Minimum

The Intel Core i5-9400 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT achieves a combo rank of 649 out of 1,733 tested combinations for Minimum. This places the pairing in the top 37.5% of all recorded systems, a solid standing that reflects a balanced match between a mid-range six-core processor and a high-end graphics card. The rank suggests that while the GPU is the dominant contributor to frame rates, the CPU does not bottleneck the experience to a degree that would push the combo into lower percentiles. The data positions this system firmly in the upper-middle tier of performance, capable of handling the game’s demands across most resolutions without falling behind the majority of tested hardware.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 649 out of 1,733 represents a percentile of roughly 62.5, meaning it outperforms a clear majority of tested configurations. This is a notable result for a CPU that sits at the 50th percentile among all processors, paired with a GPU at the 76th percentile among all graphics cards. The disparity in component percentiles suggests the RX 7800 XT is doing most of the heavy lifting, but the i5-9400’s six cores and six threads are sufficient to keep pace in this title. The gap between the CPU’s lower percentile and the GPU’s higher one implies that the processor is not a severe limiting factor, but it may cap performance in CPU-bound scenarios, particularly at lower resolutions where frame rates climb higher.

Benchmark results confirm the CPU’s mid-pack positioning. The i5-9400 scores 7,969 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1,125 in single-core, placing it just 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i3-10305 and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Xeon E-2134 in average benchmark score. It also trails the Intel Core i7-8809G by 0.6%, showing that the i5-9400 is tightly clustered with its immediate rivals. This narrow spread indicates that the CPU’s performance is well understood and consistent, with no dramatic swings that would unpredictably affect game results. For Minimum, this consistency translates into dependable frame delivery, as evidenced by the measured FPS data across all settings and resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is the star of this configuration, featuring 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with a bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s. The GPU’s boost clock reaches 2,430 MHz, with a game clock of 2,124 MHz and a base clock of 1,295 MHz. These clocks, combined with 3,840 shading units and 96 ROPs, deliver a pixel rate of 233.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 583.2 GTexel/s. The sheer memory capacity is a clear advantage for Minimum, as the game can load high-resolution textures without hitting VRAM limits, even at 4K.

The GPU’s percentile standing at 76th among all graphics cards is reflected in its raw compute performance of 37.32 TFLOPS FP32. In practice, this translates to frame rates that are consistently high, with the RX 7800 XT able to push 4K High settings to 55.3 FPS average. The data shows that the GPU is the primary driver of performance, particularly at higher resolutions where the gap between settings becomes more pronounced. At 1080p, the GPU’s power is evident with 248.5 FPS on Low settings, but the CPU begins to show its limits as the resolution drops, with frame rate gains slowing between 1440p and 1080p compared to the jump from 4K to 1440p.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals how the system scales across resolutions, highlighting the shift in bottleneck from GPU to CPU as resolution decreases. At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor, with High settings producing 55.3 FPS and Low settings reaching 84 FPS. Dropping to 2560x1440, the frame rates nearly double on Low settings, hitting 160.5 FPS, while High settings reach 105.9 FPS. This substantial improvement indicates that the GPU has ample headroom once pixel count is reduced, but the scaling is not purely linear, suggesting other factors come into play.

Moving from 1440p to 1920x1080, the gains become smaller. At 1080p Low, the average FPS climbs to 248.5, a 54.8% increase over 1440p Low, whereas the jump from 4K to 1440p Low was a 91.1% increase. This diminishing return points to the CPU becoming more involved at 1080p, where the i5-9400’s six threads may struggle to feed the GPU fast enough. The data implies that at 4K, the RX 7800 XT is the outright bottleneck, while at 1080p, the system is more balanced, with the CPU starting to constrain maximum frame rates. The scaling pattern suggests that 1440p is the sweet spot where the GPU is still dominant, but the CPU is not yet holding back performance.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Minimum based on the data?*

A: The data indicates that 2560x1440 offers the best balance, with High settings achieving 105.9 FPS and Low settings reaching 160.5 FPS. This resolution avoids the CPU bottleneck visible at 1080p while maintaining high frame rates over 4K.

Q: How does the RX 7800 XT’s VRAM affect performance at 4K?

A: With 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth, the GPU has sufficient capacity for 4K textures. The measured 4K results show 55.3 FPS on High and 43.5 FPS on Ultra, indicating that VRAM is not a limiting factor, as frame rates scale consistently with settings.

Q: Is the i5-9400 a bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data suggests a mild CPU limitation. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 248.5 FPS, but the improvement over 1440p Low (160.5 FPS) is only 54.8%, compared to a 91.1% jump from 4K to 1440p. This smaller gain implies the CPU is starting to cap performance.

Q: How does the i5-9400 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2,305, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core i3-10305 and 0.4% higher than the Intel Xeon E-2134. It trails the Intel Core i7-8809G by 0.6%, showing it is competitively positioned within its segment.

Q: What settings preset provides the highest frame rate at 4K?

A: Low settings at 3840x2160 produce the highest average FPS of 84, compared to 64.4 on Medium, 55.3 on High, and 43.5 on Ultra. The data shows a clear trade-off between visual fidelity and performance.

Q: Does the combo’s rank change the interpretation of its performance?

A: The rank of 649 out of 1,733 places it above average, but the component percentiles (CPU at 50th, GPU at 76th) suggest the GPU is the primary driver. The rank reflects a well-matched system, though the CPU may limit maximum FPS in CPU-bound scenarios.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 provides six cores and six threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Its 9 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth are typical for its generation. The CPU’s benchmark scores, including 803 in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 3346 in R20 multi-core, place it at the 50th percentile among all processors. This mid-tier positioning is reflected in the game data, where the CPU’s influence becomes more apparent at lower resolutions.

At 1080p, the CPU’s role is more pronounced. The measured FPS of 248.5 on Low settings is the highest recorded, but the scaling from 1440p suggests the i5-9400 is nearing its limit. The six threads without hyper-threading may cause occasional frame pacing issues in CPU-heavy scenes, though the data does not capture min FPS to confirm this. The CPU’s single-core performance of 1,125 in Cinebench R23 is modest, which could impact games that rely heavily on a single thread. However, for Minimum, a 2014 title, the i5-9400’s architecture is more than adequate, and the data shows it does not prevent the system from achieving high frame rates at any resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution. At 3840x2160, High settings provide 55.3 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for competitive play; Medium offers 64.4 FPS, a better balance. Low settings at 4K yield 84 FPS, but the visual compromise may not be worth it given the GPU’s capabilities. For 2560x1440, High settings at 105.9 FPS are the recommended choice, offering a strong balance of visual quality and performance, with Ultra still delivering a playable 81.3 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the data shows that Ultra settings at 124.3 FPS provide an excellent experience, well above the 60 FPS threshold. High settings at 159.4 FPS are even better for high-refresh-rate monitors, while Medium at 194.1 FPS and Low at 248.5 FPS cater to esports-level responsiveness. The recommendation is to use High settings at 1440p for the best overall experience, as it leverages the GPU’s strength without pushing the CPU into a bottleneck. For 4K, Medium is the pragmatic choice, as it offers a 17% improvement over High while maintaining visual fidelity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across all settings and resolutions. At 3840x2160, the system averages 55.3 FPS on High, 64.4 FPS on Medium, 84 FPS on Low, and 43.5 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 40.5 FPS, indicating that settings have a significant impact at 4K, with Ultra being the most demanding preset.

At 2560x1440, the results are substantially higher: High averages 105.9 FPS, Medium 124.3 FPS, Low 160.5 FPS, and Ultra 81.3 FPS. The jump from 4K to 1440p improves frame rates by roughly 91% on Low and 91% on High, demonstrating the GPU’s sensitivity to resolution. At 1920x1080, the averages are 159.4 FPS on High, 194.1 FPS on Medium, 248.5 FPS on Low, and 124.3 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from 1440p to 1080p is less dramatic, with only a 50% improvement on Low, confirming the CPU’s growing influence at lower resolutions. This data paints a clear picture of a system that is GPU-bound at 4K, balanced at 1440p, and slightly CPU-limited at 1080p.