Minimum

Opening Paragraph

The data for Minimum with the Intel Core i5-13400F and Intel Arc B390 reveals a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics processor. While the CPU delivers strong synthetic benchmark scores, the measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings show that the Arc B390 is the primary bottleneck, often struggling to maintain playable performance. This analysis breaks down the measured results, offering practical settings and resolution guidance based solely on the provided benchmark data.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, running on the Intel Socket 1700 platform. With a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, it offers substantial processing headroom. Its 20 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB per-core L2 cache provide solid memory hierarchy for gaming workloads. The CPU's 65 W TDP and 10 nm process node from Intel contribute to its efficiency, but more importantly, its compute capabilities are far ahead of what the paired GPU can utilize.

Looking at the processor's raw performance, the benchmark data shows a clear strength in multi-threaded tasks. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and the Geekbench multicore score of 11068 indicate a highly capable chip for any game logic, physics calculations, or background tasks. The Passmark multithread score of 25032 further confirms this. Single-thread performance is also respectable, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3191 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1996, which is crucial for games like Minimum that rely on a strong primary thread for frame pacing and draw calls.

However, the CPU's relevance to this specific game's results is defined by its massive lead over the GPU. The i5-13400F scores in the 77th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25292. Its nearest rivals in this metric are the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (25284, 0% delta) and the Intel Core 5 120 (25362, -0.3% delta), meaning it sits almost exactly at par with those parts. This places it in a performance tier where it should easily handle the demands of a 2014-era third-person shooter. The data indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor in any of the measured FPS rows. In fact, the GPU’s low percentile ranking (9th) suggests that the i5-13400F is significantly overqualified for the graphical workload, leaving massive performance on the table due to the Arc B390's limitations.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B390 is the clear performance bottleneck in this configuration. This is an integrated GPU (IGP) based on the Panther Lake chip and the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process node. Its specifications are modest: 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 24 raster operation units (ROPs), along with 12 ray tracing cores. The GPU's base clock is 300 MHz, boosting up to 2500 MHz, which yields a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is rated at 7.680 TFLOPS.

The most critical limitation is its memory configuration. The Arc B390 uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it has no dedicated VRAM of its own. Its memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which in practice means it relies on the system's main memory (DDR4 or DDR5) over the bus interface. This is a severe constraint for gaming, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth and often suffers from higher latency. This is a primary reason for the low benchmark scores. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the Arc B390 scores 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all older, low-end discrete cards like the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% delta), with the Arc B390 only slightly outperforming them.

This performance tier aligns perfectly with the measured FPS data. The GPU's theoretical compute is insufficient to push high frame rates at demanding settings, and the shared memory architecture further hobbles it when resolution and texture loads increase. The data shows that the Arc B390 is fundamentally a low-end solution, and the benchmark results for Minimum reflect that. The combination of low shading power and shared memory means that the GPU is responsible for the sharp FPS drops observed when moving from Low to Ultra settings or from 1080p to 4K.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal experience for this system is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which yields an average of 95 FPS. This is the only configuration that provides a clearly smooth, high-refresh-rate experience. While there is no minFps data for this setting, the average is high enough to suggest consistent playability. The next best option is 1920x1080 with High settings, averaging 61 FPS, which is technically playable but may have more frequent dips into the 50s, especially during intense action. The Medium preset at 1080p averages 72 FPS with a measured minimum of 62 FPS, which is also a viable choice for a balance between visual quality and smoothness, though the Low setting provides a more comfortable margin.

At 1440p, the data shows that only the Low setting (61 FPS) is playable. The High setting at 39 FPS and Medium at 47 FPS are borderline, and the Ultra setting at 30 FPS is not recommended for a smooth experience. For 4K, all settings are below the threshold of smooth playability. The highest average at 4K is 33 FPS on Low, which is not suitable for a third-person shooter that requires responsive aiming. Therefore, the recommendation is clear: prioritize resolution over visual fidelity. For the best experience, run the game at 1080p. If the user insists on 1440p, they must use Low settings. The 'Ultra' preset should be avoided entirely, as it yields the lowest frame rates at every resolution.

FAQ

*Q: Is the Intel Core i5-13400F or the Intel Arc B390 the limiting factor in Minimum?*

A: The benchmark data clearly identifies the Intel Arc B390 as the limiting factor. Its 9th percentile ranking among all GPUs and its low average benchmark score of 1482 are in stark contrast to the CPU's 77th percentile ranking. The FPS drops across resolutions and settings are consistent with the GPU's performance ceiling, not the CPU's capabilities.

*Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K?*

A: The measured data shows that 4K performance is not adequate for smooth gameplay. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 33 FPS on Low settings, with High at 21 FPS, Medium at 25 FPS, and Ultra at 16 FPS. These frame rates are below the threshold for a playable third-person shooter.

Q: What is the best preset to use at 1080p?

A: According to the data, the Low preset at 1920x1080 provides the best performance with an average of 95 FPS. The Medium preset is also viable with an average of 72 FPS and a minimum of 62 FPS, offering a good balance between performance and visual quality, but Low gives the most headroom.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Arc B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 is only 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463) and 2.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446). This places it in the same performance tier as these older entry-level discrete GPUs, confirming its low-end status.

Q: Why is the performance so poor despite having a powerful CPU?

A: The performance is poor because the Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution with System Shared memory. This architecture is severely bandwidth-limited and lacks the raw compute power of a dedicated GPU. The CPU's high scores in tests like Cinebench R23 (22604) cannot compensate for the GPU's inability to render frames quickly.

Q: Is there any setting at 1440p that provides a 60 FPS experience?

A: Yes, the Low setting at 2560x1440 is the only one to reach an average of 61 FPS. All other settings at this resolution—High (39 FPS), Medium (47 FPS), and Ultra (30 FPS)—fall short of the 60 FPS target.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data shows a predictable and steep decline as resolution increases, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound system. At Low settings, the average FPS progresses from 95 at 1080p, to 61 at 1440p, and finally to 33 at 4K. This represents a 36% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 46% drop from 1440p to 4K. At High settings, the trend is similar: 61 FPS at 1080p, 39 FPS at 1440p, and 21 FPS at 4K. The scaling factor is nearly linear, indicating that the GPU is working at its maximum capacity at every resolution.

This scaling behavior strongly suggests that the limiting component is the GPU. When a system is CPU-limited, you typically see frame rates that stay relatively flat across resolutions, because the CPU is the bottleneck and the GPU has spare capacity. Here, the frame rate drops significantly with every increase in pixel count, which means the GPU's pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth are being exhausted. The Arc B390's 24 ROPs and System Shared memory are simply overwhelmed by the increasing workload. The jump from 1080p to 4K (a 4x increase in pixels) results in a 65% decrease in FPS on Low settings (95 to 33), which is a clear indicator of a GPU that is struggling to keep up with the render demands.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following data presents the exact average FPS figures from the benchmark, broken down by resolution and settings.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: Average 95 FPS.
• Medium: Average 72 FPS, with a minimum of 62 FPS and a maximum of 83 FPS.
• High: Average 61 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 46 FPS.

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: Average 61 FPS.
• Medium: Average 47 FPS, with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS.
• High: Average 39 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 30 FPS.

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: Average 33 FPS.
• Medium: Average 25 FPS, with a minimum of 21 FPS and a maximum of 29 FPS.
• High: Average 21 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 16 FPS.

These numbers illustrate the system's performance envelope. The only configurations that hit the 60 FPS target are 1080p Low (95 FPS) and 1080p High (61 FPS), along with 1440p Low (61 FPS). All other combinations fall below this threshold, with the 4K Ultra setting bottoming out at 16 FPS, which is far below playable standards. The data confirms that this combo is only suitable for 1080p gaming with adjusted settings, and it does not have the headroom for higher resolutions without significant compromises.