Minimum

The Intel Core i7-14700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER combination delivers a benchmark profile that is heavily skewed by the age of Minimum. With a 2014 release date, this game is far more dependent on raw clock speed and single-thread performance than on modern multi-core scaling. The CPU’s 20 cores and 28 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and boost clock of 5.40 GHz, are more than sufficient to feed the GPU at any resolution. The 33 MB of shared L3 cache and the Raptor Lake architecture ensure that frame pacing remains stable, but the data shows that even at 1080p Low, the system is already pushing 329 FPS, which is well beyond the refresh rate of typical monitors. In this title, the CPU is effectively a non-factor; its 91st percentile ranking against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 53620, means it sits well above the threshold where it would create a bottleneck. The nearest rival data confirms this: the Intel Xeon 6505P scores 53701 (a 0.2% difference), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X scores 53288 (a 0.6% difference), both indicating that the i7-14700F is in a performance tier where minor synthetic score differences do not translate into measurable FPS changes in this game.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The i7-14700F’s specifications are overkill for Minimum, but that is exactly why the data shows such high frame rates. The 20 cores (with 28 threads) are largely idle, as a 2014 third-person shooter rarely utilizes more than a few threads. The critical metric is the 5.40 GHz boost clock, which directly drives the single-thread performance necessary for high FPS in older game engines. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4958 and Geekbench single-core score of 2429 are strong indicators of this capability. In practice, this means the CPU can process game logic and draw calls faster than the GPU can render frames, especially at lower resolutions. The 65W TDP and Intel Socket 1700 platform are irrelevant to performance here, but the 33 MB L3 cache helps with keeping frequently accessed data close to the cores, reducing latency. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU’s PassMark single-thread score of 4257 is a better predictor of Minimum performance than its multi-thread score of 41317. Data from the measured FPS shows a clear pattern: at 1080p Low, the system hits 329 FPS, which is a sign that the CPU is still capable of pushing frames well past 300, but the GPU is starting to limit at higher settings. The CPU’s role in this combo is to ensure that it never becomes the limiting factor, and the data confirms it does not, as even the weakest CPU-bound scenario (1080p Low) yields playable triple-digit FPS. The 20-core count is future-proofing for other titles, but in Minimum, only the boost clock and single-core efficiency matter.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is the component that determines the playable experience in Minimum, particularly at higher resolutions and settings. With 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, the GPU has a bandwidth of 672.3 GB/s, which is far more than this game requires, but it ensures no memory-related stutters. The boost clock of 2610 MHz and the FP32 performance of 44.10 TFLOPS are the raw compute figures that scale with resolution. The GPU’s 8448 shading units and 96 ROPs handle the pixel output, with a pixel rate of 250.6 GPixel/s. In the measured FPS data, the GPU shows its limits when settings move from Low to Ultra. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 56, which is a clear sign that the GPU is the bottleneck, as the CPU is still capable of more. The VRAM is not a factor; 16 GB is ample for a 2014 title, even at 4K with Ultra textures. The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 31811 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 5569 place it in the 76th percentile of all GPUs, which is respectable but not top-tier. The nearest rivals show it is competitive: the NVIDIA TITAN RTX scores 31676 (a 1.9% difference), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell scores 31532 (a 1.4% difference), meaning the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is slightly slower in synthetic tests but still delivers strong real-world performance. The GPU’s Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5nm process, provides efficient power usage, but the 285W TDP is a consideration for cooling, though not for performance in this context. The data shows that the GPU is the primary scaling factor: going from 1080p to 4K at Ultra drops FPS from 161 to 56, a 65% reduction, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo ranks 449th out of 3712 tested combinations, placing it in the top 12.1% of all systems in the database for Minimum. This is a strong result, but it is not near the top, which suggests that there are faster combos, likely with higher-end GPUs like the RTX 4090 or RX 7900 XTX that can push 4K Ultra past 60 FPS. The rank of 449 indicates that the i7-14700F and RTX 4070 Ti SUPER are well-matched for this game, but the GPU is the limiting factor for the highest settings. The data shows that at 1440p Ultra, the combo hits 104 FPS, which is excellent, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 56 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. This placement in the 88th percentile of combos means that the system is faster than the vast majority of tested hardware, but there is headroom for improvement if the goal is 4K Ultra at 60+ FPS. The rank is also influenced by the fact that many combos with newer or more expensive GPUs will outperform it. However, for 1080p and 1440p gaming, this combo is in the upper echelon, with 1440p High hitting 136 FPS and 1080p High hitting 211 FPS. The benchmark results indicate that the combo’s performance is consistent with its component scores: the CPU’s 91st percentile and GPU’s 76th percentile combine to produce a system that is better than the GPU alone would suggest, because the CPU does not bottleneck. The rank suggests that if you are targeting 4K, you would need a more powerful GPU, but for 1440p high-refresh-rate gaming, this combo is near-ideal.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings levels.

At 1920x1080, the combo is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher settings. At Low, the average FPS is 329, which is extremely high and indicates that the CPU is still pushing hard. At Medium, the average drops to 252 FPS, with a minimum of 214 and a maximum of 290. High settings yield 211 FPS average. At Ultra, the average is 161 FPS. This scaling from 329 to 161 FPS as settings increase from Low to Ultra shows that the GPU’s shading units and texture units are becoming the bottleneck, but the frame rates remain far above any display’s refresh rate. The minimum FPS at Medium (214) is still higher than the average FPS at Ultra (161), which suggests that even the most demanding settings at 1080p are easily handled.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops are more pronounced. Low settings produce 212 FPS average, which is still very high. Medium yields 162 FPS average (min 138, max 187). High settings drop to 136 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 104 FPS average. The trend shows that the GPU is now doing more work, but the CPU is still not a limiting factor, as even the lowest FPS at Medium (138) is above 120 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 108 FPS, which is a 51% reduction, indicating that the GPU is scaling with settings.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the GPU is fully saturated. Low settings produce 114 FPS average, which is playable. Medium drops to 87 FPS average (min 74, max 101). High settings yield 73 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 56 FPS average. At 4K Ultra, the combo is just below the 60 FPS target, which means you would need to drop to High or Medium for a locked 60 FPS experience. The min FPS at 4K Medium (74) is higher than the average at 4K Ultra (56), which shows that the GPU is hitting its limits with the highest settings. The data shows a consistent pattern: the CPU is never the bottleneck, and the GPU’s performance scales predictably with resolution and settings.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The resolution scaling data is a clear diagnostic for identifying the system’s bottleneck. From 1080p Low (329 FPS) to 4K Low (114 FPS), the FPS drops by 65.3%. From 1080p Ultra (161 FPS) to 4K Ultra (56 FPS), the drop is 65.2%. This consistent percentage drop across all settings is a classic sign of a GPU-bound system. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the FPS would remain relatively flat when increasing resolution, because the CPU workload does not change with resolution. However, the data shows that doubling the pixel count from 1080p to 4K roughly halves the FPS, which is exactly what you expect when the GPU is doing all the heavy lifting. The fact that the FPS drop is similar at Low and Ultra settings (around 65%) indicates that the GPU’s compute and memory bandwidth are the constraints. At 1080p, the GPU is working hard but has enough headroom to produce very high frame rates. At 4K, the GPU is fully saturated, and the FPS drops to the 56-114 range depending on settings. The CPU’s role in this scaling is negligible, as its performance does not change with resolution. The benchmark results suggest that if you were to pair this CPU with a more powerful GPU, the 4K Ultra FPS would increase, but the CPU would still not be a bottleneck. Conversely, if you used a weaker GPU, the 1080p FPS would drop, but the scaling pattern would remain the same. This data confirms that the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is the limiting component in this combo, and the i7-14700F has ample headroom for even more demanding GPUs.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Minimum at 4K Ultra with smooth frame rates?*

A: The measured data shows 56 FPS average at 4K Ultra, which is below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. For a locked 60 FPS, you would need to lower settings to High (73 FPS) or Medium (87 FPS).

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

A: The resolution scaling analysis shows that FPS drops by approximately 65% from 1080p to 4K, which is a clear sign of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU has a 91st percentile ranking and does not limit performance at any resolution.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested systems?

A: It ranks 449th out of 3712 combos, placing it in the top 12.1% of all tested hardware for Minimum. This is a strong result, but not top-tier, as higher-end GPUs will outperform it at 4K Ultra.

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Minimum?*

A: At 1440p, the combo delivers 104 FPS at Ultra and 136 FPS at High, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. At 4K, you can play at High settings with 73 FPS, but 1440p Ultra is the sweet spot for a balance of fidelity and frame rate.

Q: Is the 16 GB VRAM sufficient for this game?

A: Yes, the 16 GB GDDR6X memory is far more than Minimum requires, even at 4K Ultra. The GPU’s memory bandwidth of 672.3 GB/s is ample, and there are no memory-related performance issues in the data.

Q: How does the CPU’s multi-core performance affect this game?

A: It does not. The CPU’s multi-core score of 35122 in Cinebench R23 is irrelevant because Minimum is a 2014 title that relies on single-thread performance. The 5.40 GHz boost clock and single-core score of 4958 are what matter, and they are more than sufficient.