Minimum

FAQ

Q: What is the frame rate for Minimum at 1080p with Ultra settings on this hardware?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti produces an average of 66 FPS at 1080p on Ultra settings. This is the most demanding setting tested at that resolution, dropping from 84.1 FPS at High.

Q: How does this combo compare to the RX 570X, a close rival to the GTX 1660 Ti?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has an average benchmark score of 13925, which is 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 570X (13871). In practical terms for Minimum, the performance difference is negligible, so either card would deliver similar frame rates.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at 1080p Low settings?

A: At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 134.4 FPS average. The i5-9400's six cores and six threads with a boost clock of 4.10 GHz are sufficient to feed the GTX 1660 Ti at this level, and the data does not suggest a CPU limit since frame rates scale consistently with resolution changes.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the GTX 1660 Ti?

A: The launch MSRP was 279 USD. This figure is provided for reference only; the analysis here focuses purely on measured performance.

Q: How does the i5-9400's multi-core performance compare to the Core i3-10305?

A: The i5-9400 scores 803 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, while the Intel Core i3-10305 scores 2300 in its average benchmark, showing a 0.2% difference in favor of the i5. This indicates the i5-9400 is essentially on par with that rival in synthetic CPU workloads.

Q: What is the combo's overall rank among tested configurations for Minimum?

A: The combo ranks 1496 out of 1733 tested combinations. This places it in the lower portion of the database, meaning the majority of other CPU/GPU pairings deliver higher average frame rates in this game.

GPU Role

The GTX 1660 Ti brings 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. For Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014, this memory configuration is more than adequate for texture streaming and geometry at 1080p and 1440p, though the 4K results show where the card starts to strain. The GPU's base clock is 1500 MHz with a boost of 1770 MHz, and it houses 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. These specs translate to a pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s.

The benchmark data shows the GPU's influence clearly. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra settings drops the average FPS from 134.4 to 66, a 51% reduction. This is a substantial hit, but the card still maintains playable frame rates at the highest settings for 1080p. The FP32 compute rating of 5.437 TFLOPS is modest by modern standards, yet it is sufficient for a game of Minimum's era. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1061 and Passmark G3D score of 12871 place the GPU at the 55th percentile among all GPUs, which is a solidly mid-range position.

At 1440p, the GPU's workload increases noticeably. The High setting average drops to 53 FPS, and Ultra falls to 40.3 FPS. The gap between Low (85.4 FPS) and High (53 FPS) at this resolution is 37.8%, showing that the GPU is the primary limiter as pixel count rises. The 4K results are more telling: Ultra settings yield only 22.5 FPS, which is not smooth for a shooter. Even Low settings at 4K produce just 45.1 FPS, indicating that the 6 GB framebuffer and the 192-bit memory bus are not enough to handle 3840x2160 with consistent fluidity. The GPU's transistor count of 6,600 million on a 284 mm² die is irrelevant to game performance, but it does illustrate the architectural generation the card belongs to.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a six-core, six-thread processor from the Coffee Lake refresh generation, built on Intel's 14 nm process. Its base clock is 2.90 GHz with a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, and it shares 9 MB of L3 cache. The CPU's memory support is DDR4 in dual-channel configuration, providing 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth. For a game like Minimum, which does not heavily multithread, the six physical cores without Hyper-Threading are adequate to avoid becoming the primary bottleneck.

The CPU's benchmark results show it sits at the 50th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 2305. In Cinebench R23, it scores 1125 single-core and 7969 multi-core. The single-core score is particularly relevant for gaming, as many titles rely on a few threads. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-10305, has an average score of 2300, a 0.2% difference, meaning the i5-9400 is effectively tied with that chip. The Intel Xeon E-2134 also sits close at 2295, a 0.4% gap.

In the game data, the CPU's role is evident when comparing frame rates at low resolutions with low settings. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 134.4 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the dataset. This shows the CPU can drive high frame rates without the GPU holding back at lower settings. The fact that the i5-9400 is not multiplier unlocked means no overclocking headroom, but the stock boost clock of 4.10 GHz is reasonably high for the era. The 65 W TDP and LGA 1151 socket are standard for mainstream builds, and the CPU's production status is end-of-life, so this is a legacy platform. The integrated UHD 630 graphics are present but irrelevant when a discrete GPU is installed.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank for this Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti pairing in Minimum is 1496 out of 1733 tested combinations. This places the configuration in the bottom 14% of the database, which is a significant finding given the individual component percentile scores. The GPU sits at the 55th percentile among all GPUs, and the CPU at the 50th percentile, yet the combination ranks much lower in this specific game. This discrepancy suggests that Minimum's engine may be particularly sensitive to certain hardware features, or that the game's optimization favors newer architectures more heavily.

The data indicates that while the GTX 1660 Ti is a mid-range card by global standards, its performance in Minimum at higher resolutions is limited. The nearest GPU rival, the AMD Radeon RX 570X, has an average score of 13871 with a 0.4% delta, meaning these two cards perform almost identically in synthetic benchmarks. However, the combo rank shows that many other pairings in the database achieve higher frame rates, likely due to more powerful GPUs or CPUs with higher single-thread performance. The rank of 1496 out of 1733 is a stark reminder that component benchmarks alone do not predict game-specific performance.

For a builder considering this pairing today, the data suggests it is a capable 1080p setup but not one that excels in Minimum. The 66 FPS average at 1080p Ultra is playable, but the 22.5 FPS at 4K Ultra is not. The combo's position in the ranking reflects this limitation; it is not a top performer, but it is also not the absolute bottom. The delta between the combo rank and component percentiles highlights the importance of game-specific testing over generic synthetic scores.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the GPU as the dominant limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 134.4 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 85.4 FPS, a 36.5% reduction. At 4K Low, the frame rate falls further to 45.1 FPS, which is a 66.4% drop from the 1080p Low figure. This progressive decline is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the CPU has enough headroom to process the frames but the GPU cannot keep up with the increasing pixel count.

The same pattern holds across all settings. At High settings, the 1080p average is 84.1 FPS, dropping to 53 FPS at 1440p (a 37% decrease) and then to 31.3 FPS at 4K (a 62.8% decrease from 1080p). The Ultra settings show the steepest absolute decline: from 66 FPS at 1080p to 40.3 FPS at 1440p (a 38.9% drop) and 22.5 FPS at 4K (a 65.9% drop). The consistent 36-39% reduction from 1080p to 1440p across all settings indicates that the scaling is predictable and primarily driven by pixel fill rate requirements.

The 4K results are particularly telling. The gap between Low (45.1 FPS) and Ultra (22.5 FPS) at 4K is 50.1%, which is larger than the 1080p gap of 50.9% between Low and Ultra. This suggests that at 4K, the GPU's memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s becomes a bottleneck, as higher settings require more data to be fetched and processed. The 6 GB VRAM is not exhausted at 4K in this game, but the 192-bit bus limits how quickly textures can be streamed. For a smooth experience in Minimum, the data shows that 1080p is the sweet spot, with 1440p being acceptable at Low or Medium settings, and 4K being only marginally playable at Low.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the performance is as follows: Low settings yield an average of 134.4 FPS, Medium produces 101.3 FPS, High drops to 84.1 FPS, and Ultra settles at 66 FPS. These figures show a clear stepwise progression, with each settings tier costing roughly 15-20% performance. The difference between Low and Ultra is 50.9%, which is substantial but leaves the user with playable frame rates at every setting level. For a competitive shooter, the Low setting's 134.4 FPS is ideal for high refresh rate monitors, while Ultra's 66 FPS is smooth enough for casual play.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 85.4 FPS, Medium at 67.6 FPS, High at 53 FPS, and Ultra at 40.3 FPS. The scaling here is steeper, with Ultra being 52.8% slower than Low. The 53 FPS at High is borderline for smooth gameplay, and the 40.3 FPS at Ultra may feel choppy to sensitive players. The 1440p results indicate that the GTX 1660 Ti is best paired with Medium settings at this resolution to maintain a comfortable frame rate above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the numbers drop significantly: Low averages 45.1 FPS, Medium 36.9 FPS, High 31.3 FPS, and Ultra 22.5 FPS. None of these are ideal for a shooter, as even the Low setting cannot sustain 60 FPS. The Ultra setting's 22.5 FPS is barely playable and would be a poor experience in fast-paced combat. The data strongly suggests that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combo in Minimum, regardless of settings. The 31.3 FPS at High and 36.9 FPS at Medium are below the threshold for smooth motion, making 1440p the practical ceiling for this hardware.