Minimum

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 5316 — placing it just 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 940M and 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon R7 M445. This is a GPU built on the 14nm Pascal architecture with 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its base clock of 1291 MHz and boost clock of 1392 MHz are modest by modern standards, and the 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus delivers 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth.

In "Minimum," the data shows this GPU is the primary constraint across nearly every resolution and setting combination. At 4K High, the combo manages only 14.4 FPS average — a figure that indicates the render pipeline is saturated well before the CPU's capabilities come into play. The 8.8 FPS at 4K Ultra is particularly telling: the jump from High to Ultra at 4K costs 5.6 FPS, or about 39% of the High result. This is a GPU that was designed for 1080p gaming from a bygone era, and the benchmark results confirm that expectation.

The GTX 1050 Ti's 4 GB VRAM capacity is worth considering in the context of this game's resolution scaling. At 4K, texture data and framebuffer demands often exceed what 4 GB can efficiently handle, which likely contributes to the steep performance cliff between 1440p and 4K. The GPU's 2.138 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 44.54 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply insufficient to feed a 4K display at playable frame rates in this title.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent, predictable scaling pattern that strongly implicates the GPU as the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 65.2 FPS average. Dropping to 1440p Low yields 40.3 FPS — a reduction of 24.9 FPS, or roughly 38%. At 4K Low, the average falls to 23.6 FPS, another 41% drop from 1440p. This geometric scaling pattern is classic GPU-bound behavior: as pixel count rises, the render workload expands proportionally, and the GTX 1050 Ti's fixed compute resources become increasingly strained.

The picture is similar at Medium settings. 1080p Medium produces 47.9 FPS, 1440p Medium drops to 29.7 FPS (38% lower), and 4K Medium falls to 19.2 FPS (another 35% reduction). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings levels — roughly 38-41% per resolution step — indicates that the limiting factor is the GPU's raw throughput rather than memory bandwidth or CPU interaction. If the CPU were the constraint, we would expect to see diminishing FPS gaps as resolution increases, because the CPU workload stays relatively constant while GPU work scales.

At High settings, the pattern holds: 44 FPS at 1080p, 25.7 FPS at 1440p (41.6% lower), and 14.4 FPS at 4K (44% lower). Ultra settings show the steepest relative decline — 34.4 FPS at 1080p, 23.5 FPS at 1440p, and 8.8 FPS at 4K — suggesting that the Ultra preset introduces effects that disproportionately tax the GPU's shading units and ROPs at higher pixel counts.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo achieve 60 FPS at 1080p in Minimum?

A: Only at Low settings, where the measured average is 65.2 FPS. At Medium settings, the average drops to 47.9 FPS, meaning the 60 FPS target requires the Low preset at 1080p.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-14700KF the limiting factor at 4K?

A: No. The CPU is a 20-core, 28-thread processor with a 5.60 GHz boost clock and sits at the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The 4K results — 8.8 to 23.6 FPS depending on settings — are far below what this CPU can feed, confirming the GTX 1050 Ti as the bottleneck.

Q: How does the GTX 1050 Ti compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 5316 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce 930A (5317, 0% delta) and 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 940M (5297). It sits 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 240 (5280) and 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon R7 M445 (5361).

Q: What is the best frame rate achievable at 1440p?

A: The highest 1440p average is 40.3 FPS at Low settings. Medium produces 29.7 FPS, High drops to 25.7 FPS, and Ultra yields 23.5 FPS. None of these reach 60 FPS.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide any benefit at 4K?

A: The 4K Ultra average of 8.8 FPS is effectively unplayable. Compared to 4K Low (23.6 FPS), Ultra costs 14.8 FPS — a 63% reduction — for what the data suggests is a marginal visual improvement in this test.

Q: Is the 4 GB VRAM sufficient for 4K in this game?

A: The benchmark results indicate no — 4K High (14.4 FPS) and 4K Ultra (8.8 FPS) are both far below playable thresholds. While VRAM capacity alone isn't the sole cause, the combination of 4 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus (112.1 GB/s) is insufficient for smooth 4K operation.

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

At 1920x1080, the data shows a clear hierarchy: Low settings deliver 65.2 FPS average, Medium drops to 47.9 FPS, High falls to 44 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 34.4 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 17.3 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is only 3.9 FPS — suggesting diminishing returns on visual quality versus performance in the middle range. Ultra costs an additional 9.6 FPS over High.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts: Low produces 40.3 FPS, Medium 29.7 FPS, High 25.7 FPS, and Ultra 23.5 FPS. Here, the gap between Medium and High narrows to 4.0 FPS, while High to Ultra is just 2.2 FPS. This compression of frame rates at higher presets indicates that the GPU's resources are so taxed that even small settings changes have outsized impacts relative to the absolute FPS numbers.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low 23.6 FPS, Medium 19.2 FPS, High 14.4 FPS, and Ultra 8.8 FPS. The Ultra result is particularly striking — it's less than half of the Low result and represents a 63% reduction from Low to Ultra. The 4K data also shows the largest relative spread between presets, with Ultra offering only 37% of Low's performance.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This combination of Intel Core i7-14700KF and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti ranks 1720 out of 1733 tested combos in Minimum. That places it in the bottom 0.8% of all configurations — a rank that reflects the extreme mismatch between the CPU's capabilities and the GPU's limitations. The CPU alone sits at the 96th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 70104, while the GPU languishes at the 30th percentile with a score of 5316.

The ranking data implies that nearly every other tested combo in this game achieves higher frame rates, regardless of whether those combos use older or newer parts. The fact that this combo ranks this low despite having a top-tier CPU underscores the GPU-bound nature of Minimum's workload. The i7-14700KF's nearest rivals — the Intel Core i7-14700K (0% delta), AMD EPYC 9115 (0.3% ahead), AMD Ryzen 9 9950X (0.4% ahead), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (1.3% ahead) — all deliver similar CPU performance, but none of that matters when the GPU is this far behind the curve.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured data points to 1080p Low as the only combination that clears 60 FPS, with a 65.2 FPS average. This is the only row that approaches what most players would consider smooth gameplay. At 1080p Medium, the 47.9 FPS result is playable but noticeably short of 60, while High (44 FPS) and Ultra (34.4 FPS) require progressively larger compromises.

For players who value visual fidelity over frame rate, 1440p Low at 40.3 FPS is the best balance at that resolution — it's the only 1440p setting that stays above 40 FPS. The 1440p Medium result of 29.7 FPS is acceptable for slower-paced gameplay, but the 25.7 FPS High and 23.5 FPS Ultra results are borderline. At 4K, no setting is truly playable; Low's 23.6 FPS is the least bad option, but the data suggests this resolution is out of reach for this GPU.

The recommendation from the data is clear: 1080p Low is the only preset that delivers a consistently smooth experience. For users who must run at higher resolutions or settings, the measured FPS drops below 30 at 4K across all presets, and even 1440p Ultra falls to 23.5 FPS.

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

The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a 20-core, 28-thread processor based on Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10nm process with a 257 mm² die. Its 3.40 GHz base clock and 5.60 GHz boost clock, combined with 33 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB L2 per core, position it as a top-tier desktop CPU. In Cinebench R23, it scores 44557 multicore and 6290 singlecore; Geekbench shows 19287 multicore and 2972 singlecore. PassMark multithread reaches 52425 with single-thread at 4480.

In the context of Minimum's measured results, the CPU's role is almost entirely passive. The benchmark data shows no scenario where the CPU could plausibly be the bottleneck — even at 1080p Low, where the GPU produces 65.2 FPS, the i7-14700KF's single-core performance (6290 in Cinebench R23 singlecore) is far beyond what a 2014 third-person shooter would require for game logic, physics, and draw call processing.

The CPU's 96th percentile ranking and its proximity to the Intel Core i7-14700K (0% delta), AMD EPYC 9115 (0.3% ahead), and AMD Ryzen 9 9950X (0.4% ahead) confirm that it is not the limiting component. Its 125W TDP and unlocked multiplier (with launch MSRP of $384) make it a flexible platform component, but in this pairing, its headroom is entirely untapped. The data implies that swapping the GTX 1050 Ti for a more capable GPU would unlock substantially higher frame rates without any CPU-side changes, as the i7-14700KF has abundant processing capacity to feed a much faster graphics card.