 55.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 111.4 GTexel/s provide theoretical limits that align with the observed FPS. At 1080p Low, the 120 FPS average indicates the GPU is not fully saturated, but as resolution climbs, the pixel fill rate becomes the limiting factor. The FP32 performance of 7.127 TFLOPS is sufficient for this 2014 title, but the 90 W TDP and 250 W suggested PSU hint at a deliberately power-constrained design that caps performance headroom.

The GPU's percentile ranking against all GPUs is 50, meaning it sits exactly at the median of tested graphics cards. This neutral positioning explains why it delivers average performance in Minimum—neither exceptional nor inadequate, but rather a balanced mid-range part that struggles when pushed to 4K. The end-of-life production status and 199 USD launch MSRP place it as a budget-oriented option, though the data shows it can handle 1080p gaming well in this title.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F is a 12th-generation desktop processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and the 65 W TDP indicates a power-efficient design.

Benchmark results show this CPU is well above average. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 12380 and single-core score of 1680 indicate strong multi-threaded and single-threaded performance. The Geekbench multicore score of 9472 and single-core score of 1964 reinforce this picture. The PassMark multithread score of 19433 and single-thread score of 3481 place it in the 73rd percentile against all CPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly three-quarters of tested processors.

In Minimum, the CPU's role appears secondary to the GPU. At 1080p Low, the 120 FPS average suggests the CPU can easily feed frames to the GPU, but at 4K Ultra, the 20 FPS average is clearly GPU-limited. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 5895 and single-thread score of 909 show that even at lower thread counts, the processor has sufficient headroom. The nearest rivals—AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS (avgScore 19047, deltaPct 0), Intel Core 3 201E (avgScore 19056, deltaPct -0.1), Intel Core i5-1335U (avgScore 18982, deltaPct 0.3), and AMD EPYC 7773X (avgScore 18979, deltaPct 0.3)—all perform within 0.3% of the i5-12400F in average benchmark score, confirming that this CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo.

The 4.40 GHz boost clock is particularly relevant for a game like Minimum, which likely relies on single-threaded performance for game logic. The single-thread PassMark score of 3481 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1680 indicate that the CPU can handle the demands of this third-person shooter without bottlenecking the GPU at lower resolutions. However, at 4K, the GPU is so overburdened that the CPU's performance becomes irrelevant to the final frame rate.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 3265 out of 3712 tested combinations places this system in the 12th percentile of all tested setups for Minimum. This means about 88% of tested combos perform better, which is a low ranking for a game that is nearly a decade old. The data suggests that the RTX 3050 4 GB is the primary reason for this low position, as the CPU is ranked in the 73rd percentile against all CPUs.

The rank implies that this combo is suited for 1080p gaming at medium to high settings, but struggles at higher resolutions. The 3712 total combos include systems with much more powerful GPUs, and the 3265th rank reflects the performance ceiling imposed by the 4 GB graphics card. For context, the CPU's average benchmark score of 19039 places it well above average, but the GPU's lack of benchmark data (avgBenchmarkScore 0) makes it difficult to compare directly.

The ranking also suggests that this combo is not optimized for Minimum's specific requirements. A game from 2014 should run easily on modern hardware, but the 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus of the RTX 3050 limit its ability to handle high-resolution textures and effects. The result is a system that performs adequately at 1080p but falls behind many older, higher-end GPUs at 1440p and 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 120 FPS, Medium gives 92 FPS (with a minimum of 78 and maximum of 106), High yields 77 FPS, and Ultra drops to 59 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 61 FPS, showing that settings have a significant impact at this resolution. The 59 FPS at Ultra is still playable, and the 120 FPS at Low provides a smooth experience for competitive play.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 78 FPS, Medium hits 59 FPS (minimum 50, maximum 68), High falls to 50 FPS, and Ultra manages only 38 FPS. At this resolution, only Low and Medium settings remain comfortably playable above 60 FPS, while High and Ultra dip below that threshold. The 1440p Medium result of 59 FPS is almost identical to the 1080p Ultra result, suggesting that resolution and settings trade-offs are roughly equivalent in this range.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly overwhelmed. Low settings average 42 FPS, Medium drops to 32 FPS (minimum 27, maximum 37), High falls to 27 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 20 FPS. None of these results reach the 60 FPS mark, and even the Low preset struggles to maintain smooth gameplay. The 27 FPS at 4K High is borderline unplayable for a shooter, and the 20 FPS at Ultra confirms that this combo is not suited for 4K gaming.

The minimum FPS data, available only for Medium settings, shows that at 1080p the minimum is 78 FPS, at 1440p it is 50 FPS, and at 4K it is 27 FPS. These minimums are close to the averages, indicating stable frame pacing without major stutters, but the low averages at 4K mean that even stable performance is insufficient for smooth gameplay.

FAQ

*Q: Is this combo capable of running Minimum at 4K with playable frame rates?*

A: No. At 4K, the highest average FPS is 42 at Low settings, which drops to 32 at Medium and 27 at High. The Ultra preset only achieves 20 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS threshold typically desired for a third-person shooter.

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU-GPU combination?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings presets achieve at least 59 FPS. Low settings reach 120 FPS, Medium 92 FPS, and even Ultra hits 59 FPS, making 1080p the most balanced choice.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19039, with the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS at 19047 (0% delta), Intel Core 3 201E at 19056 (-0.1% delta), Intel Core i5-1335U at 18982 (0.3% delta), and AMD EPYC 7773X at 18979 (0.3% delta). All rivals are within 0.3% of the i5-12400F.

Q: Why does the FPS drop so significantly from 1080p to 4K?

A: The 4K resolution has approximately four times the pixels of 1080p, and the RTX 3050 4 GB's pixel rate of 55.68 GPixel/s and memory bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s become limiting factors. The 4 GB VRAM also constrains texture loading at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The CPU ranks in the 73rd percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 50th percentile. The FPS drops consistently with resolution increases, indicating that the graphics card cannot keep up with the pixel workload.

Q: What settings preset provides the best experience at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium settings deliver 59 FPS average with a minimum of 50 FPS, which is the highest playable average above 60 FPS. Low settings hit 78 FPS, but Medium offers better visual quality while staying close to the 60 FPS target.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, all settings presets are viable: Ultra provides 59 FPS for the best visual quality, High offers 77 FPS for a balance of quality and smoothness, and Low reaches 120 FPS for maximum responsiveness. For most players, High at 1080p is the best compromise, as it maintains a 77 FPS average while providing better visuals than Low or Medium.

At 2560x1440, the choice narrows significantly. Medium settings deliver 59 FPS average, which is just below the 60 FPS target but still playable. Low settings reach 78 FPS, making them the best choice for players who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity. High settings at 50 FPS and Ultra at 38 FPS are less desirable for a shooter, as lower frame rates can impact aiming and reaction times.

At 3840x2160, no setting provides a fully smooth experience. Low settings at 42 FPS is the only option that approaches playability, but even this is marginal. The 27 FPS minimum at 4K Medium suggests that frame pacing becomes erratic at this resolution. Players with this combo should avoid 4K unless they are willing to accept significant compromises in visual quality and frame rate.

The data suggests that the best overall experience for this system is 1080p with High settings, which provides a 77 FPS average without sacrificing too much visual detail. Alternatively, 1080p Ultra at 59 FPS is a viable option for players who prioritize image quality. For competitive play, 1080p Low at 120 FPS offers the smoothest experience, though it comes at the cost of reduced graphical fidelity. The 1440p Medium preset is a reasonable secondary choice for players with 1440p monitors, but the 59 FPS average is close to the edge of playability for a fast-paced shooter.