Minimum

This analysis examines the performance of the Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER in the third-person shooter Minimum, a title released on 2014-06-25. The data comes from direct measurement and places this CPU-GPU combination at rank 2602 out of 3712 tested combos in the game. The CPU belongs to Intel’s Raptor Lake architecture and was launched with a launch MSRP of $196. The GPU is a Turing-based product with a launch MSRP of 399 USD. This configuration yields a meaningful spread of frame rates across resolution and quality settings, highlighting the specific strengths and bottlenecks of each component in this workload.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the benchmark database, this combination sits at the 70th percentile overall — that is, more than 70% of all tested combos deliver a higher performance score in Minimum. The CPU alone holds a percentile rank of 77 among all processors (meaning it outperforms 77% of CPUs), while the GPU’s percentile is 62 among all graphics cards. This discrepancy points toward the GPU as the more limiting factor in this pairing, especially when pushing higher resolutions or more demanding settings.

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 25292, which places it nearly level with its nearest rivals. It is exactly matched by the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (avgScore 25284, deltaPct 0) and sits 0.3% behind the Intel Core 5 120 (avgScore 25362) and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (avgScore 25365). Meanwhile, it is 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (avgScore 25201). These negligible deltas suggest that the i5-13400F is a highly typical mid-range processor, with performance well within 0.3% of its closest competitors.

The GPU similarly ranks in the mid-range. Its average benchmark score is 18093, which is 0.4% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (avgScore 18159). It is also 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (avgScore 18189) and 1.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 460 (avgScore 18373). The Intel Arc A770M trails by 1.6% (avgScore 18383). These close margins indicate that the RTX 2060 SUPER sits in a dense segment of graphics cards, with no clear statistical jab against its identical tier.

The combination’s overall rank of 2602 out of 3712 suggests that while the individual pieces are respectable for their generation, the overall frame delivery in Minimum is not exceptional. The CPU is comfortably above the GPU in relative strength, which is typical for a system that is GPU-bound in a demanding title like this one.

GPU Role

The RTX 2060 SUPER brings a substantial 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, resulting in a memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. Its base clock runs at 1470 MHz, with a boost clock of 1650 MHz. The card houses 2176 shading units, 136 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 34 ray tracing cores, and 272 tensor cores, making it a capable Turing-generation GPU. The GPU’s passmark G3D score is 10873, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2011, both reflecting a mid-tier performance level.

In the game Minimum, this GPU clearly controls the frame rate. At 4K resolution, the average framerate jumps from 29 FPS on Ultra to 38 on High, then to 45 on Medium, and finally 59 on Low — a nearly two-fold widest swing from Ultra to Low. AT 1440p, the same pattern holds: Ultra 54 FPS, High 71, Medium 84, Low 110. At 1080p, the numbers rise to 83 FPS on Ultra, 109 on High, 130 on Medium, and 170 on Low. The consistent increase of FPS as settings drop across all resolutions confirms that the GPU is the primary constraint, since lowering the load directly boosts frame rates.

The GPU’s 175 W TDP and single 8-pin power connector suggest it is a modest power draw, but the game’s demand on shading and memory is evident in the halving of performance when the resolution moves from 1080p to 4K. The presence of ray tracing cores and tensor cores in the GPU, while not necessarily utilized, does not alter the fact that the raw pixel throughput is decisive in this title.

Resolution Scaling

The measurement records clearly show how the average FPS drops as resolution increases—this is the classic sign of a GPU-bound workload. Starting with Low settings, the averageFPS at 1080p is 179, at 1440p it's 110, and at 4K it's 59. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is moderate (110 vs 179 is about 60% of the original), while the step to 4K reduces the figure to about a one-third of the 1080p value (59 vs 179). This is a significant decline, implying that half of the GPU load is reserved for rendering those extra pixels.

A similar trend appears at Medium settings: 1080p yields 143 FPS, 1440p gives 84, and 4K falls to 45. The difference between resolutions is also consistent at High: 175, 84, 38. At Ultra, the numbers are 104, 53, and 30. The FPS differences between successive resolutions are roughly similar, again pointing to a linear scaling of GPU processing.

Importantly, the available minimum and maximum FPS numbers are only recorded for Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the min is 111 and max 150, giving a range of 39 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the min is 63 and max 103 (a range of 40). At 4K Medium, the min is 121 and max 150 (range 22). While the mean values decline with resolution, the spread between min and max also shortens, suggesting the frame pacing becomes more variable at lower resolutions - likely because the CPU can keep up more easily at high FPS.

This resolution dependency indicates that the limiting component is the GPU. The consistent 20-40% per-frame performance drop when raising the resolution signals that the RTX 2060 SUPER cannot keep up with the pixel load in Minimum, particularly at the Ultra preset.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS of this combo at 1080p on High settings?

A: The average frame rate at 1920×1080 High is 109 FPS.

Q: Does the GPU have more memory than 8 GB on the RTX 2060 SUPER?

A: No, the GPU has exactly 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, which is fixed in the test version.

Q: What is the rank of this CPU+GPU combination in the game?

A: It is ranked 2602 out of 3712 combinations tested.

Q: At which resolution and setting does the combo cross the 60 FPS average threshold on Medium?

A: At 1440p Medium, the average is 84 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it is 130 FPS, both above 60 FPS.

Q: What is the CPU's multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The CPU scores 22604 in Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Q: What is the GPU's memory bandwidth?

A: The memory bandwidth is 448.0 GB/s.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following are the exact average FPS values recorded for this combination in Minimum, along with the minimum and maximum for the Medium preset where they exist.

• 1920×1080, Low: average 170 FPS
• 1920×1080, Medium: average 130 FPS (metric range 111–150)
• 1920×1080, High: average 109 FPS
• 1920×1080, Ultra: average 83 FPS
• 2560×1440, Low: average 110 FPS
• 2560×1440, Medium: average 84 FPS (min 71–max 97)
• 2560×1440, High: average 71 FPS
• 2560×1440, Ultra: average 54 FPS
• 3840×2160, Low: average 59 FPS
• 3840×2160, Medium: average 45 FPS (min 38–max 52)
• 3840×2160, High: average 38 FPS
• 3840×2160, Ultra: average 29 FPS

This breakdown gives a clear picture: at 1080p, even the highest preset yields an average above 80 FPS; at 1440p, the Medium and High settings remain playable, while 4K requires the Low preset to maintain a 56 FPS average.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, running at a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost of 4.60 GHz with a TDP of 65 W. It has an L3 cache of 20 MB shared across the cores. At 10 nm process, its compute ability is above average for this tier.

The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 22604, single-core 3191. In 3DMark with 16 threads it reaches 6625, while 2-thread and 4-thread tests score 1880 and 3459, respectively. The 6-thread score is 5591. These numbers indicate a balanced multi-threading workload. In Geekbench, the multi-core score is 11068 and single-core is 1996.

In Minimum, the CPU’s impact is indirectly visible by comparing the FPS between settings. At 1080p low, the system runs at 170 FPS—far beyond a typical 60 Hz target—suggesting the CPU is not limiting the frame rate in that scenario. Even at 4K low, the average is 59 FPS, showing the GPU is concentrating on the biggest bottleneck. With only 8 GB of video memory, the resolution scaling and geometry load strain the GPU as exposed, while the CPU has plenty of headroom to deal with the game’s logic.

The CPU's percentile (77% of all CPUs) and its near parity with rivals like the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (0% difference) indicates that this processor can hold its own in CPU-heavy scenes. However, the overall system rank at 2602/1074 suggests that the GPU cannot consistently deliver, and the CPU's strength does not directly translate to a high rank in this particular game combination.

Settings Recommendations

According to the measured data, the best quality-to-FPS trade-off depends on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1080p, the High preset provides 109 FPS, which easily covers 60 Hz and leaves room for 120 Hz or 144 Hz monitors. The Ultra preset still yields 83 FPS, which is acceptable for smooth play, but not ideal for maximum refresh rates—Medium and High are safer choices. At 1440p, the High preset hits 71 FPS, which handles a 60 Hz display. For 1440p at high refresh (≥120 Hz), the Medium preset averages 84 FPS, offering a slightly reduced quality with a greater in FPS. At 4K, the most reasonable option is Low, which produces a 59 FPS average—just below the 60FPS target. The Medium preset drops to 45 FPS, which is choppy, and Ultra is practically unplayable at 29 FPS. Therefore, the recommendation is to use Medium at 1080p or 1440p for a balanced experience, and Low at 4K for minimum acceptable smoothness. If a 60 Hz display, 1440p High balances visual quality without compromise, while 1080p Ultra is a valid alternative for graphics puritans who sacrifice a few frames.

These settings recommendations strictly based on the measured averages; individual preferences and sensitivity to drops may influence the minimal acceptable frame rate, but the data clearly indicates the optimal trade-offs.