Minimum

The Minimum benchmark data pairs the Intel Core i5-12600KF with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT, a combination that occupies a specific tier in the database. The measured results reveal a system that is decisively limited by the GPU at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s headroom becomes apparent only at 1080p. The following analysis breaks down the numbers.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance rank of this CPU and GPU combo in Minimum?

A: The combo ranks 1689th out of 3712 tested combinations, placing it in the 54.5th percentile of all recorded systems for this game.

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

A: The i5-12600KF has an average benchmark score of 27799, which is effectively tied with the Intel Core i9-10900K (27872, -0.3% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D (27896, -0.3% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (27887, -0.3% delta). It sits marginally ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 8500GE (27712, +0.3% delta).

Q: What is the GPU’s standing relative to other graphics cards in the database?

A: The RX 6750 XT scores 26011 on average, ranking in the 71st percentile of all GPUs. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (25891, +0.5% delta), followed closely by the AMD FirePro W7100 (25856, +0.6% delta) and the AMD FirePro D700 (25842, +0.7% delta).

Q: Which resolution and settings combo yields the highest average frame rate?

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 214, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 164 FPS at 1080p Medium, showing a steep drop as settings increase.

Q: Is there a measured frame rate for 4K Ultra settings, and what does it show?

A: Yes, the 3840x2160 Ultra preset produces an average of 36 FPS. This is the lowest measured average across all tested configurations, indicating the GPU is heavily taxed at this extreme setting.

Q: Does the data include minimum frame rate information for all settings?

A: No, minimum FPS values are only provided for the Medium preset at each resolution: 139 FPS at 1080p, 90 FPS at 1440p, and 48 FPS at 4K. All other presets lack min/max data.

How This Combo Ranks

The rank of 1689 out of 3712 combos places this pairing in the upper-middle tier of the database. This is a meaningful distinction, as it implies the system is capable of running Minimum well above playable thresholds at most settings, but it is not among the elite performers. The percentile position suggests that roughly 45% of tested combinations deliver higher average frame rates, which is expected given the mid-range positioning of both components.

The CPU’s synthetic benchmark percentile of 79 (vs all CPUs) is notably higher than the GPU’s percentile of 71 (vs all GPUs). This discrepancy hints at an imbalance: the processor has more relative headroom than the graphics card. In practice, this means the GPU will likely become the bottleneck as resolution and settings increase, a hypothesis confirmed by the measured FPS data. The combo’s overall rank sits closer to the GPU’s percentile than the CPU’s, reinforcing that graphics performance is the limiting factor in this pairing.

When examining the nearest rivals, the CPU’s deltaPct values are all within a fraction of a percent of its closest competitorscars. The i9-10900K, Ryzen 7 5800X3D, and Ryzen 7 6800U all score within 0.3% of the i5-12600KF, making these chips functionally interchangeable in synthetic tests. This suggests that the combo’s rank is less dependent on CPU choice and more heavily influenced by the GPU’s performance tier menu.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy for optimizing the experience in Minimum. For players prioritizing frame rate above all else, the 1920x1080 Low preset delivers an average of 214 FPS, which is more than sufficient for competitive play on high refresh rate monitors. However, this comes at the cost of visual fidelity.

The Medium preset at 1080p offers a more balanced approach, with an average of 164 FPS and a minimum of 139 FPS. This ensures that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate stays well above the 144Hz threshold, making it the recommended choice for most users at this resolution. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p reduces the average to 138 FPS, still playable but beginning to approach the refresh rate ceiling of standard 144Hz displays.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is the sweet spot, producing 106 FPS average with a 90 FPS minimum. This provides smooth gameplay on 100Hz+ monitors without sacrificing too much detail. The High preset at 1440p drops to 89 FPS, which is still acceptable but may show stutter on VRR displays. For 4K, the situation is more constrained: only the Low preset (74 FPS) reaches the 60 FPS threshold, while Medium (57 FPS) and High (48 FPS) fall short. The Ultra preset at any resolution is not recommended, as it yields 36 FPS at 4K, 68 FPS at 1440p, and 105 FPS at 1080p — the latter being the only Ultra configuration that maintains playability.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The data shows a predictable pattern where FPS scales inversely with both resolution and graphical settings. At 1080p, the range spans from 214 FPS (Low) down to 105 FPS (Ultra). The Medium preset at 1080p records an average of 164 FPS with a minimum of 139 FPS and a maximum of 189 FPS, indicating a wide variance that suggests scenes with heavy particle effects or draw distances can impact performance significantly.

Moving to 1440p, the averages drop by roughly 35-38% across all settings. Low goes from 214 to 138 FPS, Medium from 164 to 106 FPS, High from 138 to 89 FPS, and Ultra from 105 to 68 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p shows a minimum of 90 FPS and a maximum of 122 FPS, tightening the variance compared to 1080p.

At 4K, the performance collapse is dramatic. Low settings yield 74 FPS, which is a 45% reduction from 1440p Low. Medium drops to 57 FPS (46% reduction from 1440p Medium), and High falls to 48 FPS (46% reduction from 1440p High). Ultra at 4K produces just 36 FPS, a 47% reduction from 1440p Ultra. This consistent ~46% reduction across all settings when moving from 1440p to 4K strongly implicates the GPU as the primary bottleneck, as the pixel count doubles but the frame rate does not halve — instead, it drops by less than half, suggesting some CPU involvement at lower resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), with a base clock of 2150 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz. The game clock is rated at 2495 MHz, which is the frequency likely sustained during gaming workloads.

The GPU’s 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units deliver a pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 416.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance of 13.31 TFLOPS places this card firmly in the mid-range tier for its generation. The 40 ray accelerators provide hardware ray tracing support, though the measured FPS data in Minimum does not include ray tracing-specific benchmarks.

The 12 GB VRAM is a notable asset for Minimum, as the game’s texture-heavy environments can consume significant memory at higher resolutions. The 4K Ultra preset, which produces only 36 FPS, is likely constrained by both the GPU’s compute throughput and memory bandwidth. The fact that 4K Low achieves 74 FPS while 4K High drops to 48 FPS (a 35% reduction) suggests that shading complexity, rather than memory capacity, is the limiting factor — the VRAM is sufficient even at Ultra, but the compute units cannot keep up with the increased shader work.

The GPU’s benchmark percentile of 71 indicates it outperforms roughly 29% of all graphics cards in the database. Its nearest rival, the R9 M395X, is a much older mobile GPU, which highlights that the RX 6750 XT’s position is more about consistent mid-range performance than raw top-tier capability.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12600KF features 10 cores (6 performance + 4 efficiency) and 16 threads, based on the Alder Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a 125W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

Synthetic benchmarks show strong multi-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 multicore scores 23391, while single-core scores 3302. The Geekbench multicore score is 12137 with a single-core score of 2157. PassMark multithread results show 27575, and the 3DMark 16-thread test scores 7956. The CPU’s percentile of 79 (vs all CPUs) confirms it is well above average for gaming workloads.

In Minimum, the CPU’s role becomes evident when examining the FPS scaling across resolutions. At 1080p Low (214 FPS), the system is no longer GPU-bound — this high frame rate suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU enough data to maintain such a high output. However, the 3DMark single-thread score of 1016 and PassMark single-thread of 3925 indicate that the CPU’s per-core performance, while strong, is not exceptional enough to push frame rates significantly higher in this title.

The CPU’s nearest rival, the Ryzen 7 5800X3D, scores nearly identically in average benchmarks (27896 vs 27799), yet the 5800X3D’s 3D V-Cache is known for gaming improvements. The fact that the i5-12600KF matches it in synthetic tests suggests that Minimum is not heavily cache-dependent, or that the i5’s higher boost clock compensates. The 10-core/16-thread configuration provides ample headroom for background tasks while gaming, but the measured FPS data shows that the GPU saturates long before the CPU becomes a limiting factor at 1440p and above.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the system’s bottleneck characteristics. At Low settings, the frame rates are 214 (1080p), 138 (1440p), and 74 (4K). This represents a 35.5% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 46.4% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear — the 4K drop is more severe relative to the pixel count increase (2.25x pixels from 1440p to 4K vs 1.78x from 1080p to 1440p).

For Medium settings, the progression is 164 (1080p), 106 (1440p), and 57 (4K). The percent drops are 35.4% and 46.2% respectively, nearly identical to Low. High settings show 138 (1080p), 89 (1440p), and 48 (4K), with drops of 35.5% and 46.1%. Ultra settings follow the same pattern: 105 (1080p), 68 (1440p), and 36 (4K), with drops of 35.2% and 47.1%.

The consistency of these percentages across all settings is striking. It indicates that the GPU is the dominant bottleneck at 4K, regardless of graphical complexity. The fact that the drop from 1440p to 4K (~46%) is larger than the drop from 1080p to 1440p (~35%) aligns with the GPU’s fill rate and bandwidth limitations. The RX 6750 XT’s 432.0 GB/s bandwidth is likely saturated at 4K, especially with higher settings that increase texture fetches and shader calculations.

However, the 1080p to 1440p drop of ~35% is less than the pixel ratio increase (1.78x), suggesting that the CPU is partially limiting performance at 1080p. At 1080p Low, the 214 FPS average approaches the CPU’s maximum frame generation capability. As resolution increases, the GPU becomes fully utilized, and the CPU’s role diminishes. This explains why the percentage drops are smaller than pixel count increases — the system is transitioning from a mixed CPU/GPU bottleneck at 1080p to a pure GPU bottleneck at 4K. The data implies that players with high-refresh 1080p monitors should consider upgrading the CPU to push frame rates above 214 FPS, while 4K users would benefit more from a stronger GPU.