Minimum

The benchmark data for Minimum with the Intel Core i7-14700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 shows a system that scales predictably with resolution, but the gap between settings tiers reveals where the bottleneck shifts. This pairing, ranked 537 out of 1733 tested combinations, delivers a playable experience across most configurations, though the Ultra preset demands more than the hardware can consistently provide at higher resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep but not uniform across all settings, indicating a transition from CPU-bound to GPU-bound behavior. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 269.3 FPS, which falls to 171.9 FPS at 1440p and then to 92.3 FPS at 4K. That represents a 36% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a further 46% drop to 4K. The scaling suggests that at 1080p, the 20-core, 28-thread processor is feeding frames faster than the GPU can render, but the RTX 3080’s 10 GB GDDR6X memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth become the limiting factor as pixel count climbs.

Moving to Medium settings, the pattern holds: 204.7 FPS at 1080p, 129.7 FPS at 1440p (a 37% decline), and 71.9 FPS at 4K (a 45% decline from 1440p). The High preset shows 171.6 FPS at 1080p, 111.7 FPS at 1440p (35% drop), and 57.2 FPS at 4K (49% drop). The Ultra preset is the most demanding, with 131.1 FPS at 1080p, 83.1 FPS at 1440p (37% drop), and 44.6 FPS at 4K (46% drop). Notably, the relative percentage drop between 1440p and 4K is larger for High and Ultra than for Low and Medium, confirming that higher visual fidelity increases GPU workload disproportionately.

At 4K, no settings tier achieves 60 FPS except Low, which hits 92.3 FPS. High sits just below the threshold at 57.2 FPS, while Medium and Ultra fall further behind. This suggests that at 4K, the RTX 3080’s 8704 shading units and 68 RT cores are the primary constraint, with the CPU’s 5.40 GHz boost clock providing ample headroom. At 1080p, the data shows the opposite: even Ultra hits 131.1 FPS, meaning the processor’s multithreaded capability (Cinebench R23 multicore score of 35443) is sufficient to keep the GPU saturated. The scaling curve implies that for competitive play at lower resolutions, the combo is well-balanced, but for 4K enthusiasts, only Low settings offer a comfortable margin.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination ranks 537 out of 1733 tested combos, placing it in the top 31% of all pairings in the database. This is a respectable position for a mid-high-end desktop setup from the Raptor Lake and Ampere generations. The CPU alone holds a percentile of 94 against all processors, with an average benchmark score of 54097. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X, scores 54450, just 0.6% higher, while the Ryzen 9 9900X3D is 1.1% ahead. The Intel Xeon Phi 7290 trails by 1.2%, and the AMD EPYC 7313P is 1.7% behind. This indicates the i7-14700F is competitive with flagship desktop and workstation chips in synthetic tests, though its real-world gaming performance depends on the GPU pairing.

The GPU, meanwhile, holds a percentile of 80 against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35787. Its closest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro Duo, scores 35860, just 0.2% higher, while the AMD Radeon 880M is 0.4% behind. The Radeon RX 7900 GRE leads by 0.9%, and the RTX 5070 Ti Mobile trails by 1%. The RTX 3080’s Passmark G3D score of 25086 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4407 place it firmly in the upper tier of graphics cards, though it is not at the absolute top. In Minimum, the combo’s rank of 537 suggests that while the individual components are strong, the pairing does not boost to the highest echelons of the game’s performance leaderboard, likely because the game is not heavily optimized for multi-core processors or ray tracing.

Settings Recommendations

For most users, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and frame rate. At 1440p, Medium delivers 129.7 FPS, which is 16% higher than High (111.7 FPS) and 56% higher than Ultra (83.1 FPS). The jump from Medium to High costs 18 FPS at 1440p, while the jump from High to Ultra costs another 28.6 FPS. At 1080p, Medium (204.7 FPS) provides a 19% advantage over High (171.6 FPS) and a 56% advantage over Ultra (131.1 FPS). The data shows that Ultra is disproportionately punishing for the visual gains it provides, making it a poor choice for this hardware.

At 4K, the recommendation shifts to Low, which produces 92.3 FPS, nearly double the High preset’s 57.2 FPS. Medium at 4K (71.9 FPS) is playable but leaves less headroom for dips, while Ultra (44.6 FPS) falls below the standard 60 FPS target. For competitive players prioritizing smoothness, Low at 1080p (269.3 FPS) or 1440p (171.9 FPS) is optimal, as the frame rate exceeds most high-refresh displays’ capabilities. For single-player immersion, Medium at 1440p is the sweet spot, offering high frame rates without sacrificing too many visual details.

It is notably the measured FPS rows show no minimum or maximum values, only averages, so the data does not capture frame time consistency. However, the wide gaps between presets suggest that the GPU is the primary scaling factor, and users should avoid Ultra unless they prioritize image quality over frame rate and are willing to play at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. Low leads with 269.3 FPS, followed by Medium at 204.7 FPS, High at 171.6 FPS, and Ultra at 131.1 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 138.2 FPS, indicating that the GPU has significant overhead at this resolution. The RTX 3080’s boost clock of 1710 MHz and 10 GB VRAM are sufficient to handle the game’s demands, with the CPU’s 5.40 GHz boost ensuring no bottleneck.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but the gaps narrow slightly. Low produces 171.9 FPS, Medium 129.7 FPS, High 111.7 FPS, and Ultra 83.1 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent at roughly 36-37% for each preset, showing that the scaling is linear and GPU-bound. The 1440p results are still highly playable, with even Ultra exceeding 80 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the performance falls sharply. Low yields 92.3 FPS, Medium 71.9 FPS, High 57.2 FPS, and Ultra 44.6 FPS. The 4K results show a clear hierarchy: only Low and Medium maintain 60 FPS or above. High and Ultra fall below the threshold, making them less suitable for smooth gameplay. The 4K Ultra result of 44.6 FPS is the lowest measured, representing a 66% reduction from the 1080p Ultra score. This confirms that the RTX 3080’s memory bus width of 320-bit and 28,300 million transistors are taxed heavily at 4K, even for a game released in 2014.

GPU Role

The RTX 3080 is the dominant component in this pairing for Minimum, especially at higher resolutions. Its 10 GB GDDR6X memory with a 320-bit bus provides 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is critical for 4K textures. The GPU’s base clock is 1440 MHz, boosting to 1710 MHz, and it houses 8704 shading units, 272 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 465.1 GTexel/s help explain why the card scales well from 1080p to 1440p, but struggles to maintain 60 FPS at 4K Ultra.

The GPU’s 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores are present, but the game’s 2014 release date means it likely does not utilize ray tracing or DLSS, so those units may remain idle. The Passmark G3D score of 25086 places the card in the 80th percentile, and its nearest rivals show it is within 1% of comparable GPUs. The data indicates that the RTX 3080’s performance in this game is consistent with its synthetic benchmarks. The VRAM capacity is not a limiting factor at 1080p or 1440p, but at 4K Ultra, the 10 GB allocation may be strained, contributing to the 44.6 FPS result. The GPU’s power draw of 320 W and dual-slot design are not reflected in the FPS data, but they are consistent with a high-end card that performs well in this title when settings are tuned appropriately.