Minimum

The data for Minimum with the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 presents a clear picture of a system that is capable at lower resolutions but begins to strain under the demands of 4K. The measured frames per second across the resolution and settings matrix show a predictable pattern, with the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck as pixel count increases. The following analysis walks through the benchmark results, the roles of each component, and what the numbers indicate for real-world play.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best average frame rate achieved with this combo in Minimum?*

A: The highest average FPS recorded in the measured data is 180, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is followed closely by 138 FPS at the same resolution with Medium settings and 116 FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are significantly lower. With Low settings, the combo manages an average of 62 FPS. At Medium, the average drops to 48 FPS, and at High, it falls to 40 FPS. The Ultra preset yields the lowest result at 31 FPS, which is below the commonly accepted 60 FPS target for smooth play.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the limiting factor, particularly at higher resolutions. As resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, the average frame rate at High settings drops from 116 FPS to 75 FPS at 2560x1440, and then to 40 FPS at 4K. This steep decline with increasing pixel count is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's high multi-threaded benchmark score of 12804.5 in Cinebench R23 suggests it has ample headroom.

Q: What are the minimum FPS figures for the Medium preset?

A: The measured data includes minimum FPS values only for the Medium preset. At 1920x1080, the minimum is 117 FPS. At 2560x1440, the minimum is 75 FPS, and at 3840x2160, the minimum is 41 FPS. No minimum FPS data is available for the Low, High, or Ultra presets.

Q: How does this combo's overall performance rank among all tested combinations?

A: The combo ranks 1752 out of 2939 tested combinations for this game. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the overall performance distribution, indicating that while it is not a top-tier performer, it is also not at the bottom of the list.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between the Low and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves an average of 116 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves an average of 57 FPS. This represents a significant 59 FPS difference, or approximately a 51% reduction in frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is a mobile GPU based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 272.0 GB/s. The GPU's base clock is 1830 MHz, with a boost clock of 2460 MHz. These specifications define its processing capacity, and the benchmark results in Minimum reflect how this hardware handles the game's rendering load.

The GPU's role is most evident when examining the measured frame rates across different resolutions. At 1920x1080, the GPU is able to produce high frame rates, with the Low preset hitting 180 FPS and the High preset at 116 FPS. This indicates that at this resolution, the GPU has sufficient resources to render frames quickly. However, as the resolution increases to 2560x1440, the average FPS for the High preset drops to 75, and at 3840x2160, it falls to 40. This scaling pattern is directly tied to the GPU's memory bandwidth and processing power. The 8 GB VRAM and 272.0 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but the higher pixel count at 4K demands more memory throughput and shading power than the RTX 4060 can provide, leading to the observed drop in performance.

The GPU's benchmark scores further contextualize its performance. In Passmark's G3D test, it scores 19545, and in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), it scores 2302. These figures place it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17639. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7790, which has an average score of 17666 (a -0.2% delta), and the AMD Radeon 780M, which scores 17588 (a 0.3% delta). This suggests the RTX 4060's raw compute performance is closely matched with these older or integrated solutions, but its feature set, including 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores, provides additional capabilities that may not be fully utilized in Minimum, a game released in 2014.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 achieves a rank of 1752 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places the system in the 59.6th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning it performs better than roughly 59% of the combos but worse than about 40%. This mid-pack positioning suggests that the hardware is neither a high-end powerhouse nor a low-end entry point for this specific title.

To understand this rank, it is useful to look at the individual component standings. The CPU, Intel Core Ultra 5 125H, has an average benchmark score of 27507, placing it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 5800 with an average score of 27535 (a -0.1% delta), the Intel Core i5-12600K at 27578 (a -0.3% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X at 27578 (a -0.3% delta). This indicates the CPU is a strong performer, nearly identical in synthetic compute to these desktop-class alternatives. The GPU, on the other hand, sits in the 61st percentile, with an average benchmark score of 17639. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 7790, has a score of 17666, a -0.2% delta, showing that the GPU's raw compute is not as dominant relative to its peers as the CPU's is.

The disparity between the CPU's high percentile (79) and the GPU's lower percentile (61) suggests that the GPU is the weaker link in this pairing. In a game like Minimum, the overall combo rank of 1752 is likely constrained more by the GPU's performance than by the CPU's. The CPU can deliver the necessary instructions and physics calculations, but the GPU must render each frame, and its limitations become more pronounced at higher resolutions and settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at how the system performs across a grid of four resolutions and four quality presets. The data is complete, with average FPS for all 16 combinations, and minimum and maximum FPS for the Medium preset only.

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 180 FPS, which is the highest recorded figure in the entire dataset. The Medium preset averages 138 FPS, with a minimum of 117 and a maximum of 158. The High preset averages 116 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 88 FPS. All of these results are well above the 60 FPS threshold, indicating smooth gameplay at this resolution regardless of settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates show a clear decline. The Low preset still performs well, averaging 116 FPS. The Medium preset averages 89 FPS, with a minimum of 75 and a maximum of 102. The High preset averages 75 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 57 FPS. While the Low and Medium presets remain playable, the Ultra preset falls below the 60 FPS target, suggesting that users seeking maximum quality at 1440p may need to accept some compromises.

At 3840x2160, the system's limitations become apparent. The Low preset averages 62 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS target. The Medium preset averages 48 FPS, with a minimum of 41 and a maximum of 55. The High preset averages 40 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 31 FPS. None of the presets except Low achieve a 60 FPS average, and the Ultra preset's 31 FPS would likely result in a stuttery experience.

The data for the Medium preset is notable because it is the only setting with min/max FPS values. At 1080p, the range is 117 to 158 FPS, a spread of 41 FPS. At 1440p, the range narrows to 75 to 102 FPS, a spread of 27 FPS. At 4K, the range is 41 to 55 FPS, a spread of 14 FPS. This narrowing range with increasing resolution indicates that frame times become more consistent at higher pixel counts, likely because the GPU is working at a more sustained level of utilization.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 reveals the nature of the performance bottleneck. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 116 at 1080p to 75 at 1440p, and then to 40 at 4K. This represents a 35% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a 47% reduction from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is not linear, with a more pronounced drop at the higher resolution.

This pattern is typical of a GPU-bound workload. The number of pixels at 4K is 4 times that of 1080p. If the system were perfectly GPU-bound, we would expect the frame rate to drop by a factor of 4, all else being equal. The actual drop from 116 FPS to 40 FPS is a factor of 2.9, which is less than the theoretical maximum. This suggests that while the GPU is the primary limiter, there are other factors, such as memory bandwidth and CPU overhead, that prevent the scaling from being perfectly linear.

At Low settings, the scaling is similar. The average FPS drops from 180 at 1080p to 116 at 1440p, and then to 62 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 35.5%, and from 1440p to 4K is 46.5%. The relative consistency of these percentage drops across different settings indicates that the resolution scaling is primarily a function of GPU workload, not of specific settings.

The fact that the 4K Low preset still manages 62 FPS, while the 4K Ultra preset only reaches 31 FPS, highlights the significant impact of quality settings on the GPU load. At 4K, the GPU is already saturated with pixel processing, and adding more complex shading and effects through higher presets further reduces the frame rate. This suggests that for 4K play, users should prioritize lower settings to maintain a playable frame rate, while at 1080p, the GPU has enough headroom to run higher settings without issue.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and the desired frame rate. For a 60 FPS target, the system can handle Ultra settings at 1920x1080, where it achieves 88 FPS on average. At 2560x1440, the High preset delivers 75 FPS, which is above the target, while the Ultra preset falls short at 57 FPS. At 3840x2160, only the Low preset achieves an average above 60 FPS (62 FPS), with all other presets falling below.

If the goal is to maximize visual quality while maintaining a smooth experience, the High preset at 2560x1440 appears to be the sweet spot. It offers an average of 75 FPS, which is comfortable for most displays, and the visual upgrade from Medium to High is typically noticeable. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset at 88 FPS is the best choice for those with high-refresh-rate monitors, as it balances quality and performance.

For users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity, the Low preset at 2560x1440 delivers 116 FPS, and at 1920x1080, it delivers 180 FPS. These figures are ideal for competitive play or for displays with refresh rates above 144 Hz. The Medium preset at 1920x1080, with an average of 138 FPS and a minimum of 117, is also a strong option for high-refresh-rate gaming without sacrificing too much quality.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset's 62 FPS average is the only configuration that meets the 60 FPS target, and even then, it is close to the limit. The Medium preset's 48 FPS average, with a minimum of 41, may be acceptable for slower-paced games, but in a third-person shooter, this could lead to noticeable input lag and stuttering. The Ultra preset at 31 FPS is not recommended for any serious play.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H is a mobile processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, built on a 7 nm process at Intel. It features 14 cores and 18 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's thermal design power is 28 W, and it supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

In the context of Minimum, the CPU's role is to handle game logic, physics, and draw calls. The benchmark results show that the CPU is a strong performer. In Cinebench R23, it scores 12804.5 in multi-core and 1647.5 in single-core tests. In Passmark, it scores 21100 in multithreaded tests and 3399 in single-thread tests. These scores place it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27507.

The CPU's performance is closely matched with several desktop processors. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800, has an average score of 27535, a -0.1% delta. The Intel Core i5-12600K and AMD Ryzen 7 5700X both score 27578, a -0.3% delta. This suggests that the Core Ultra 5 125H offers compute performance on par with these established desktop chips, despite being a mobile part.

Given that the CPU's percentile rank (79) is higher than the GPU's (61), it is likely that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck in Minimum. The measured FPS scaling with resolution confirms this, as the frame rates drop significantly when the GPU workload increases, while the CPU's load remains relatively constant. The CPU's high multi-core score of 12804.5 in Cinebench R23 indicates it can handle the game's threading requirements without issue. Furthermore, the CPU's boost clock of 4.50 GHz ensures strong single-thread performance, which is often critical for game logic. In this system, the data suggests the CPU has ample headroom, and the GPU is the component that determines the playable settings and resolutions.