Minimum

The Intel Core i5-14400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 delivers a robust 1080p experience in Minimum, but the data reveals a clear shift in system bottleneck as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 262 FPS average, dropping to 169 FPS at High settings. Moving to 2560x1440, the average at Low is 169 FPS, while High yields 109 FPS. At 3840x2160, the frame rates compress significantly: Low produces 91 FPS, High drops to 59 FPS, and Ultra falls to 45 FPS. This scaling pattern—where the gap between Low and High shrinks from 93 FPS at 1080p to 32 FPS at 4K—indicates that the RX 9070 becomes the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions, while the i5-14400F has sufficient headroom to drive high frame rates at lower pixel counts.

The resolution scaling behavior is textbook for a balanced mid-range pairing. At 1080p, the 262 FPS Low result suggests the CPU is doing meaningful work, but the 201 FPS Medium and 169 FPS High results show the GPU is already engaged. The 4K Ultra result of 45 FPS is the only sub-60 FPS average in the entire dataset, and it aligns with the GPU's 69th percentile ranking among all tested GPUs. The transition from 1440p to 4K at High settings—109 to 59 FPS, a 46% reduction—confirms that pixel throughput, not geometry or draw calls, is the dominant constraint. For a 2014 title, this level of scaling is expected; the data shows the combo is more than capable of high-refresh 1080p gaming but will require settings compromises for 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS deltas across resolutions tell a clear story about where the bottleneck resides. At 1080p Low, the system produces 262 FPS, which is 2.88 times higher than the 4K Low result of 91 FPS. This 2.88x ratio is close to the pixel count difference between 1080p (2.07 million pixels) and 4K (8.29 million pixels), which is exactly 4x. The fact that the FPS drop is less than the pixel ratio suggests that the CPU is limiting at 1080p, preventing the GPU from reaching its full potential. At 1080p High, the 169 FPS result drops to 109 FPS at 1440p and 59 FPS at 4K—a 35% and 65% reduction respectively, which outpaces the pixel count increases of 78% and 300%. This disproportionate drop indicates that at High settings, the GPU becomes the limiting factor even at 1440p.

The Medium settings row provides the most complete data, with min and max FPS recorded at all three resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the average is 201 FPS with a min of 171 and max of 231. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 130 FPS (min 110, max 149). At 4K Medium, the average is 70 FPS (min 59, max 80). The min-to-max spread narrows from 60 FPS at 1080p to 39 FPS at 1440p and 21 FPS at 4K, suggesting that frame pacing becomes more consistent as the GPU saturates. The 4K Medium min of 59 FPS is notably close to the 4K High average of 59 FPS, indicating that the GPU is hitting a throughput ceiling around that performance level.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1119 out of 3712 tested combinations in Minimum, placing it in the 70th percentile of all CPU-GPU pairings. This is a strong showing for a mid-range processor paired with an upper-mid-range GPU. The RX 9070's individual GPU percentile is 69, while the i5-14400F's CPU percentile is 83, which explains the overall combo ranking—the GPU is the slightly weaker link, but both components are above the median. The ranking context is important: being in the top 30% of all combos means this pairing outperforms the vast majority of systems tested, even if it doesn't reach the top tier reserved for flagship hardware.

The CPU's nearest rivals provide context for its contribution. The i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32279, which is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (32233) and 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i9-11900 (32226). It trails the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS by 0.2% (32354) and leads the Intel Core i7-12800H by 0.5% (32121). These deltas are minimal, meaning the i5-14400F offers performance parity with a range of mobile and desktop chips from previous generations. In-game, this translates to consistent frame delivery without CPU-induced stutters, provided the GPU is not overwhelmed. The GPU's nearest rivals show a similar pattern: the RX 9070 scores 23877 on average, 0.6% ahead of the GTX TITAN Z (23736) and 1.1% ahead of the RTX 3080 Mobile (23628), while trailing the RX 6800S by 0.8% (24063) and the RTX 2080 SUPER by 1.2% (24170).

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture using a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 357 mm² and 53,900 million transistors. Its memory configuration is substantial: 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a key asset for Minimum, a 2014 title that was designed for older hardware—the RX 9070 has more bandwidth and capacity than the game can fully utilize, which explains why even 4K Ultra only produces 45 FPS rather than a lower figure. The GPU's base clock is 1330 MHz, with a boost clock of 2520 MHz and a game clock of 2070 MHz. The boost clock is 89% higher than the base clock, indicating significant dynamic frequency scaling headroom.

The GPU's compute specifications are equally robust: 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The pixel rate of 322.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 564.5 GTexel/s are more than adequate for a game from 2014. The FP32 throughput of 36.13 TFLOPS is the headline number, but in practice, the 4K results show that memory bandwidth and ROP throughput are the more relevant constraints for this title. The 4K High result of 59 FPS aligns almost exactly with the 4K Medium minimum of 59 FPS, suggesting a hard performance wall around that frame rate regardless of settings. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6290 and PassMark G3D score of 25381 place it in the 69th percentile overall, which is a solid but not exceptional position for a current-generation card.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete dataset shows consistent performance scaling across all settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 262 at Low to 128 at Ultra, with Medium at 201 and High at 169. The spread from Low to Ultra is 134 FPS, representing a 51% performance penalty for the highest quality preset. The 1440p results show a similar pattern but compressed: Low hits 169 FPS, High reaches 109 FPS, Medium sits at 130 FPS, and Ultra drops to 83 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra spread is 86 FPS, a 51% penalty relative to Low—the same relative drop as 1080p, indicating consistent scaling behavior.

At 3840x2160, the performance landscape changes dramatically. Low produces 91 FPS, Medium averages 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 and maximum of 80, High averages 59 FPS, and Ultra falls to 45 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra spread is 46 FPS, representing a 51% penalty, but the absolute numbers are much lower. The 4K Medium min of 59 FPS is identical to the 4K High average, which suggests that the GPU's performance ceiling around 60 FPS at 4K is not settings-dependent but rather a hard architectural limit for this workload. The 1080p Medium min of 171 FPS and max of 231 FPS show a 60 FPS variance, while the 1440p Medium shows a 39 FPS variance (110 to 149). This tightening of frame delivery at higher resolutions is typical of GPU-bound scenarios.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, and it has a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration is more than sufficient for Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter that was designed for the hardware of its era. The CPU's benchmark scores confirm its capability: Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and single-core score of 3055, Geekbench multi-core of 11268 and single-core of 2058, and PassMark multi-thread of 25470 with single-thread of 3701.

The CPU's role in this pairing is most evident at 1080p Low, where the 262 FPS result is likely close to the CPU's maximum frame delivery capability. The fact that the 1440p Low result is 169 FPS—a 35% drop from 1080p—while the pixel count only increases by 78% suggests that the GPU is taking over as the limiting factor even at Low settings once resolution rises. The CPU's 83rd percentile ranking among all tested CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32279, places it comfortably above the median. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, scores nearly identically (32233, 0.1% delta), confirming that the i5-14400F delivers mainstream-level performance that won't bottleneck the RX 9070 in most scenarios. The 10-core, 16-thread layout provides ample parallel throughput for modern game engines, though Minimum is unlikely to utilize more than a few cores effectively.

FAQ

*Q: Is the i5-14400F bottlenecking the RX 9070 in Minimum?*

A: At 1080p Low, the 262 FPS result suggests the CPU is reaching its limit, as the 1440p Low result of 169 FPS represents only a 35% drop despite a 78% pixel increase. However, at High settings and above, the GPU becomes the bottleneck, as evidenced by the 4K High (59 FPS) and 4K Ultra (45 FPS) results.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average is 109 FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings. This is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay and represents a 45% reduction from the 1080p High result of 169 FPS.

Q: How does the RX 9070 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RX 9070 has an average benchmark score of 23877, which is 0.6% ahead of the GTX TITAN Z (23736) and 1.1% ahead of the RTX 3080 Mobile (23628). It trails the RX 6800S by 0.8% (24063) and the RTX 2080 SUPER by 1.2% (24170).

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with this combo?

A: Only with settings compromises. At 4K Low, the average is 91 FPS, but at High it drops to 59 FPS and at Ultra to 45 FPS. The 4K Medium average of 70 FPS with a minimum of 59 FPS is the most playable 4K configuration.

Q: What is the CPU's single-threaded performance?

A: The i5-14400F scores 3055 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 3701 in PassMark single-thread. Its boost clock of 4.70 GHz provides strong single-threaded performance, which is relevant for games that rely on a few fast cores.

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

A: The 1080p Low average of 262 FPS is 2.05 times faster than the 1080p Ultra average of 128 FPS. The same relative difference applies at 1440p (169 vs 83 FPS) and 4K (91 vs 45 FPS), where Low is consistently about twice as fast as Ultra.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 201 FPS average with a minimum of 171 FPS, which is an excellent balance for high-refresh monitors—the min FPS stays above 144 Hz, ensuring no drops below typical high-refresh thresholds. The High preset at 1080p (169 FPS average) is also viable for 144 Hz displays, but Ultra drops to 128 FPS, which may fall below the refresh rate of the fastest gaming monitors. For 1080p, Medium is the recommended preset for competitive play, while High offers a better visual experience without sacrificing playability.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset provides 130 FPS average with a minimum of 110 FPS, which is ideal for 120 Hz displays. The High preset at 109 FPS average is still above 100 FPS, making it a solid choice for 100 Hz monitors, but the 83 FPS Ultra result is best reserved for slower displays. For 1440p, Medium offers the best combination of visual quality and frame rate stability, as the 110 FPS minimum ensures no dips below 100 FPS. At 3840x2160, the Low preset (91 FPS) is the only configuration that guarantees 60+ FPS gameplay, while Medium (70 FPS average, 59 FPS minimum) is borderline—the minimum exactly hits 60 FPS, but any demanding scene could push it lower. For 4K, Low is the safest recommendation for consistent performance, with Medium as an option for those willing to accept occasional dips to 59 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K (45 FPS) is not recommended for playable frame rates, and High (59 FPS) sits just below the 60 FPS threshold, making both presets less desirable than the lower settings.