Minimum

The Intel Core i7-12700KF paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB delivers a playable, though not flawless, experience in Minimum. The data shows a classic balance between a high-end 2021 CPU and a mid-range 2025 GPU, with the graphics card consistently acting as the limiting factor at higher resolutions. This combination lands at rank 1895 out of 3712 tested combos in this title, placing it in the 51st percentile of all possible pairings. The benchmark results indicate that while the CPU has ample headroom, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory interface define the performance ceiling.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a steep and predictable decline as resolution increases, confirming that the Radeon RX 9060 XT is the primary bottleneck in this configuration. At 1080p with High settings, the system produces 133 FPS. Moving to 1440p drops that to 86 FPS, a 35% reduction. At 4K, the same High preset yields only 46 FPS, which is a 65% drop from the 1080p result.

This scaling pattern is instructive. The 1080p to 1440p transition costs 47 FPS, while the 1440p to 4K transition costs 40 FPS. The percentage losses are nearly identical, suggesting a linear relationship between pixel count and performance degradation. This is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario where the rendering pipeline is saturated regardless of the resolution step.

The Ultra preset amplifies this effect. At 1080p Ultra, the system manages 101 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it falls to 65 FPS. At 4K Ultra, it collapses to 35 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is below the 60 FPS threshold, making it unsuitable for smooth gameplay. The data indicates that the 4K High preset at 46 FPS is also marginal, while 4K Medium at 55 FPS with a minimum of 47 FPS is the only 4K option that approaches acceptable playability.

The Low preset shows the system's raw capability. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 206 FPS, and at 1440p Low, it still delivers 133 FPS. Even at 4K Low, the system produces 72 FPS. This suggests that when the GPU is not heavily taxed by shading and texture work, the i7-12700KF can push frame rates well beyond what most displays can show. The scaling from Low to Ultra at any given resolution is roughly a 50-60% performance penalty, which is typical for a game with significant visual fidelity options.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a 12-core, 20-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It features a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with 25 MB of shared L3 cache. The benchmark scores show a strong multi-threaded performer: Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 28838, and Geekbench multicore hits 14367. Single-thread performance is also solid, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 4071 and Passmark single-thread at 3984.

In the context of Minimum, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with enough draw calls and game logic updates. The data shows that even at 1080p Low, where the GPU is least stressed, the system reaches 206 FPS. This is a strong indicator that the CPU is not the limiting factor at lower resolutions. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 9282 and max-thread score of 9983 suggest there is substantial compute headroom available.

The processor's nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the Intel Core i7-13700T (35403, delta -0.1%), Intel Core i5-13600T (35305, delta 0.2%), and Intel Core i7-12700K (35287, delta 0.2%). The 12700KF sits at a 85th percentile versus all CPUs, indicating it is a high-performing chip. However, in this game, the FPS differences between the Low and High presets at the same resolution are more significant than any CPU-bound variation would be.

The Passmark physics score of 1780 and the floating point math score of 87449 indicate the CPU can handle complex game physics calculations. The 20 threads are useful for background tasks and streaming, but Minimum is not a heavily threaded title based on the FPS scaling data. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 2065 and 4-thread score of 4011 show that even with limited thread usage, the chip performs well, which is beneficial for games that rely on a few fast cores.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB is the clear performance limiter in this configuration. Based on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a Navi 44 chip, it has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The GPU runs at a base clock of 1700 MHz with a boost clock of 3130 MHz, and it features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 322.3 GB/s. The FP32 compute is rated at 25.64 TFLOPS.

The GPU's benchmark score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 is 4093, which places it at the 24th percentile versus all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel HD Graphics 630 (4075, delta 0.4%), NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151, delta -1.4%), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (4033, delta 1.5%). This is a stark comparison: the RX 9060 XT is positioned near integrated and very old mobile graphics solutions in synthetic benchmarks, despite being a modern discrete card. This explains its struggle at higher resolutions in Minimum.

The 8 GB VRAM is a known constraint. At 4K Ultra, the game likely exceeds this capacity, leading to the 35 FPS result. The 128-bit memory bus provides 322.3 GB/s, which is sufficient for 1080p but becomes a bottleneck at 4K where texture bandwidth demands increase. The pixel rate of 200.3 GPixel/s and texture rate of 400.6 GTexel/s are mid-range figures that align with the observed performance.

The FPS data confirms the GPU bottleneck. At 4K, the difference between Low (72 FPS) and Medium (55 FPS) is 17 FPS, while the difference between Medium and High (46 FPS) is 9 FPS, and High to Ultra (35 FPS) is 11 FPS. This stepwise degradation shows that each preset level adds rendering work that the GPU cannot sustain at 4K. At 1440p, the same pattern holds but with higher absolute numbers: Low at 133 FPS, Medium at 102 FPS, High at 86 FPS, and Ultra at 65 FPS. At 1080p, the GPU can keep up better, delivering 206 FPS on Low and 101 FPS on Ultra.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combination depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. The data provides clear guidance for each scenario.

For 1080p displays, the High preset at 133 FPS is the best balance of visual quality and performance. The Ultra preset at 101 FPS is also viable for 100Hz+ monitors, but the 32 FPS gain from dropping to High is substantial. The Medium preset at 158 FPS is excessive unless aiming for 165Hz or higher refresh rates. The Low preset at 206 FPS is only useful for competitive play where frame rate trumps visuals.

For 1440p, the High preset at 86 FPS is the recommended starting point. It clears the 60 FPS threshold with margin and provides good image quality. The Medium preset at 102 FPS is a strong alternative for higher refresh rate displays, offering a 16 FPS improvement over High. The Ultra preset at 65 FPS is borderline; it works for 60Hz monitors but leaves no headroom for drops. The Low preset at 133 FPS is overkill for most 1440p displays but usable for esports.

For 4K, the options are limited. The Medium preset at 55 FPS, with a minimum of 47 FPS, is the only preset that approaches playability, though it will experience noticeable stutter. The High preset at 46 FPS is below the playable threshold. The Low preset at 72 FPS is playable but sacrifices most graphical features. The Ultra preset at 35 FPS is not recommended.

The data suggests that the 1440p Medium preset provides the best overall experience: it delivers 102 FPS average with a minimum of 87 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay on standard 100Hz displays. For users prioritizing visual fidelity, 1440p High at 86 FPS is the ceiling for this combination without significant frame drops. The 1080p High preset is the safest choice for consistent 60+ FPS with good quality.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K smoothly?*

A: No. The data shows the best 4K result is the Medium preset at 55 FPS average with a 47 FPS minimum. The High preset drops to 46 FPS, and Ultra falls to 35 FPS. Only the Low preset at 72 FPS clears the 60 FPS threshold, but it sacrifices most visual quality.

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU/GPU combo?

A: The 1440p Medium preset at 102 FPS average and 87 FPS minimum is the strongest measured result. It offers a balance of resolution and frame rate. At 1080p, the High preset provides 133 FPS, but 1440p offers more detail at a still-playable frame rate.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck at 1440p and 4K, as shown by the steep FPS drops with each preset increase. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 206 FPS, indicating the CPU can handle high frame rates. The GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus limit performance at higher resolutions.

Q: How does the RX 9060 XT compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RX 9060 XT scores 4093 in 3DMark Steel Nomad. It is 0.4% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 630 (4075), 1.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151), and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (4033). The GPU sits at the 24th percentile overall.

Q: What FPS can I expect at 1080p with High settings?

A: The measured average is 133 FPS. This is a solid result for high refresh rate monitors. The Medium preset yields 158 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 101 FPS, so High is the sweet spot for quality and speed.

Q: Should I use the Ultra preset at 1440p?

A: The Ultra preset at 1440p averages 65 FPS. This is playable on a 60Hz monitor, but the High preset at 86 FPS provides a more comfortable margin. The Medium preset at 102 FPS is better for 100Hz+ displays.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table lists all measured FPS values for this combination, organized by resolution and settings.

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: 72 FPS average
• Medium: 55 FPS average, 47 FPS minimum, 63 FPS maximum
• High: 46 FPS average
• Ultra: 35 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: 133 FPS average
• Medium: 102 FPS average, 87 FPS minimum, 117 FPS maximum
• High: 86 FPS average
• Ultra: 65 FPS average

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: 206 FPS average
• Medium: 158 FPS average, 134 FPS minimum, 182 FPS maximum
• High: 133 FPS average
• Ultra: 101 FPS average

The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution step down from 4K to 1080p roughly doubles the average FPS for a given preset. The Medium preset is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum values, providing a frame time variance of 16 FPS at 1080p, 30 FPS at 1440p, and 16 FPS at 4K. This suggests the Medium preset has the most stable frame pacing across resolutions. The jump from Medium to High costs approximately 25-30% of the FPS at each resolution, while the jump from High to Ultra costs an additional 22-24%. The Low preset is the only one that maintains above 60 FPS at all three resolutions, making it the fallback for consistent performance.