Minimum

FAQ

Q: Is this CPU-GPU combination fast enough for Minimum at high refresh rates?

A: At 1920x1080, the combination delivers 143 FPS on Low settings and 90 FPS on High settings, placing it in the 2843rd combo rank out of 3712 measured combinations. For 144Hz displays, only the Low preset reaches the refresh threshold, while Medium (101 FPS) and High (90 FPS) fall short of 144 FPS but remain playable.

Q: How does the Intel Core i7-12700K compare to its closest rivals in CPU benchmarks?

A: The i7-12700K scores 35287 in the average benchmark score, sitting at the 84th percentile among all CPUs. It trails the Intel Core i5-13600T by 0.1%, the i7-12700KF by 0.2%, the i7-13700T by 0.3%, and the Intel Core 5 213PE by 0.4% — making it effectively performance-equivalent to all four nearest rivals.

Q: What is the RX 9060 XT 8 GB's standing relative to other GPUs in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's only recorded benchmark, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, scores 4093, placing it at the 24th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel HD Graphics 630, scores 4075 (0.4% behind), while the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M scores 4151 (1.4% ahead), indicating this is not a high-end GPU in raw compute terms.

Q: Does the RX 9060 XT 8 GB have enough VRAM for Minimum at 4K?

A: The GPU features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 322.3 GB/s bandwidth. At 3840x2160, measured average FPS ranges from 40 (Ultra) to 73 (Low), suggesting the 8 GB capacity is sufficient for this game's demands, though the Low preset at 4K still only reaches 73 FPS.

Q: What kind of frame pacing can be expected at Medium settings?

A: The measured Medium preset shows consistent frame times: at 1920x1080, average FPS is 101 with a minimum of 86 and maximum of 117; at 2560x1440, average is 77 with min 65 and max 88; at 3840x2160, average drops to 52 with min 44 and max 60. The gap between minimum and average is roughly 15% across resolutions.

Q: Should overclocking the CPU be considered for better frame rates?

A: The i7-12700K has an unlocked multiplier, a base clock of 3.60 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its single-thread performance is strong — Cinebench R23 single-core scores 1850.5 and Geekbench single-core scores 2308 — but benchmark results indicate the GPU's 24th percentile standing is likely the limiting factor at higher resolutions, so CPU overclocking may not yield proportional FPS gains.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture using the Navi 44 chip, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process with 29,700 million transistors. It operates with a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2530 MHz, and a boost clock of 3130 MHz, with memory running at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective). The 8 GB GDDR6 memory pool is paired with a 128-bit bus, yielding 322.3 GB/s of bandwidth — a configuration that proves adequate for Minimum's measured results across all tested resolutions.

The GPU's shading power comes from 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units, producing a pixel rate of 200.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 400.6 GTexel/s. Floating-point throughput is rated at 25.64 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, with 32 ray-tracing cores included for DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads. However, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4093 places this GPU at only the 24th percentile, and its nearest rivals include integrated and mobile parts like the Intel HD Graphics 630 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M — suggesting this is a modest performer despite the modern architecture.

In Minimum specifically, the GPU's VRAM and clock behavior directly influences FPS scaling with settings. At 1920x1080, raising from Low to Ultra drops average FPS from 143 to 78 — a 45% reduction, which aligns with the GPU's limited raster throughput rather than memory capacity issues. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset yields 40 FPS while Low yields 73 FPS, showing that even at 4K the 8 GB buffer does not bottleneck performance; the compute and fill-rate limits dominate instead.

The GPU's power envelope is modest at 150 W TDP with a single 8-pin connector and a suggested 450 W PSU. This makes it a practical card for mainstream builds, though the benchmark data suggests it pairs better with 1080p or 1440p gaming than with high-refresh 4K. The measured results show that the GPU is the primary constraint at higher resolutions — at 4K, even Low settings cannot reach 75 FPS, indicating the card's raw throughput is the ceiling.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear hierarchy across three resolutions and four presets. For 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 143 FPS, Medium 101 FPS, High 90 FPS, and Ultra 78 FPS. The recommended choice depends on the display's refresh rate: for 144Hz, Low is the only preset that clears the bar; for 60Hz, all presets including Ultra are playable, and Medium offers a comfortable margin at 101 FPS with min FPS of 86.

At 2560x1440, the data shows Low at 108 FPS, Medium at 77 FPS, High at 68 FPS, and Ultra at 59 FPS. For 60Hz displays, Ultra barely meets the target with 59 FPS average, but Medium provides a safer 77 FPS with a recorded minimum of 65 FPS, making it the best balance for smooth play. High at 68 FPS is also viable, but the extra 9 FPS from Medium comes with only a modest visual step down.

At 3840x2160, the results are more constrained: Low reaches 73 FPS, Medium 52 FPS (min 44, max 60), High 46 FPS, and Ultra 40 FPS. For 4K gaming, Low is the only preset that approaches 60 FPS, and it still falls short. Medium is the highest preset that stays above 50 FPS average, but the 44 FPS minimum could cause noticeable hitches on a 60Hz panel. Given the data, Medium at 1440p or Low at 4K are the pragmatic choices, with the former offering a better overall experience.

The measured frame ranges at Medium settings — 86-117 FPS at 1080p, 65-88 at 1440p, and 44-60 at 4K — indicate that Medium is the most stable preset in terms of frame consistency relative to its average. For players prioritizing visual quality over raw FPS, High at 1080p (90 FPS) or 1440p (68 FPS) is acceptable, but Ultra only makes sense at 1080p where 78 FPS remains above 60.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full preset ladder was measured. Low produces 143 FPS average, Medium produces 101 FPS with a minimum of 86 and maximum of 117, High produces 90 FPS, and Ultra produces 78 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 42 FPS, while the step from Medium to High costs 11 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 12 FPS — showing diminishing returns as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the same preset progression yields 108 FPS on Low, 77 FPS on Medium (min 65, max 88), 68 FPS on High, and 59 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Medium is 31 FPS, while Medium to High is 9 FPS, and High to Ultra is 9 FPS. The proportional drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 24-25% for Low and Medium, but only 18% for High and Ultra, suggesting the GPU becomes more uniformly bound at higher resolutions.

At 3840x2160, performance degrades to 73 FPS on Low, 52 FPS on Medium (min 44, max 60), 46 FPS on High, and 40 FPS on Ultra. The Low-to-Medium gap is 21 FPS, Medium-to-High is 6 FPS, and High-to-Ultra is 6 FPS. Notably, the 4K Medium minimum of 44 FPS is below the 1080p Ultra average of 78 FPS, highlighting the severe resolution penalty.

The combo's overall rank of 2843 out of 3712 measured combinations indicates that this hardware pairing is below the median for Minimum. The data shows consistent behavior: Low and Medium presets offer the most headroom, while Ultra at any resolution above 1080p struggles to maintain 60 FPS. The measured rows lack min/max data for most presets, but the Medium preset's recorded ranges at each resolution provide a representative window into frame variability.

Resolution Scaling

Scaling from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops by approximately 24% on Low (143 to 108), 24% on Medium (101 to 77), 24% on High (90 to 68), and 24% on Ultra (78 to 59). This consistent ~24% reduction across all presets indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor — a CPU-bound scenario would show smaller drops or even flat performance as resolution increases, since the CPU work per frame stays constant.

Scaling from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160, the drops are steeper: Low falls 32% (108 to 73), Medium falls 32% (77 to 52), High falls 32% (68 to 46), and Ultra falls 32% (59 to 40). The consistent 32% reduction at the 4K step, combined with the 24% reduction at the 1440p step, shows that the GPU's fill-rate and bandwidth limits scale almost linearly with pixel count. The 128-bit memory bus and 322.3 GB/s bandwidth appear to be a significant constraint at 4K.

The data strongly indicates that the RX 9060 XT 8 GB is the bottleneck across the entire resolution range. At 1080p Low, 143 FPS suggests the CPU can feed the GPU adequately, but the 24th percentile GPU standing means it cannot sustain high frame rates at higher pixel densities. The fact that the 4K Low preset (73 FPS) does not come close to the 1080p Low (143 FPS) confirms that pixel throughput, not CPU thread scheduling, is the dominant limiter.

The evidence for GPU limitation is reinforced by the CPU's performance characteristics. The i7-12700K scores 9979 in 3DMark max-thread test and 1043 in single-thread, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19784 and single-core of 1850.5 — all indicating a CPU capable of far more than 143 FPS. The modest FPS ceiling in Minimum is therefore attributable to the GPU's 4093 Steel Nomad score, which places it among entry-level parts.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-12700K brings 12 cores and 20 threads from the Alder Lake architecture, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 215 mm². Its base clock of 3.60 GHz boosts to 5.00 GHz, and it supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel interface. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 25 MB shared L3 — a configuration that handles modern game workloads well.

Benchmark results show a strong all-round performer: Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 19784, Geekbench multi-core scores 15790, and 3DMark max-thread scores 9979. Single-thread performance is equally robust, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 1850.5, Geekbench single-core at 2308, and 3DMark single-thread at 1043. The PassMark multi-thread score of 34404 and single-thread of 4013 further confirm that this CPU is not the limiting component in Minimum.

The CPU sits at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35287. Its nearest rivals — the i5-13600T, i7-12700KF, i7-13700T, and Core 5 213PE — all score within 0.4% of it, meaning no meaningful performance gap exists between these parts in general compute. The i7-12700K's 125 W TDP and Intel Socket 1700 compatibility make it a conventional desktop choice, with an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

In Minimum, the measured FPS data indicates that the CPU's 12 cores and 20 threads are more than sufficient. At 1080p Low, the 143 FPS average suggests the CPU can drive frame rates well beyond what the GPU can deliver at higher settings. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 9276 and 8-thread score of 7202 show strong scaling up to 16 threads, which is ample for a third-person shooter that likely uses fewer than 8 threads effectively.

The CPU's memory support for DDR4 and DDR5, combined with PCIe Gen 4 (20 lanes), provides a flexible platform. However, the integrated UHD Graphics 770 is irrelevant when a discrete GPU is installed. The benchmark data confirms that the i7-12700K's role in this combo is to feed the GPU without becoming a bottleneck — and the measured FPS patterns, with consistent resolution-based scaling, prove it succeeds in that role. Players should look to the GPU for upgrade headroom, as the CPU's 84th percentile standing leaves substantial compute capacity unused in this game.