Minimum

Minimum is a 2014 third-person shooter that, on paper, should not challenge modern hardware, yet the measured results for the Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 reveal a title that still demands careful settings management at higher resolutions. The data shows a system capable of delivering high refresh rates at 1080p, but one that hits a hard wall at 4K, where the GPU's 8 GB memory and raw throughput become the primary bottlenecks. This analysis provides a practical breakdown of how to configure the game for the best balance of visual fidelity and frame rate, based strictly on the measured FPS data.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data across all resolutions makes it clear that the "High" preset is the most efficient choice for this hardware combo, offering the best compromise between visual quality and performance. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 115 FPS, which is only 22 FPS behind the Low preset's 179 FPS but provides a significantly better visual experience. The jump to Medium at 1080p nets 137 FPS, but the marginal visual upgrade from Medium to High is worth the 22 FPS loss, especially on a 60Hz or 144Hz display where 115 FPS is already well above the threshold for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the High preset remains the sweet spot, producing 74 FPS. This is comfortably above the 60 FPS target for most monitors, and while Medium offers 88 FPS, the drop from High to Medium is a noticeable downgrade in texture detail and shadow quality that doesn't justify the extra 14 FPS. The data indicates that Ultra is not a viable option at this resolution, as it drops to 57 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS standard. For 4K, the High preset at 40 FPS is barely playable, and the data strongly suggests that users should avoid this resolution unless they are willing to drop to Low settings, which yields 62 FPS.

The "Low" preset is the only configuration that provides a playable experience at 4K, with 62 FPS. However, the visual degradation is substantial. The recommendation is to prioritize High at 1080p and 1440p, as the performance headroom allows for it. For 4K, the choice is between Low for playability or High for visual fidelity at the cost of a stuttery experience near 40 FPS. The data shows that Medium at 4K offers 48 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS, which suggests occasional frame dips that could be jarring in a fast-paced third-person shooter. Therefore, the practical advice is to stick with High for all resolutions up to 1440p, and only consider Low if 4K is a hard requirement.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is the decisive component in this pairing, particularly as resolution increases. The card features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth, with a boost clock of 2572 MHz. The data shows that this memory configuration becomes a limiting factor at 4K, where the High preset only manages 40 FPS. The 8 GB capacity is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the combination of higher resolution textures and the game's rendering overhead saturates the memory bandwidth, causing a significant performance drop.

The GPU's raw compute metrics, including 2560 shading units and a 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, are more than adequate for a 2014 title at lower resolutions. This is evident in the 1080p Low preset result of 179 FPS, which suggests the game is heavily GPU-bound even at high frame rates. However, the 4K results tell a different story. The RTX 5050's pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s is challenged by the 8.3 million pixels of a 4K display, and the 32 ROPs become a bottleneck. The data indicates that the GPU's compute power is not the issue, but rather its memory subsystem and pixel throughput.

The closest GPU rivals in the benchmark database, such as the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT with a 1.6% higher average score, suggest that the RTX 5050 is performing within its expected class. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2502 and a Passmark G3D score of 17326 place it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, confirming its mid-range positioning. For Minimum, the practical takeaway is that the GPU is the primary driver of performance at 1440p and above, and its 8 GB memory is a hard constraint at 4K. The data shows that even the Low preset at 4K, which reduces texture loads, only achieves 62 FPS, highlighting how the memory bus width and bandwidth cap the card's potential.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and predictable performance degradation as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K, with the GPU becoming the limiting component. At the High preset, the average FPS drops from 115 at 1080p to 74 at 1440p, a 36% reduction, and then to 40 at 4K, a further 46% reduction. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-bound scenario, where the RTX 5050's pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth are progressively overwhelmed by the increasing pixel count.

The Low preset shows a similar trend but with a more dramatic drop. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 179 FPS, which falls to 116 at 1440p and 62 at 4K. The 4K Low result is particularly telling: even with minimal graphical demands, the game cannot reach 60 FPS consistently, with the average sitting at 62 FPS. This suggests that the RTX 5050's 8 GB memory and 128-bit bus are simply not suited for 4K gaming, regardless of settings. The 1440p to 4K drop is the steepest, averaging a 46-47% reduction in FPS across all settings, which is a stronger indicator of the memory bandwidth limit than the compute shader limit.

The data also shows that the scaling from 1080p to 1440p is less punishing, with a 35-37% FPS drop, indicating that the GPU still has headroom in its compute units but is starting to feel the memory pressure. For users targeting 4K, the results are clear: the RTX 5050 is not a 4K-capable card for this game. The 1080p and 1440p results, however, show that the card scales well within its intended design envelope, and the CPU does not appear to be a bottleneck at any resolution, as even the lowest FPS figures at 4K are above the single-threaded performance expectations of the i5-12400F.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system performs admirably across all settings. The Low preset delivers an average of 179 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate displays. Medium settings yield 137 FPS, with a minimum of 117 FPS and a maximum of 158 FPS, indicating consistent frame pacing. High settings produce 115 FPS, and Ultra drops to 88 FPS. The 1080p results show that the CPU is not a limiting factor, as even the highest frame rates are well within the i5-12400F's capabilities. The data suggests that users with 144Hz monitors can comfortably use High settings, while those with 240Hz displays may prefer Low or Medium to push frame rates higher.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains solid but requires more careful settings selection. Low settings average 116 FPS, which is still very playable. Medium settings average 88 FPS, with a minimum of 75 FPS and a maximum of 102 FPS. High settings average 74 FPS, which is suitable for 60Hz displays but marginal for 144Hz. Ultra settings drop to 57 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and not recommended for smooth gameplay. The 1440p data indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck, as the frame rate scaling from Low to Ultra is more severe than at 1080p, reflecting the increased pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings average 62 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS target. Medium settings average 48 FPS, with a minimum of 41 FPS, indicating noticeable frame drops. High settings average 40 FPS, and Ultra settings average 30 FPS. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with even the lowest settings barely hitting 60 FPS. The data strongly implies that 4K is not a viable resolution for this hardware combo, as the GPU's memory bandwidth and pixel throughput are insufficient. The measured FPS breakdown across all resolutions shows a clear hierarchy: the system is excellent at 1080p, good at 1440p, and inadequate at 4K.

FAQ

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1080p gaming on this system?

A: The High preset is the best choice, delivering 115 FPS average. This provides a significant visual upgrade over Medium (137 FPS) while maintaining a frame rate that is well above the 60 FPS standard and suitable for most high-refresh-rate monitors.

Q: Can this hardware handle 4K at a playable frame rate?

A: Only with the Low preset, which achieves 62 FPS average. The Medium preset drops to 48 FPS, and High falls to 40 FPS, making the game feel sluggish. The data indicates that 4K is not a practical resolution for this GPU.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck in this game?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck at all resolutions. The 1080p Low preset produces 179 FPS, which is far beyond the CPU's single-threaded limits, and the 4K results show the GPU's memory bandwidth (320.0 GB/s) and 8 GB capacity are the limiting factors.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 5050 has an average benchmark score of 21035, which is 1.6% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713) and 0.6% lower than the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21153). This places it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs.

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

A: Ultra settings average 57 FPS, while High settings average 74 FPS. The 17 FPS difference represents a 30% performance improvement with High settings, which is a significant gain for a minor reduction in visual quality.

Q: Should I use Medium or High settings at 1440p for a 60Hz monitor?

A: High settings are recommended, as they deliver 74 FPS, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS refresh rate. Medium settings offer 88 FPS, but the visual quality reduction is unnecessary when the system can already exceed the monitor's refresh rate.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F plays a supporting role in Minimum, as the benchmark data shows the game is overwhelmingly GPU-bound. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads, with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, provide ample processing power for this 2014 title. The 3DMark single-thread score of 909 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1680 indicate strong per-core performance, which is sufficient for the game's primary game logic and physics threads. The multi-threaded performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12380, is more than enough to handle any background tasks or additional game systems.

The data shows that at 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 179 FPS, which is a frame rate that would stress many CPUs. The fact that the i5-12400F can maintain this without bottlenecking reflects its single-threaded capabilities. The 73rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19039, places it slightly above the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS (19047) and the Intel Core 3 201E (19056), confirming its position as a solid mid-range processor. The CPU's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB per-core L2 cache are adequate for Minimum's data requirements, as the game's asset streaming is not particularly demanding.

In this specific game, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and process game state, which it does effortlessly. The measured FPS data shows no evidence of CPU-induced frame drops, even at the highest frame rates. The i5-12400F's 65W TDP and 10nm process node also mean it runs cool and efficient, allowing the GPU to be the sole performance variable. For users looking to upgrade, the data suggests that the CPU has headroom to support a more powerful GPU, as it is not the limiting factor in any resolution or settings combination tested. The CPU's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, shows a 0% deltaPct, indicating they perform identically in average benchmark scores, so no meaningful performance difference is expected in Minimum.