Minimum

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT delivers a playable experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter, but the data reveals a clear performance ceiling defined by the graphics card. Across the measured resolutions, the combination shows a predictable decline in frame rates as pixel count increases, with the scaling pattern indicating a shift from a balanced workload at 1080p to a heavily GPU-limited scenario at 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a steep drop as resolution increases, which is the primary indicator of where the bottleneck lies. At 1080p with High settings, the combo produces 109.3 FPS, which falls to 72.7 FPS at 1440p—a 33% reduction. Moving to 4K, the average further collapses to 39.2 FPS, representing a 64% loss from the 1080p baseline. This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound workload; the frame rate declines almost linearly with the increase in pixel count, suggesting the Radeon RX 6600 XT’s rendering throughput is the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

The gap between Low and Ultra settings widens dramatically at 4K, which further confirms the GPU’s dominance in this configuration. At 1080p, the difference between Low (171.2 FPS) and Ultra (84.2 FPS) is 87 FPS, a substantial margin that reflects the GPU’s ability to handle the extra shading and texture work. However, at 4K, the same settings spread shrinks to just 29 FPS (57.4 FPS Low versus 28.4 FPS Ultra). This compression suggests that at 4K, the GPU is already saturated at Low settings, leaving little headroom for additional visual features without a disproportionate hit to frame rate. The 4K Ultra result of 28.4 FPS is particularly telling—it is below the 30 FPS threshold often considered the minimum for fluid gameplay, indicating that this combo is not suited for maximum fidelity at that resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations, this pairing of Intel Core i5-13400F and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT sits at rank 1158 out of 1733 combos for Minimum. This places it in the lower third of all tested systems, which is a modest result given the hardware’s individual specifications. The rank reflects the game’s age and its relatively low demands on modern components; many newer CPUs and GPUs will achieve higher scores simply due to raw clock speed and architectural efficiency. The data shows that while this combo can handle the game at playable frame rates in most scenarios, it does not stand out as a high-performance pairing for this specific title.

The combo’s rank is influenced by the CPU’s placement among all processors. The Intel Core i5-13400F holds an 82nd percentile ranking against all CPUs, which is strong, but its average benchmark score of 25236 places it in a tight cluster with rivals like the Intel Core i7-13620H (25201, a 0.1% difference) and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25365, a 0.5% difference). This indicates the CPU is not a weak link; its performance is competitive with other mid-range and even some high-end chips. Conversely, the GPU’s 71st percentile ranking against all GPUs is slightly lower, and its average score of 27985 is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (27956, a 0.1% difference). This positions the GPU as the more limiting component, which aligns with the resolution scaling data.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on a 10 nm process. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, and it features a 20 MB shared L3 cache. For a game like Minimum, which launched in 2014, the CPU’s multi-threaded capabilities are more than sufficient. Benchmark scores support this: the processor achieves 21279 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 10971 in Geekbench multi-core, indicating substantial parallel processing power. The single-thread performance, measured at 3004 in Cinebench R23 and 2301 in Geekbench, is also strong, which is critical for game logic and physics calculations that often rely on a few fast cores.

The data suggests the CPU is not the primary constraint in this combo. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 171.2 FPS, which is a high frame rate that would require a capable CPU to feed the GPU. The fact that the frame rate drops to 84.2 FPS at 1080p Ultra, while the CPU’s workload remains relatively constant, indicates that the graphics card is the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rate would remain flat regardless of resolution or settings changes. Instead, the observed scaling is a textbook example of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU’s 82nd percentile ranking and its tight grouping with rivals like the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (within 0.5%) reinforce that it is providing adequate performance without holding back the system.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the combo’s capabilities across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers strong performance: 171.2 FPS on Low, 131 FPS on Medium, 109.3 FPS on High, and 84.2 FPS on Ultra. These numbers indicate that the combo is well-suited for high-refresh-rate gaming at 1080p, with even the Ultra preset achieving a smooth experience above 60 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a 50% performance reduction, which is typical for a game with a wide range of visual effects.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain playable but begin to show the GPU’s strain. The Low preset yields 111.4 FPS, which is still excellent, while Medium drops to 86.9 FPS and High to 72.7 FPS. The Ultra preset falls to 57.1 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS target for many gamers. This represents a 49% drop from the 1080p Ultra result, confirming that the GPU is the primary factor in the performance decline. At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more challenging. The Low preset achieves 57.4 FPS, which is playable, but Medium drops to 47.7 FPS, High to 39.2 FPS, and Ultra to a marginal 28.4 FPS. The 4K results are only viable for the Low and Medium presets if the user prioritizes frame rate over visual fidelity.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using a 7 nm process, with a die size of 237 mm² and 11,060 million transistors. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The GPU’s base clock is 1968 MHz, with a boost clock of 2589 MHz and a game clock of 2359 MHz. These specifications translate to a pixel rate of 165.7 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 331.4 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 10.60 TFLOPS. The GPU’s 71st percentile ranking against all GPUs, and its near-identical average score to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (within 0.1%), positions it as a solid mid-range performer from the previous generation.

The GPU’s clock speeds and memory bandwidth are the key factors driving the resolution scaling observed in the data. At 1080p, the 256.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient to feed the shader units, allowing the GPU to reach high frame rates. However, as resolution increases, the demand on the memory bus grows, and the 128-bit interface becomes a limiting factor. This is evident in the 4K results, where the frame rate drops below 60 FPS even at Low settings. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is adequate for a game from 2014, as the texture sizes and geometric complexity are not demanding by modern standards, but the bus width restricts the GPU’s ability to maintain performance at higher resolutions. The GPU’s boost clock of 2589 MHz provides a significant lift over the base clock, which helps in lighter scenes, but the sustained load at 4K keeps the card near its thermal and power limits, as indicated by the 160 W TDP. Overall, the data shows that the RX 6600 XT is the component that dictates the combo’s performance envelope in Minimum, excelling at 1080p and becoming progressively less capable as the resolution climbs.