Minimum

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS for this combo at 1080p with High settings in Minimum?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 delivers an average of 115 FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings.

Q: How does the RTX 5050 compare to its closest rival in synthetic GPU benchmarks?

A: The RTX 5050's average benchmark score is 21,035, which places it 0.6% below the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21,153) and 1.6% above the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20,713), per the nearestRivals data.

Q: What is the CPU's multithreaded performance relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core i5-13400F scores 25,292 on average, matching the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (25,284, 0% delta) and sitting 0.3% below the Intel Core 5 120 (25,362) and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25,365).

Q: Does the combo perform better at 1440p High or 1080p Ultra?

A: At 2560x1440 with High settings, the average FPS is 74, while at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the average is 88 FPS. The 1080p Ultra preset offers a higher frame rate.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this combo in the measured data?

A: The lowest average is 30 FPS, observed at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 1,764th out of 2,939 tested combinations, placing it in the 60th percentile of all tested systems.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, drawing a 65 W TDP. The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 cache. This configuration supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, with PCIe Gen 5 connectivity on 16 CPU lanes.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 13400F shows a strong scaling pattern from 1,880 in the 2-thread test to 7,314 in the 16-thread test, with the max-thread score of 7,307 nearly matching the 16-thread result. This indicates that the CPU's performance is largely saturated by 16 threads, which aligns with its 16-thread count. The single-thread score of 960 in 3DMark and 3,191 in Cinebench R23 single-core suggests that per-core performance is solid for a 13th-gen part, though not class-leading.

In Cinebench R23, the multicore score of 22,604 is nearly 10 times the single-core score of 3,191, reflecting efficient multi-thread scaling. The Geekbench scores (11,068 multicore, 1,996 single-core) and PassMark results (25,032 multithread, 3,634 single-thread) reinforce this balanced profile. For a third-person shooter like Minimum, which is a 2014 title, the CPU's 16 threads are more than sufficient. The game's engine from that era typically relies on fewer than 8 threads, meaning the 13400F's 10 physical cores provide substantial headroom. The boost clock of 4.60 GHz ensures that even lightly threaded scenes (e.g., physics updates, AI pathfinding) will run at high frequencies, reducing frame time spikes.

The percentile ranking of 77 (vs. all CPUs) indicates this processor outperforms three-quarters of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals — the Ryzen 9 6900HS, Core 5 120, and Ryzen 5 5600X3D — all sit within a 0.4% delta of its average score, meaning that for this game, swapping among these CPUs would produce negligible differences in FPS. The 13400F's advantage lies in its combination of high boost clocks and a large L3 cache, which helps maintain consistent frame pacing in a title that may not be heavily threaded.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture (chip GB207) using TSMC's 5 nm process, with 16,900 million transistors packed into a 149 mm² die. It features 2,560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, along with 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2,317 MHz and a boost clock of 2,572 MHz, with memory running at 2,500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory sits on a 128-bit bus, providing 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s and texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s indicate that the RTX 5050 is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming. The FP32 performance of 13.17 TFLOPS (with 1:1 FP16) places it in the mid-range tier of the 50-series lineup. The GPU's 130 W TDP and single 8-pin power connector suggest it is designed for mainstream systems, with a suggested 300 W PSU.

In synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 5050 scores 17,326 in PassMark G3D and 25,002 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The Geekbench scores (90,334 OpenCL, 89,381 Vulkan) show strong compute performance. The GPU's percentile rank of 66 (vs. all GPUs) means it outperforms two-thirds of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, scores 21,153 (0.6% higher), while the Radeon RX 5600 XT scores 20,713 (1.6% lower). This tight grouping suggests that the RTX 5050 sits in a competitive mid-range segment.

For Minimum, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM is more than adequate for a 2014 game, which typically uses under 4 GB even at 4K. The 320 GB/s bandwidth ensures that texture streaming at higher resolutions does not become a bottleneck. The RTX 5050's boost clock of 2,572 MHz is high enough to maintain strong fill rates, which is crucial for a third-person shooter that may involve complex character models and environments. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) ensures compatibility with modern rendering paths, though Minimum likely uses DX11 given its release year.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, yielding 12 distinct configurations. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 179 (Low) to 88 (Ultra). The Medium preset delivers 137 FPS with a minimum of 117 and maximum of 158. High settings produce 115 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a 51% drop in performance (from 179 to 88 FPS), which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario where higher presets increase shader complexity and texture detail.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS ranges from 116 (Low) to 57 (Ultra). Medium achieves 88 FPS (min 75, max 102), while High delivers 74 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at the same settings is roughly 35-40% (e.g., High: 115 to 74 FPS, Low: 179 to 116 FPS). This indicates that the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor as resolution increases, since the CPU's workload remains constant while pixel count grows.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 62 (Low) to 30 (Ultra). Medium achieves 48 FPS (min 41, max 55), while High delivers 40 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K drops to 30 FPS, which is borderline playable but not smooth. The scaling from 1440p to 4K at High settings shows a 46% drop (74 to 40 FPS), and at Ultra, a 47% drop (57 to 30 FPS). These percentages highlight that the RTX 5050's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus become strained at 4K, even for an older game.

The Medium preset consistently shows the tightest min-max range (e.g., 117-158 at 1080p, 75-102 at 1440p, 41-55 at 4K), suggesting that Medium offers the most stable frame pacing. The Low preset, while delivering the highest FPS, likely reduces draw distances and shadow quality, which could affect gameplay visibility in a third-person shooter.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 1,764th out of 2,939 tested combinations for Minimum, placing it in the 60th percentile. This means that roughly 40% of tested systems perform better, while 60% perform worse. Given that the CPU ranks in the 77th percentile and the GPU in the 66th percentile, the combo's overall ranking is dragged down by the GPU's mid-range standing.

The rank of 1,764 suggests that in this game, the RTX 5050 is the primary bottleneck. The CPU's high percentile (77) indicates that it is not holding back performance, but the GPU's lower percentile (66) means that many systems with stronger GPUs (even paired with weaker CPUs) would outperform this combo. For a 2014 game like Minimum, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus are sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results (30-62 FPS) fall below the 60 FPS threshold that many players consider smooth.

The nearest rival systems in the GPU benchmarks — those with RX Vega M GL, HD 8970M, RX 5600 XT, or RTX A4000 Mobile — would likely produce similar FPS in Minimum, given the sub-2% delta in synthetic scores. However, the CPU differences could shift the balance: the 13400F's 16 threads provide more headroom than older mobile chips, which might help maintain minimum FPS in busy scenes.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset at 2560x1440 offers the best balance of performance and visual fidelity. At 88 FPS with a narrow min-max range (75-102), this configuration stays well above the 60 FPS threshold while providing a higher resolution than 1080p. The 1440p Medium setting also avoids the 4K Ultra's 30 FPS stutter and the 1080p Low's potential visual compromises.

For players with 1080p displays, the High preset at 115 FPS is the recommended choice. It delivers a smooth experience with better visual quality than Medium (137 FPS) without sacrificing much headroom. The 1080p Ultra (88 FPS) is viable but offers diminishing returns, as the jump from High to Ultra only adds 27 FPS of headroom loss (from 115 to 88) while increasing load on the GPU.

At 4K, the data suggests that Medium (48 FPS) is the highest playable preset, but even this falls below 60 FPS. The Low preset (62 FPS) is the only 4K configuration that reaches 60 FPS, but it likely degrades visual fidelity significantly. For 4K gaming, players should accept either 62 FPS at Low or 48 FPS at Medium, depending on whether frame rate or image quality takes priority.

The Ultra preset should be avoided at all resolutions if consistent frame pacing is desired. At 1080p Ultra (88 FPS), the frame rate is acceptable but not exceptional. At 1440p Ultra (57 FPS) and 4K Ultra (30 FPS), the experience becomes marginal or unplayable. The Medium preset's tight min-max range across all resolutions suggests it is the most optimized preset for this GPU's memory bandwidth and shader throughput.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the limiting component. Comparing the same settings across resolutions:

• Low: 179 FPS (1080p) → 116 FPS (1440p) → 62 FPS (4K). This is a 35% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 47% drop from 1440p to 4K.
• Medium: 137 FPS → 88 FPS → 48 FPS. Drops of 36% and 45%, respectively.
• High: 115 FPS → 74 FPS → 40 FPS. Drops of 36% and 46%, respectively.
• Ultra: 88 FPS → 57 FPS → 30 FPS. Drops of 35% and 47%, respectively.

The consistency of these percentages (35-36% for the first drop, 45-47% for the second) is striking. The transition from 1080p to 1440p increases pixel count by 78% (from ~2.1M to ~3.7M pixels), yet FPS drops by only ~35%. This indicates that the CPU is still partially involved at 1080p, masking some of the GPU's workload. The transition from 1440p to 4K increases pixel count by 125% (from ~3.7M to ~8.3M pixels), and the FPS drops by ~46%, which is closer to the pixel count ratio.

This pattern suggests that at 1080p, the CPU (with its 16 threads and 4.6 GHz boost) is able to feed the GPU fast enough that the GPU is not fully saturated. As resolution increases, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck, and the FPS scaling approaches the pixel-count scaling. The fact that the drops are nearly identical across all settings presets implies that the GPU's memory bandwidth (320 GB/s) and fill rate (82.30 GPixel/s) are the limiting factors at higher resolutions, rather than shader complexity.

For Minimum, which is a 2014 title, the data indicates that the RTX 5050 is well-suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming (with the right preset), but 4K gaming requires significant compromise. The 8 GB VRAM is not the issue — the 128-bit bus and 320 GB/s bandwidth are the constraints. Players seeking 4K at 60 FPS would need a GPU with higher memory bandwidth, while those sticking to 1080p can enjoy near-maximum settings with this combo.