Minimum

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-14400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 lands at rank 2703 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. That places this configuration in the bottom 8% of all tested systems, a position that reflects the GPU's severe limitation rather than the CPU's capability. The combo rank of 2703 with only 2939 total combos means roughly 236 configurations performed worse, leaving this pairing among the weakest tested for this title.

Benchmark results indicate the Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its nearest rivals in that synthetic test are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which scores 1186, and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 at 1190. The B370 trails both by 0.2% and 0.5% respectively, while it leads the AMD FirePro M2000 by 1.4%. This positions the GPU in territory occupied by integrated and legacy discrete graphics solutions from over a decade ago.

The CPU, by contrast, sits at the 83rd percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 32279. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U at 32233, the Intel Core i9-11900 at 32226, and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS at 32354. The i5-14400F outperforms the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U by 0.1%, edges the Core i9-11900 by 0.2%, and trails the Ryzen 7 6800HS by 0.2%. The delta between CPU and GPU percentiles — 83 versus 5 — tells the story: this is a system where the graphics processor is the bottleneck by a wide margin.

# GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is built on the Panther Lake chip with Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. Its base clock runs at 300 MHz with a boost clock of 2400 MHz. Memory is system shared, meaning there is no dedicated VRAM; the GPU draws from system memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The memory bus width is likewise system shared, which has direct implications for performance in Minimum.

With 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, the B370's compute capabilities are modest. It offers 10 ray tracing cores and delivers 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, with FP16 at 12.29 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. Power draw is rated at 25 W, which aligns with its integrated graphics package design — it is an IGP with no power connectors and no dedicated slot width.

The relationship between these specs and the measured FPS in Minimum is straightforward. The system shared memory configuration means bandwidth scales with whatever DDR4 or DDR5 memory the host system uses, but the GPU's raw throughput remains constrained. At 4K Ultra, the combo manages only 15 FPS average, while at 1080p Low it reaches 85 FPS. The GPU's 5th percentile standing among all GPUs is consistent with these results — it is simply not designed for demanding rendering workloads at high resolutions.

DirectX 12 Ultimate support with feature level 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 mean the API compatibility is modern, but the underlying hardware throughput limits what those APIs can accomplish. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 confirms the GPU's position near the bottom of the performance hierarchy.

# Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance on which settings preset delivers the best experience for this combo. At 1080p, the most commonly used resolution, the Low preset yields 85 FPS average, which is the highest measured result across all resolutions and settings. Medium produces 65 FPS, High drops to 55 FPS, and Ultra falls to 42 FPS.

Given that Minimum is a third-person shooter, frame rate consistency matters for gameplay responsiveness. The 1080p Low setting at 85 FPS offers the smoothest experience, and the data shows no minimum FPS recorded for that configuration, suggesting it maintains acceptable frame pacing. The 1080p Medium setting at 65 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS and maximum of 75 FPS is also playable, providing a balance between visual quality and performance.

Moving to 1440p, the Low preset delivers 55 FPS, which is borderline playable but represents a significant drop from 1080p. The 1440p Medium preset at 42 FPS with minimums of 36 FPS may be too inconsistent for fast-paced shooter gameplay. At 4K, even Low settings only reach 30 FPS, which is below the threshold for comfortable play in most shooters.

For users prioritizing a stable experience, the data suggests 1080p Low is the optimal choice. Those who want better visuals can use 1080p Medium at 65 FPS, but the jump to High at 55 FPS and Ultra at 42 FPS offers diminishing returns. The measured rows show that the gap between Low and Medium at 1080p is 20 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 10 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 13 FPS. The performance cost of each preset tier is not linear, with the Low to Medium transition being the most expensive in absolute FPS terms.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full settings ladder was measured. Low averages 85 FPS with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium averages 65 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS and maximum of 75 FPS. High averages 55 FPS. Ultra averages 42 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 43 FPS, representing a 50.6% drop from the lowest settings.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 55 FPS. Medium averages 42 FPS with a minimum of 36 FPS and maximum of 48 FPS. High averages 35 FPS. Ultra averages 27 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 28 FPS, a 50.9% drop. This consistency in percentage drop across resolutions suggests the GPU's scaling behavior is predictable regardless of resolution.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 30 FPS. Medium averages 23 FPS with a minimum of 19 FPS and maximum of 26 FPS. High averages 19 FPS. Ultra averages 15 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 15 FPS, a 50% drop. The pattern holds: moving from Low to Ultra consistently costs roughly half the frame rate at each resolution.

The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum values across all three resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 56 to 75 FPS, a 19 FPS spread. At 1440p, the range is 36 to 48 FPS, a 12 FPS spread. At 4K, the range is 19 to 26 FPS, a 7 FPS spread. The narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates the GPU is becoming the limiting factor, reducing the variance that comes from scene complexity or CPU-side bottlenecks.

# Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the limiting component. At Low settings, 1080p produces 85 FPS, 1440p produces 55 FPS, and 4K produces 30 FPS. That is a 35.3% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 64.7% drop from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, 1080p yields 65 FPS, 1440p yields 42 FPS, and 4K yields 23 FPS — drops of 35.4% and 64.6% respectively. At High settings, 1080p yields 55 FPS, 1440p yields 35 FPS, and 4K yields 19 FPS — drops of 36.4% and 65.5%. At Ultra settings, 1080p yields 42 FPS, 1440p yields 27 FPS, and 4K yields 15 FPS — drops of 35.7% and 64.3%.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all four settings presets is striking. Regardless of whether the game runs at Low or Ultra, the cost of moving to a higher resolution is nearly identical in proportional terms. This uniformity indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint at every resolution and settings combination. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the percentage drops would diminish at higher resolutions as the GPU load increases, but the data shows no such effect.

The pixel count increase from 1080p to 1440p is 77.8%, while the FPS drop is approximately 35%. From 1440p to 4K, the pixel count increases by 125%, and the FPS drops by approximately 45%. The fact that the FPS drop is smaller than the pixel count increase at each step suggests the GPU has some headroom in its memory subsystem or that the game's rendering workload does not scale perfectly with resolution. However, the overall trend confirms that resolution scaling is the dominant factor in performance, and the system shared memory architecture may contribute to this behavior since bandwidth is system dependent.

# CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F brings substantial processing power to this combo. It has 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The architecture is Raptor Lake-R on a 10 nm process, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, with ECC memory support enabled. The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1700 and has a 65 W TDP.

Synthetic benchmarks show the CPU's strength. In Cinebench R23, it scores 21645 multi-core and 3055 single-core. In Geekbench, it scores 11268 multi-core and 2058 single-core. PassMark results include 25470 for multithread and 3701 for single-thread. The avgBenchmarkScore of 32279 places it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs.

In Minimum, the CPU's role is secondary to the GPU's limitations. The measured FPS at 1080p Low of 85 FPS is likely near the upper bound of what the GPU can deliver, and the CPU has ample headroom to feed it. The 4.70 GHz boost clock and 16 threads provide more than enough processing power for a third-person shooter from 2014. The game's release date of 2014 means it was designed for hardware from that era, and this modern CPU far exceeds those requirements.

The nearest rival data reinforces this assessment. The CPU outperforms the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U and Intel Core i9-11900 by small margins, and trails the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS by just 0.2%. These deltas are within noise for synthetic benchmarks, indicating the i5-14400F is competitive with other mid-range to high-end processors. The bottleneck in this system is unambiguously the GPU, as the CPU's 83rd percentile standing versus the GPU's 5th percentile makes clear.

# FAQ

*Q: What is the overall rank of this CPU-GPU combo in Minimum?*

A: The combo ranks 2703 out of 2939 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 0.2% behind the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, 0.5% behind the ATI Radeon HD 5770, and 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000.

Q: What is the best settings preset for playable performance?

A: The 1080p Low preset delivers 85 FPS average, which is the highest measured result. The 1080p Medium preset at 65 FPS is also viable, with a minimum of 56 FPS.

Q: How much performance drops when moving from 1080p to 4K?

A: At Low settings, FPS drops from 85 to 30, a 64.7% reduction. The drop is consistent across all settings presets, ranging from 64.3% to 65.5%.

Q: What is the CPU's performance percentile and average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F sits at the 83rd percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 32279.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance in this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting component. The B370 ranks at the 5th percentile among GPUs, while the CPU ranks at the 83rd percentile, and resolution scaling shows consistent FPS drops that indicate GPU-bound performance.