Minimum

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The data shows a steep, predictable performance cliff as resolution climbs, but the shape of that curve reveals that this pairing is heavily GPU-bound at every step above 1080p. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo delivers 83.4 FPS, which drops to 57.1 FPS at 2560x1440 — a 31.5% reduction — and then falls further to 31.3 FPS at 3840x2160, a 45.2% drop from 1440p. This is a textbook GPU-limited scenario: the Intel Core i5-14400F has ample headroom, while the GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER's 6 GB GDDR6 frame buffer and 192-bit memory interface simply cannot sustain the pixel throughput required at higher resolutions.

The scaling pattern is consistent across settings. At Low, the combo goes from 129.6 FPS at 1080p to 85.8 FPS at 1440p (a 33.8% drop) and then to 46.4 FPS at 4K (a 45.9% drop from 1440p). At Medium, the numbers are 101.9 FPS, 66.5 FPS, and 33.2 FPS respectively — the 4K figure represents a 50.1% loss from 1440p. The Ultra preset tells the most severe story: 63.5 FPS at 1080p, 42.2 FPS at 1440p, and a nearly unplayable 20.1 FPS at 4K.

What this means is that the limiting component is unequivocally the GPU. The CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads, boosted by a 4.70 GHz maximum clock, are not the bottleneck — even at 1080p Low, the frame rate of 129.6 FPS is well below what this processor can theoretically push in a lighter workload. The game's 2014 release date suggests a modest CPU demand, and the benchmark results confirm that the GTX 1660 SUPER is the component that dictates the experience. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect to see smaller FPS gaps between resolutions, particularly at Low settings where GPU load is minimal. Instead, the consistent 30-50% drops across every settings tier point to pure pixel-pushing limits.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is a Turing-architecture card built on a 12 nm process at TSMC, with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock of 1530 MHz and boost clock of 1785 MHz, combined with 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs, produce a raw FP32 throughput of 5.027 TFLOPS. These specifications place the card at the 55th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 14286.

In Minimum, the GPU's role is decisive. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra — 20.1 — is a direct reflection of the card's memory bandwidth and shading capacity being overwhelmed. The 6 GB VRAM is sufficient for this title's textures at 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K Ultra preset demands more than the 48 ROPs can rasterize. The card's pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s are the limiting factors at higher resolutions, not the CPU.

The nearest rivals in the GPU benchmark database show how close this card is to its competition. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 averages 14314 (a delta of -0.2%), the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics also averages 14315 (-0.2%), and the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT averages 14389 (-0.7%). This tight clustering means the GTX 1660 SUPER is essentially performance-equivalent to these cards in synthetic workloads, but the in-game results for Minimum show that real-world performance can diverge based on driver optimization and memory subsystem behavior. The card's 14 Gbps effective memory speed is a key advantage over older GDDR5-based rivals, which helps explain why it maintains playable frame rates at 1440p Medium (66.5 FPS) despite its age.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-14400F provides 10 cores and 16 threads, split between performance and efficiency cores, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. This Raptor Lake-R architecture chip, built on Intel's 10 nm process, has 20 MB of shared L3 cache and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. Its benchmark results are strong: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21914 and single-core score of 3093, plus a Geekbench multi-core score of 11209 and single-core of 2333. The Passmark multi-thread score of 25783 and single-thread of 3723 place the processor at the 88th percentile among all CPUs.

In Minimum, the CPU's role is almost entirely preparatory — it feeds the GPU with draw calls and physics data, but the game's 2014-era engine does not stress modern multi-core processors. The i5-14400F's single-core performance, as evidenced by the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3093, is more than adequate for the game's thread scheduling. The fact that frame rates scale so dramatically with resolution and settings — from 129.6 FPS at 1080p Low down to 20.1 FPS at 4K Ultra — confirms that the CPU is never the limiting factor. If the CPU were the constraint, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions, but that is clearly not the case.

The nearest CPU rivals in the database illustrate the i5-14400F's position: the Intel Core i7-12800H averages 32513 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 averages 32446 (0.2% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 7 250 averages 32584 (-0.2% delta). This means the i5-14400F is statistically tied with these processors in overall benchmark performance, giving it ample headroom for any game that doesn't require extreme multi-threading. For Minimum specifically, the CPU's 65 W TDP and dual-channel memory support are more than sufficient; the bottleneck is purely the GPU.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Minimum?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings presets remain playable. At 1080p, even Ultra achieves 63.5 FPS, while High hits 83.4 FPS, Medium reaches 101.9 FPS, and Low tops out at 129.6 FPS.

Q: Can this combo handle 1440p gaming in Minimum?

A: Yes, but only at Low or Medium settings. At 1440p Low, the combo delivers 85.8 FPS, and at Medium it drops to 66.5 FPS. High settings at 1440p produce 57.1 FPS, which is borderline, while Ultra falls to 42.2 FPS, which may be too choppy for some players.

Q: Is 4K viable with the GTX 1660 SUPER and i5-14400F in this game?

A: Not really. The best 4K result is 46.4 FPS at Low settings, which is below the 60 FPS threshold most players prefer. Medium drops to 33.2 FPS, High to 31.3 FPS, and Ultra to 20.1 FPS. The 6 GB VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth cannot sustain smooth 4K performance.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER averages 14286 in the GPU benchmark suite. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 scores 14314 (-0.2% delta), Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics scores 14315 (-0.2%), and AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT scores 14389 (-0.7%). The differences are negligible, meaning in-game performance is likely to vary more by driver than by raw compute.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-14400F averages 32508. The Intel Core i7-12800H scores 32513 (0% delta), AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 scores 32446 (0.2% delta), and AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 32584 (-0.2% delta). This puts the i5-14400F in a dead heat with these alternatives for overall processing power.

Q: What does the combo rank tell us about its overall position?

A: The combo ranks 1517 out of 1733 tested combinations in this game, placing it in the lower 12.5% of all pairings. This reflects the GTX 1660 SUPER's age and tier, not the CPU's capability.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-14400F + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER combination ranks 1517 out of 1733 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the bottom 12.5% of all pairings. This rank is almost entirely attributable to the GPU, which sits at the 55th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU ranks at the 88th percentile. The disparity between these two components is stark: the processor is a high-end modern chip, while the graphics card is an end-of-life product from the GeForce 16 series.

This rank means that in the database's tested population, the vast majority of other combinations deliver higher frame rates in Minimum. The data shows why: the GPU's 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 6 GB of VRAM are simply not competitive against newer cards with more memory bandwidth and higher shading throughput. However, the rank also indicates that the combo is not the worst — 216 combinations rank below it, likely those with even older or more integrated graphics solutions.

The CPU's high percentile (88th) and the GPU's middling percentile (55th) create an imbalance that shows up in the scaling data. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 129.6 FPS, which is respectable for a 2019 GPU, but the rank suggests that many combos with weaker CPUs but stronger GPUs would outperform it at higher settings. The lesson is clear: for Minimum, the GPU is the determining factor for rank, and this particular GPU holds the combo back.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture across three resolutions and four settings tiers, with all values representing average frame rates:

1920x1080:

• Low: 129.6 FPS
• Medium: 101.9 FPS
• High: 83.4 FPS
• Ultra: 63.5 FPS

2560x1440:

• Low: 85.8 FPS
• Medium: 66.5 FPS
• High: 57.1 FPS
• Ultra: 42.2 FPS

3840x2160:

• Low: 46.4 FPS
• Medium: 33.2 FPS
• High: 31.3 FPS
• Ultra: 20.1 FPS

The pattern is consistent: each resolution step up costs roughly 30-50% of the frame rate, and each settings tier up from Low to Ultra costs an additional 20-40% within a given resolution. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 66.1 FPS (from 129.6 to 63.5), while at 4K the gap narrows to 26.3 FPS (from 46.4 to 20.1), showing that the GPU's limits compress the settings headroom at higher resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

For a smooth 60 FPS experience, 1920x1080 with High settings is the clear choice, delivering 83.4 FPS with a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. If you prefer higher visual fidelity, Ultra at 1080p still holds at 63.5 FPS, but it is close to the edge — any scene complexity increase could push it below 60. Medium at 1080p offers 101.9 FPS, which is ideal for players with 144 Hz monitors who want a responsive feel without sacrificing too much visual quality.

At 2560x1440, the data suggests Medium as the best balance, with 66.5 FPS providing a playable experience that stays above 60. Low at 1440p (85.8 FPS) is the only other preset that comfortably exceeds 60, while High (57.1 FPS) and Ultra (42.2 FPS) fall short. For 4K, no preset achieves 60 FPS — the best option is Low at 46.4 FPS, which is playable but not smooth, and it would be advisable to stick to 1440p or 1080p for a better experience.

The verdict is straightforward: this combo is best suited to 1080p gaming, where it can handle Ultra settings at 63.5 FPS or High at 83.4 FPS. If you must play at 1440p, choose Medium or Low. Avoid 4K unless you accept sub-50 FPS performance. The GTX 1660 SUPER's 6 GB VRAM and 125 W TDP are the limiting factors, and the i5-14400F's 65 W TDP and strong single-core performance mean it will not hold you back at any resolution.