Minimum

The Intel Core i5-14400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti delivers a compelling 1080p and 1440p experience in Minimum, a Third-Person Shooter from 2014. The measured frame rates show this combination is heavily GPU-bound at lower resolutions, with the CPU becoming a more significant factor only as resolution climbs to 4K. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data, contextualizes the CPU’s role, and offers settings guidance based strictly on the provided benchmark results.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent with a GPU-limited scenario. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 335 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 216 FPS, a 36% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 116 FPS, which is another 46% reduction from 1440p. This pattern indicates that the RTX 5070 Ti’s rendering throughput is the primary constraint as pixel count rises, not the CPU.

For High settings, the scaling is similar. The average FPS goes from 215 at 1080p, to 139 at 1440p, and finally to 75 at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is 35%, and from 1440p to 4K is 46%. This nearly identical scaling ratio suggests that the game’s workload at High settings is equally GPU-bound across these resolutions, with the CPU having ample headroom.

The Medium preset shows the same trend. At 1080p, the average is 257 FPS; at 1440p, it is 166 FPS; and at 4K, it is 89 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 35%, and from 1440p to 4K is 46%. Again, the consistent 35% and 46% reductions point to a pure GPU throughput limit. Even the Ultra preset, which is the most demanding, sees 164 FPS at 1080p, 106 FPS at 1440p, and 57 FPS at 4K. The relative drops are 35% and 46%, respectively, matching the other presets.

What this scaling says about the limiting component is clear: the Intel Core i5-14400F is not the bottleneck at any resolution tested. The FPS halving pattern from 1080p to 4K is a classic sign of the GPU’s pixel fill rate and shading units being saturated. If the CPU were the limitation, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat across resolutions, especially at 1080p where the GPU has less work. Instead, the FPS drops dramatically as resolution increases, which confirms the RTX 5070 Ti is doing the heavy lifting.

The only instance where the CPU might start to matter is at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS falls to 57. But even there, the drop from 1440p Ultra (106 FPS) to 4K Ultra (57 FPS) is 46%, which is in line with the other settings. This suggests that even at the highest settings, the GPU remains the limiting factor. The data indicates that for Minimum, this CPU+GPU combo is well balanced, with the RTX 5070 Ti dictating performance at all resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21645 and single-core score of 3055 place it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. This level of single-thread performance is more than sufficient for a 2014 title like Minimum, which was designed for much older hardware.

In the measured FPS data, the CPU’s role is largely to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 335 FPS. This is a very high frame rate, and it suggests that the CPU is capable of issuing render commands fast enough to keep the RTX 5070 Ti busy. If the CPU were weak, we would see a plateau around 200-250 FPS at 1080p, regardless of settings. Instead, the FPS scales from 164 FPS at Ultra to 335 FPS at Low, which indicates the CPU is not imposing a hard ceiling.

The CPU’s boost clock of 4.70 GHz is likely the key attribute here. Minimum is a third-person shooter, and such games typically have a single primary game thread that drives physics, animation, and AI. A high boost clock helps ensure that this thread does not become a bottleneck. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3055 confirms strong single-thread performance, which directly translates to gaming FPS in CPU-bound scenarios.

However, the data shows that this combo is rarely CPU-bound. At 1440p High, the average FPS is 139, and at 4K High, it is 75. In both cases, the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU’s 10 cores and 16 threads provide headroom for background tasks and future games that use more threads, but for Minimum, the cores beyond the primary game thread are mostly idle. The 20 MB of shared L3 cache also helps with memory latency, but again, the game’s data set is small enough that this is not a differentiator.

The nearest rivals in CPU benchmarks are the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, Intel Core i9-11900, AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS, and Intel Core i7-12800H. The i5-14400F’s average benchmark score is 32279, which is 0.1% ahead of the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U and 0.2% ahead of the Core i9-11900, while being 0.2% behind the Ryzen 7 6800HS and 0.5% ahead of the Core i7-12800H. These are negligible differences, meaning that swapping to any of these CPUs would likely produce identical FPS numbers in Minimum because the GPU is the bottleneck anyway. The CPU’s role here is to be "good enough," and the data confirms it is.

FAQ

*Q: What is the maximum average FPS achievable with this combo in Minimum?*

A: The highest measured average FPS is 335, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 57, which is the lowest measured result across all configurations.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: The data shows the GPU is the limiting factor. At 1080p, the FPS varies from 164 (Ultra) to 335 (Low), indicating the RTX 5070 Ti’s workload changes with settings, while the CPU keeps up.

Q: What is the frame time consistency at 1440p Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 166, with a minimum of 141 and a maximum of 190. This 49 FPS range suggests some variance but generally smooth performance.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 403 out of 3712 tested combos, placing it in the top 11% of all configurations tested for Minimum.

Q: Does the CPU’s 10-core configuration help in this game?

A: The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21645 indicates strong multi-threaded performance, but Minimum likely uses only a few threads. The high boost clock of 4.70 GHz is more relevant for gaming FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank in Minimum is 403 out of 3712 tested combinations. This places it in the top 10.9% of all configurations tested for this game. Given that the RTX 5070 Ti is a high-end GPU from the GeForce 50-series, this rank is expected. The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 32974 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6604 confirm its position in the 86th percentile of all GPUs.

What this rank means in practice is that the vast majority of the 3712 combos tested are slower. The 403rd rank suggests that while this is a fast combination, there are still 402 combos that produce higher average FPS. Those combos likely feature even more powerful GPUs or CPUs with higher single-thread clocks, but the margin is probably small given the high FPS numbers already achieved.

The CPU’s percentile rank of 83rd among all CPUs is slightly lower than the GPU’s 86th percentile. This indicates that the CPU is slightly less exceptional than the GPU, but the gaming results are still excellent. In Minimum, the GPU is the primary driver of performance, so the CPU’s slightly lower percentile does not hurt the combo’s overall rank. The 403rd rank out of 3712 is a strong result, putting this system in the top decile of all tested hardware combinations.

The nearest GPU rivals, based on average benchmark scores, are the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, Intel Arc A550M, AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT, and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT. The RTX 5070 Ti’s average score of 49957 is 0.1% behind the RX Vega 64 and 0.4% ahead of the Arc A550M, while being 2% behind the RX 6900 XT and 3.1% ahead of the RX 6800 XT. Despite these small benchmark deltas, the RTX 5070 Ti’s measured FPS in Minimum is what matters, and the data shows it delivers high frame rates across all settings.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience depends on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1920x1080, all settings are playable. Low settings produce 335 FPS, which is ideal for a 240Hz or 360Hz monitor. Medium settings at 257 FPS also support high refresh rates, while High at 215 FPS and Ultra at 164 FPS are still excellent. For most 1080p users, High settings offer a balance between visual quality and frame rate, as 215 FPS exceeds the refresh rate of all but the most extreme gaming monitors.

At 2560x1440, the recommend is High settings, which produce 139 FPS. This is smooth for a 144Hz monitor. Medium settings at 166 FPS are also a great choice for those with 165Hz or 170Hz displays. Low settings at 216 FPS are overkill for most 1440p monitors, but they do provide maximum responsiveness. Ultra at 106 FPS is playable but may not fully saturate a high refresh rate panel. The sweet spot is High, as it delivers 139 FPS with better visual fidelity than Medium.

At 3840x2160, the choices are more constrained. High settings yield 75 FPS, which is suitable for a 60Hz or 75Hz monitor. Medium settings at 89 FPS are better for 60Hz displays with some headroom. Low settings at 116 FPS allow for 100Hz or 120Hz 4K monitors, but with reduced visuals. Ultra at 57 FPS is just below 60 FPS, so it may result in occasional stutter on a 60Hz display. For 4K, the recommended preset is Medium, as it provides 89 FPS, which is above 60 FPS and offers a good balance of quality and performance.

Across all resolutions, the data shows that the "Medium" preset is a safe choice. It consistently delivers average FPS that are roughly 40-50% higher than Ultra settings, while still looking better than Low. For the best visual experience without sacrificing smoothness, High settings are the pick at 1080p and 1440p, while Medium is the pick at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following is the complete list of measured average FPS values for this CPU+GPU combo in Minimum:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 335 FPS average
• Medium: 257 FPS average (minimum 218, maximum 295)
• High: 215 FPS average
• Ultra: 164 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 216 FPS average
• Medium: 166 FPS average (minimum 141, maximum 190)
• High: 139 FPS average
• Ultra: 106 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 116 FPS average
• Medium: 89 FPS average (minimum 76, maximum 103)
• High: 75 FPS average
• Ultra: 57 FPS average

The Medium preset is the only one with min/max FPS data provided. At 1080p Medium, the range is 218 to 295 FPS, showing a 77 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range is 141 to 190 FPS, a 49 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range is 76 to 103 FPS, a 27 FPS spread. The narrower range at higher resolutions indicates more consistent frame pacing, likely because the GPU is more fully utilized and frame times are more uniform.

The largest gap between settings is at 1080p, where Low (335 FPS) is more than double Ultra (164 FPS). This gap narrows at higher resolutions: at 1440p, Low (216 FPS) is roughly double Ultra (106 FPS), and at 4K, Low (116 FPS) is just over double Ultra (57 FPS). This suggests that the performance cost of Ultra settings scales with resolution, but the relative benefit of Low settings diminishes as the GPU becomes the bottleneck.

For users seeking the highest possible FPS, 1080p Low at 335 FPS is the target. For balanced performance, 1440p High at 139 FPS is recommended. For 4K gaming, Medium at 89 FPS provides the best experience without dropping below 60 FPS. The data confirms that this combo is capable of excellent performance in Minimum across all resolution and settings combinations.