Minimum

The pairing of the Intel Core i9-14900K with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT produces a fascinating dataset for the 2014 title Minimum, a Third-Person Shooter. The benchmark results show a system capable of extreme frame rates at lower resolutions, but one that begins to show its limits as pixel count climbs. The data reveals a classic tension between a top-tier CPU with 24 cores and a 32-thread count, and a GPU that, while competent, ranks in the 51st percentile among all GPUs. This combination places the system at rank 1241 out of 3712 tested combos in this specific game, suggesting a performance profile that is strong but not elite. The measured FPS across resolutions and settings paints a clear picture of where the bottleneck lies and how the hardware scales under load.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for this combo reveals a significant and predictable drop in performance as resolution increases, which is a clear indicator of the GPU becoming the primary limiting factor. At 1920x1080, the system is clearly CPU-bound or at least operating in a high-throughput zone where the GPU has ample headroom. For instance, at Low settings, the average frame rate is a staggering 252 FPS. Moving up to High settings at the same resolution yields a still-massive 162 FPS. This suggests that at 1080p, the Intel Core i9-14900K, with its 6.00 GHz boost clock, is feeding frames faster than the Radeon RX 7800 XT can render them, but the GPU is still keeping up admirably.

When we step up to 2560x1440, the data shows the GPU starting to work harder. The average FPS at Low settings drops from 252 to 162, a decrease of 90 FPS, which is a sharp 35.7% reduction. At High settings, the drop is from 162 to 104 FPS, a 58 FPS or 35.8% reduction. This consistent percentage drop indicates that the workload is scaling with pixel count, which is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck beginning to form. The GPU's 16 GB of VRAM and 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth are sufficient, but the raw shading power is being taxed more heavily.

The most dramatic scaling occurs when moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 (4K). At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 162 to 87, a substantial 46.3% reduction. At High settings, the drop is from 104 to 56 FPS, a 46.2% reduction. This near-identical percentage drop across different settings at the same resolution jump strongly reinforces the conclusion that the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is the limiting component at 4K. The CPU is no longer the constraint; the GPU's 37.32 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is simply being saturated by the sheer number of pixels. The result is that 4K Ultra is only playable at an average of 43 FPS, while 4K High hovers at 56 FPS, both of which are below the coveted 60 FPS threshold.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for maintaining a 60 FPS average on High settings?

A: The data shows that at 2560x1440, the High preset yields an average of 104 FPS, and at 1920x1080 it reaches 162 FPS. However, at 3840x2160, the average drops to 56 FPS. Therefore, 2560x1440 is the highest resolution where the High preset comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS target.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900K has an average benchmark score of 79097. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i9-14900KF, scores 79371, which is a 0.3% difference. The AMD EPYC 7413 is 1.2% ahead with a score of 80041, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is 1.7% behind with a score of 77740.

Q: What is the jump in performance from 1080p to 1440p at Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 193. At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 124. This represents a 69 FPS (35.8%) decrease when moving from 1080p to 1440p.

Q: Is the GPU's average benchmark score higher or lower than its closest rival?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT has an average benchmark score of 11627. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660, has a score of 11680, which is 0.5% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is 0.9% lower with a score of 11528.

Q: Does the game run better on Low or High settings at 4K?

A: The data indicates that Low settings at 3840x2160 produce an average of 87 FPS, which is significantly higher than the 56 FPS average on High settings. This 31 FPS difference highlights the heavy load of the High preset on the GPU.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like at 1440p Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the measured average FPS is 124, with a minimum of 106 FPS and a maximum of 143 FPS. This shows a variance of 37 FPS, suggesting some fluctuation in frame pacing.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT plays a pivotal role in determining this system's performance in Minimum, especially as resolution increases. Based on the benchmark results, the GPU's 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth, is more than adequate for the game's demands at all tested settings. The limiting factor is not memory capacity but the GPU's processing power. With a boost clock of 2430 MHz, the card is capable of high throughput, but the data shows its performance is bounded by its position in the market, ranking in the 51st percentile of all GPUs.

The measured FPS at 4K makes the GPU's role clear. The significant drop from 87 FPS at Low to 43 FPS at Ultra is not a result of VRAM limitations, but rather the compute load of the Ultra preset overwhelming the GPU's 3840 shading units. The GPU's nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (0.5% faster) and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT (1.8% slower). This positioning suggests that while the RX 7800 XT is a modern card, its raw rasterization power places it in a mid-range tier, which is reflected in the 4K performance. The GPU is the clear bottleneck at 3840x2160, where the CPU's potential is left untapped due to the rendering demands exceeding the GPU's capabilities.

How This Combo Ranks

In the specific context of Minimum, the combination of the Intel Core i9-14900K and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT achieves a rank of 1241 out of 3712 tested combinations. This places the system in the 66.5th percentile of all combos tested for this game, which is a solid, above-average result. The ranking indicates that while this is a powerful system, it is not at the very top tier of performance for this title, likely ceded by combos with more powerful GPUs. The data suggests that the CPU is not holding this system back from a higher rank, as its 24-core, 32-thread configuration is capable of immense processing power. Instead, the GPU's 51st percentile standing among all GPUs is the primary constraint on the combo's overall position. The rank of 1241 is a result of a high-end CPU paired with a mid-to-high-end GPU, which creates a balanced yet GPU-limited system for this game.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i9-14900K's role in this benchmark is to provide an unconstrained foundation for the GPU to operate. With 24 cores, 32 threads, and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz, the CPU's raw processing power is immense. The benchmark data shows that at 1920x1080, the system achieves 252 FPS on Low settings, which is a clear indication that the CPU is delivering frames at a rate far beyond what most displays can show. This performance is supported by its average benchmark score of 79097, which places it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals are within a 1.7% performance delta, showing it is at the top of its class.

The CPU's influence is most apparent when analyzing the scaling from 1080p to 1440p. The near-identical percentage drops in FPS across Low and High settings at these resolutions suggest that the CPU is not the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a less severe drop at lower resolutions where the GPU is less strained. Instead, the consistent scaling points to the GPU as the primary constraint. The CPU's role is to ensure that it never becomes the bottleneck, and the data confirms this. Even at 4K, where the GPU is clearly struggling, the CPU is likely still providing frames faster than the GPU can render them, ensuring the GPU is always the limiting component. The CPU's capabilities, including its 36 MB of shared L3 cache, are sufficient to keep up with the demands of Minimum at every resolution and setting tested.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system's capabilities across all settings and resolutions.

At 1920x1080:

• Low: The system achieves an average of 252 FPS, which is the highest recorded in the dataset.
• Medium: The average is 193 FPS, with a minimum of 164 FPS and a maximum of 222 FPS.
• High: The average is 162 FPS.
• Ultra: The average is 123 FPS.

At 2560x1440:

• Low: The average FPS is 162, which is a 35.7% decrease from the 1080p Low result.
• Medium: The average is 124 FPS, with a minimum of 106 FPS and a maximum of 143 FPS.
• High: The average is 104 FPS.
• Ultra: The average is 79 FPS.

At 3840x2160:

• Low: The average FPS is 87, a 46.3% decrease from the 1440p Low result.
• Medium: The average is 67 FPS, with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 77 FPS.
• High: The average is 56 FPS.
• Ultra: The average is 43 FPS.

The data shows a consistent and predictable pattern. The scaling from Low to Ultra at a fixed resolution shows the cost of each preset. At 1080p, the jump from Low to Ultra costs 129 FPS. At 1440p, it costs 83 FPS. At 4K, it costs 44 FPS. This diminishing absolute cost at higher resolutions is because the GPU is already saturated at 4K, so the difference between presets is less pronounced in terms of absolute FPS, but more significant in terms of percentage of the base frame rate.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the user's target resolution and desired frame rate.

For 1920x1080 users, the data shows that all settings are playable, but the Ultra preset at 123 FPS offers the best visual experience while still maintaining a frame rate well above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 162 FPS is also an excellent choice for users with high-refresh-rate monitors, as it provides a significant boost in smoothness. The Medium preset at 193 FPS is suitable for competitive play where maximum frame rate is prioritized over visual fidelity.

For 2560x1440 users, the High preset at 104 FPS is the sweet spot, providing a great balance between visual quality and performance. The Ultra preset at 79 FPS is also viable and offers the best image quality, but the drop to below 100 FPS may be noticeable to some users. The Medium preset at 124 FPS is an excellent option for those who prefer higher frame rates, while the Low preset at 162 FPS is best for competitive scenarios.

For 3840x2160 users, the data suggests that the Medium preset at 67 FPS is the maximum playable setting that stays above the 60 FPS target. The High preset at 56 FPS is borderline and may be acceptable for users who prioritize image quality over a locked 60 FPS. The Low preset at 87 FPS is the best choice for smoothness at 4K, but comes with a significant visual compromise. The Ultra preset at 43 FPS is not recommended for a smooth experience. The data implies that this combo is best suited for 1440p gaming, where it can deliver high frame rates at high settings, or 4K gaming at medium settings.