Minimum

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti delivers a playable but resolution-sensitive experience in Minimum. Benchmark data shows the combo averaging 131 FPS at 1080p Low, but this figure degrades sharply to 45 FPS at 4K Low, indicating a system that is clearly constrained by the graphics card at higher resolutions. While the CPU provides ample headroom, the GPU’s performance ceiling becomes the determining factor for visual fidelity and frame rate as pixel count increases.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance drop as resolution scales from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 84 FPS at 1080p to 54 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of 30 FPS, and then plummets to 29 FPS at 4K. This represents a 65% decrease in average FPS when moving from 1080p to 4K at High settings, a clear indicator that the GTX 1660 Ti is the limiting component at higher resolutions rather than the i5-13400F.

The pattern holds across all settings presets. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 131 at 1080p to 84 at 1440p, and finally to 45 at 4K. The Medium preset shows a similar trajectory: 100 FPS at 1080p, 65 FPS at 1440p, and 35 FPS at 4K. Even at the lowest quality settings, the 4K resolution proves too demanding for the GPU to maintain fluid frame rates, with the Low preset at 4K only reaching 45 FPS.

The scaling behavior suggests that the GTX 1660 Ti’s 6 GB of GDDR6 memory and 192-bit memory bus are being saturated at 4K. The GPU’s 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 5.437 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are insufficient for the pixel throughput required at 3840x2160. Conversely, the CPU’s 10 cores and 16 threads, boosting up to 4.60 GHz, do not appear to bottleneck at any tested resolution, as the frame rate scaling follows what would be expected from a purely GPU-limited scenario.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations for Minimum, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti ranks 3198 out of 3712 tested combos. This places the combo in the lower 14th percentile of all tested systems, indicating that while it can run the game, it is far from the top-tier configurations in the database.

The CPU itself performs well relative to its peers, holding the 77th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 25292 places it on par with the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (score 25284, delta 0%), slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (score 25201, delta 0.4%), and marginally behind the Intel Core 5 120 (score 25362, delta -0.3%) and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (score 25365, delta -0.3%). This suggests the processor is not the weak link in this combination.

The GPU, however, sits in the 41st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7723. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 540 (score 7673, delta 0.7%), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (score 7580, delta 1.9%), AMD Radeon R7 250 (score 7557, delta 2.2%), and Intel Arc A310 (score 7550, delta 2.3%). This modest GPU standing, combined with the high CPU percentile, confirms that the graphics card is what drags the overall combo rank down in this title.

FAQ

*Q: What is the maximum average FPS achievable with this combo in Minimum?*

A: The highest measured average FPS is 131, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Minimum?*

A: The data shows 4K performance is marginal. The best 4K result is 45 FPS at Low settings, dropping to 29 FPS at High and 22 FPS at Ultra, which is below smooth playability thresholds.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The i5-13400F scores 25292, which is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS at 25284 (0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H at 25201 (0.4% delta ahead), while being 0.3% behind both the Intel Core 5 120 and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D.

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

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck, especially at higher resolutions. Its 41st percentile ranking among GPUs contrasts sharply with the CPU’s 77th percentile, and the steep FPS drop from 1080p to 4K confirms graphics-bound behavior.

Q: What is the best 1440p performance this combo can deliver?

A: At 2560x1440, the best average FPS is 84 on Low settings. The High preset yields 54 FPS, Medium yields 65 FPS, and Ultra yields 41 FPS.

Q: How much faster is the 1080p Low preset compared to the 4K Ultra preset?

A: The 1080p Low preset averages 131 FPS, which is 109 FPS higher than the 4K Ultra preset’s 22 FPS average. This represents a 6x improvement in frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers strong frame rates across all presets. The Low setting produces an average of 131 FPS, providing a highly responsive experience. Medium settings average 100 FPS with a minimum of 85 FPS and maximum of 115 FPS, ensuring consistent performance. High settings average 84 FPS, while Ultra drops to 64 FPS. All 1080p results are comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates decline noticeably but remain playable on lower presets. Low settings average 84 FPS, maintaining smooth performance. Medium averages 65 FPS with a minimum of 55 FPS and maximum of 74 FPS, placing it just at the edge of comfortable playability. High settings drop to 54 FPS, and Ultra falls to 41 FPS, which may present noticeable stutter in fast-paced third-person shooter action.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s limitations become severe. Low settings average 45 FPS, which is borderline playable but not ideal for a shooter. Medium averages 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS and maximum of 40 FPS, indicating frequent dips below smooth thresholds. High settings average 29 FPS, and Ultra averages only 22 FPS, rendering these presets largely unplayable for competitive or fluid gameplay.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience, the 1920x1080 resolution with Medium settings provides the optimal balance of visual quality and performance. The data shows 100 FPS average with a minimum of 85 FPS, ensuring the frame rate never dips below a playable level while offering better visual fidelity than the Low preset. This combination maximizes the game’s graphical features without sacrificing the responsiveness required in a third-person shooter.

At 1080p, the High preset remains viable with 84 FPS average, suitable for players who prioritize visuals over maximum frame rates. However, the Ultra preset at 64 FPS, while playable, offers diminishing returns in visual quality for the performance cost. For 1440p gaming, Medium settings at 65 FPS is the recommended choice, as it stays above the 60 FPS target, while Low at 84 FPS is the safer option for those who require higher frame rates.

4K resolution is not recommended with this hardware. Even the Low preset at 45 FPS fails to provide a consistently smooth experience, and the Medium preset’s 35 FPS average with 30 FPS minimums will result in noticeable frame pacing issues. Users seeking 4K should lower the resolution to 1440p or adjust to the Low preset if 4K is mandatory.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F features 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. This Raptor Lake architecture processor, built on Intel’s 10 nm process, provides substantial multi-threaded capability. The CPU’s benchmark scores confirm its strength: it achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and a single-core score of 3191, indicating robust performance in both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded workloads.

In Minimum, the CPU does not appear to be a limiting factor. The measured FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K follows a pattern consistent with GPU limitation, not CPU bottlenecking. The processor’s 20 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 provide ample bandwidth for game logic and physics calculations. The CPU’s 77th percentile ranking among all processors, alongside its near-parity with rivals like the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, indicates it has significant headroom even in CPU-intensive scenes.

The passmark multithread score of 25032 and 3dmark max threads score of 7307 further illustrate the CPU’s capability to handle concurrent tasks. For this specific game, the i5-13400F’s performance is more than sufficient, allowing the GTX 1660 Ti to be the sole determinant of frame rate across all tested settings and resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is built on the Turing architecture using a 12 nm process at TSMC. It features 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1500 MHz with a boost clock of 1770 MHz, and its memory runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). With 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, the card provides 5.437 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and a texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s.

The GPU’s modest 41st percentile ranking among all GPUs is reflected in its benchmark scores. Its 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1061 and Passmark G3D score of 12871 illustrate its mid-range positioning. The card’s performance in Minimum is clearly resolution-bound, with the memory bandwidth becoming a critical constraint at 4K. The 6 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for the game’s textures at tested settings, but the 192-bit memory interface struggles to feed the ROPs at 3840x2160.

The GTX 1660 Ti’s nearest rivals in benchmark scores include the AMD Radeon 540 (0.7% ahead), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (1.9% ahead), AMD Radeon R7 250 (2.2% ahead), and Intel Arc A310 (2.3% ahead). This tight grouping indicates the GPU sits at a performance tier where small architectural differences can meaningfully impact frame rates. In Minimum, the GPU’s 120 W TDP and dual-slot design deliver predictable performance, but the data clearly shows that 1080p is its comfort zone, with 1440p requiring reduced settings and 4K being largely impractical.