Minimum

Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter, still demands a balanced system, and the data for the Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti combination shows a clear picture of where the bottlenecks lie. This pairing, ranking 683rd out of 1733 tested combos, delivers playable performance across most settings, but the 8 GB VRAM and the six-core CPU create specific boundaries that are worth understanding before you tweak your graphics options. The benchmark results indicate a system that is capable of high refresh rates at 1080p but requires compromises at 4K to maintain smooth gameplay.

FAQ

Q: Can this CPU and GPU combo handle Minimum at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but with a caveat. At 4K with High settings, the average FPS is 55, which is playable but not ideal for a fast-paced shooter. Lowering to Medium settings brings it up to 62.8 FPS, while Low settings jump to 85.9 FPS. Ultra settings at 4K are the most demanding, resulting in a 41.1 FPS average.

Q: What is the best resolution for high refresh rate gaming with this setup?

A: At 1920x1080, this combination excels. The data shows an average of 156.3 FPS on High settings and 242.7 FPS on Low settings. This makes 1080p the clear choice for maximizing frame rates, especially for competitive play.

Q: How does the RTX 3070 Ti perform relative to its closest rivals in this test?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 30849, which places it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs. It is nearly identical in performance to the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME, which is 0.3% faster, and the AMD Radeon RX 6700, which is 0.8% faster. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 is also close, at 0.9% faster.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-9400 a bottleneck for the RTX 3070 Ti?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 2305, and it ranks in the 50th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-10305, scores 2300, a delta of 0.2%. This suggests the i5-9400 is a mid-range processor that can keep up with the GPU at lower resolutions, but the gap between 1080p and 1440p frame rates suggests it may start to limit performance in some scenarios.

Q: What is the performance cost of enabling Ultra settings?

A: The cost is significant. At 1440p, moving from High to Ultra drops the average FPS from 100.8 to 74.9, a reduction of about 26%. At 4K, the drop from High to Ultra is from 55 to 41.1 FPS, a reduction of 14 FPS.

Q: What is the minimum FPS expected in the most demanding scenario?

A: The lowest average FPS recorded is at 4K with Ultra settings, where the system averages 41.1 FPS. This is the slowest configuration tested in the data set.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a six-core, six-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. This configuration provides a solid foundation for gaming, and its 9 MB of shared L3 cache helps with data-heavy workloads. In the context of Minimum, a game from 2014, this CPU is generally more than capable of feeding frames to the GPU.

However, its performance relative to other CPUs is a crucial data point. The i5-9400 sits at the 50th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 2305. Its closest rivals are the Intel Core i3-10305 (score 2300, 0.2% faster) and the Intel Core i3-1125G4 (score 2299, 0.2% faster). This indicates that the i5-9400 is a solid mid-range performer, but it is not a high-end part. The data suggests that while it can handle the game's logic and physics, its six threads may become a limiting factor at lower resolutions where the GPU can produce very high frame rates.

The relationship between the CPU and the game's results is most visible in the scaling from 1080p to 1440p. At 1080p High settings, the system averages 156.3 FPS. At 1440p High, it drops to 100.8 FPS. This 35% drop is larger than what would be expected from pixel count alone, hinting that the CPU is working hard to maintain those high frame rates at 1080p. The CPU's 65W TDP and end-of-life status also indicate it is an older design, and the benchmark results show it is comparable to newer low-end i3 parts, meaning it is not leaving much performance on the table for this title.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti is the dominant component in this pairing. Built on the Ampere architecture with 6144 shading units, it has a base clock of 1575 MHz and a boost clock of 1770 MHz. It is equipped with 8 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 608.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is a key factor in the game's performance, especially at higher resolutions.

The RTX 3070 Ti's performance is strong, placing it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 30849. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME (0.3% faster) and the AMD Radeon RX 6700 (0.8% faster), showing that it is competitive with a range of other graphics cards. The data shows that the GPU is the primary driver of frame rates at 4K, where the CPU is less likely to be a bottleneck. At 4K Low settings, the system achieves 85.9 FPS, which is a substantial increase over the 55 FPS at High settings, demonstrating the GPU's raw power is being constrained by the more demanding graphics presets.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a potential concern for maximum settings at high resolutions. While the data does not show a hard crash, the significant drop in performance at 4K Ultra (41.1 FPS) compared to 4K High (55 FPS) could be attributed to the GPU struggling with memory allocation and texture data. The GPU's 21.75 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 48 RT cores provide ample horsepower for a game from 2014, but the memory bandwidth and capacity are the more likely points of contention at the highest settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive look at how this system scales across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system is extremely fast: Low settings average 242.7 FPS, Medium averages 184.3 FPS, High averages 156.3 FPS, and Ultra averages 120.6 FPS. These numbers are all well above the refresh rate of most standard monitors, making this an excellent configuration for high-refresh-rate 1080p displays.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show a clear step down. Low settings average 155.4 FPS, Medium averages 118.4 FPS, High averages 100.8 FPS, and Ultra averages 74.9 FPS. This resolution offers a balanced experience, with High settings still delivering over 100 FPS.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the performance becomes more demanding. Low settings average 85.9 FPS, Medium averages 62.8 FPS, High averages 55 FPS, and Ultra averages 41.1 FPS. The data shows that only Low settings at 4K can consistently clear the 60 FPS mark, while High and Ultra will require a monitor with adaptive sync or a tolerance for lower frame rates.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the bottleneck. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 156.3 at 1080p to 100.8 at 1440p, and then to 55 at 4K. This is a stark reduction. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is a 35% decrease in FPS, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is a 45% decrease. This pattern indicates that the system is well-balanced at 1080p but becomes increasingly GPU-limited as resolution increases.

The GPU's role becomes more pronounced at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the CPU can keep up with the RTX 3070 Ti, but at 4K, the GPU is working much harder to fill those pixels. The difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K is 44.8 FPS (85.9 vs 41.1), which is a 52% difference. This is a much larger gap than at 1080p, where the difference between Low and Ultra is 122.1 FPS (242.7 vs 120.6), a 50% difference. This suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting component at 4K, and its performance scales predictably with the graphical workload.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the best experience depends heavily on the target resolution. For 1080p, the data suggests that Ultra settings are the way to go, as they still provide an average of 120.6 FPS. This is more than sufficient for a smooth experience, and there is enough headroom to keep the frame rate above 100 FPS in most scenes.

For 1440p, High settings offer the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, averaging 100.8 FPS. Medium settings are a solid fallback at 118.4 FPS, but High achieves the "sweet spot" for quality and speed. Ultra settings at 1440p (74.9 FPS) are playable, but the 26% drop from High is steep for the visual gain.

For 4K, the recommendation is to use Low settings, which average 85.9 FPS. This ensures a responsive experience, which is crucial for a third-person shooter. Medium settings (62.8 FPS) are acceptable if you prefer higher quality, but High (55 FPS) and Ultra (41.1 FPS) dip below the ideal threshold for a game where reaction time matters. In summary, this hardware is best utilized at 1080p with maximum settings or 1440p with High settings; 4K gaming is viable but requires significant compromises in visual quality.