Minimum

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Minimum shows a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases, but the rate of that scaling tells an important story about where the bottleneck sits. At 1080p High settings, this combo delivers 130 FPS average. Moving to 1440p High drops that to 84 FPS, a 35% reduction. At 4K High, the average falls to 45 FPS, which is another 46% drop from 1440p. This steepening decline as resolution climbs is the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions.

The Low settings data reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p Low, the combo produces 202 FPS average. At 1440p Low, it drops to 130 FPS, and at 4K Low, it lands at 70 FPS. The scaling pattern here is nearly identical in percentage terms to the High settings curve, which suggests that even at Low settings, the GPU is still the primary limiter at 1440p and 4K. At 1080p Low, however, the 202 FPS figure is high enough that CPU limitations may start to emerge, though the data does not provide direct CPU utilization measurements to confirm this.

The Medium settings data provides the only min/max FPS information in the entire dataset, which is useful for understanding frame pacing. At 1080p Medium, the average is 154 FPS with a minimum of 131 and maximum of 178. At 1440p Medium, the average is 100 FPS with a minimum of 85 and maximum of 115. At 4K Medium, the average is 54 FPS with a minimum of 46 and maximum of 62. The gap between min and max FPS narrows as resolution increases: 47 FPS spread at 1080p, 30 FPS spread at 1440p, and only 16 FPS spread at 4K. This tightening of the frame time distribution at higher resolutions is consistent with the GPU becoming more fully saturated, which reduces the impact of transient CPU-side hitches on frame delivery.

Ultra settings show the most dramatic scaling. At 1080p Ultra, the combo averages 99 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 64 FPS, a 35% reduction. At 4K Ultra, it falls to 34 FPS, a 47% drop from 1440p. The Ultra settings curve is almost perfectly parallel to the High and Low curves, which strongly indicates that the GPU's compute and memory throughput, rather than any specific settings feature, is the limiting factor across all resolutions.

The data clearly shows that 4K Ultra is the only configuration that drops below 30 FPS, and even 4K High at 45 FPS is borderline for smooth gameplay. For competitive play, the 1440p Low setting at 130 FPS is the strongest option in the dataset. For visual quality, 1440p High at 84 FPS represents a reasonable balance.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 ranks 1562 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places the combo in the 47th percentile of all tested configurations, which is slightly below the median. Given that this is a mobile CPU paired with a desktop-class GPU, the ranking reflects the CPU's position as a potential constraint in this game.

The CPU itself sits at the 79th percentile against all CPUs in the database, which is a solid position. Its average benchmark score of 27507 places it nearly exactly between its nearest rivals. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 scores 27535, just 0.1% higher. The Intel Core i5-12600K and AMD Ryzen 7 5700X both score 27578, 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G scores 27382, which is 0.5% lower. This tight clustering means the CPU is performing essentially at parity with these desktop-class alternatives, despite being a mobile part.

The GPU sits at the 81st percentile against all GPUs, which is notably higher than the CPU's percentile. Its average benchmark score of 37648 is closely matched by its nearest rivals. The NVIDIA Tesla P4 scores 37628, just 0.1% lower. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 scores 37507, 0.4% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile scores 38135, which is 1.3% higher. The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 scores 37157, 1.3% lower. The GPU is performing essentially at the expected level for this class of hardware.

The discrepancy between the GPU's 81st percentile and the CPU's 79th percentile is small, but in a game like Minimum, which is a third-person shooter from 2014, the CPU's single-thread performance can matter significantly. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1647.5 and multi-core score of 12804.5 indicate a capable processor, but the PassMark single-thread score of 3399 is modest compared to the multi-thread score of 21100. The game's age suggests it may not scale perfectly across the 14 cores and 18 threads available, meaning the 3.60 GHz base clock and 4.50 GHz boost clock on fewer active cores could be the limiting factor.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for competitive play in Minimum?

A: The 1080p Low setting produces the highest average FPS at 202, followed by 1440p Low at 130 FPS. For a 1440p monitor, the Low setting at 130 FPS is the strongest option for competitive play, while 1080p Low gives the maximum headroom above display refresh rates.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Minimum?

A: Yes, but with compromises. At 4K High, the average FPS is 45, which is playable but not smooth for fast-paced action. At 4K Medium, it reaches 54 FPS with a minimum of 46. At 4K Low, it averages 70 FPS. Only 4K Ultra at 34 FPS dips below the 40 FPS threshold that most players would consider acceptable.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H scores 27507 on average, which is 0.1% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 5800, 0.3% lower than both the Intel Core i5-12600K and AMD Ryzen 7 5700X, and 0.5% higher than the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G. These differences are within noise, so the CPU is effectively tied with its direct competitors.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution?

A: At 1080p, Low averages 202 FPS while Ultra averages 99 FPS, a 103 FPS difference. At 1440p, Low averages 130 FPS while Ultra averages 64 FPS, a 66 FPS difference. At 4K, Low averages 70 FPS while Ultra averages 34 FPS, a 36 FPS difference.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more likely to limit performance in Minimum?

A: The benchmark data shows that FPS scales consistently with resolution across all settings, which indicates the GPU is the primary limiter at 1440p and 4K. At 1080p Low, the 202 FPS figure likely approaches the CPU's frame delivery ceiling, given the processor's PassMark single-thread score of 3399 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1647.5.

Q: What does the 1080p Medium FPS range tell us about frame consistency?

A: At 1080p Medium, the average is 154 FPS with a minimum of 131 and maximum of 178. The 47 FPS spread between minimum and maximum is the largest of any resolution, which suggests that at 1080p, frame pacing is less consistent due to CPU-side variations. At 4K Medium, the spread narrows to 16 FPS, indicating more consistent frame delivery when the GPU is fully saturated.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides average FPS for all resolutions and settings combinations, with min/max FPS only recorded for Medium settings.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 202 FPS average
• Medium: 154 FPS average, 131 FPS minimum, 178 FPS maximum
• High: 130 FPS average
• Ultra: 99 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 130 FPS average
• Medium: 100 FPS average, 85 FPS minimum, 115 FPS maximum
• High: 84 FPS average
• Ultra: 64 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 70 FPS average
• Medium: 54 FPS average, 46 FPS minimum, 62 FPS maximum
• High: 45 FPS average
• Ultra: 34 FPS average

The progression from Low to Ultra at each resolution follows a similar pattern. At 1080p, each settings tier costs roughly 25-35% of the previous tier's performance. Moving from Low to Medium costs 48 FPS, Medium to High costs 24 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 31 FPS. At 1440p, the step costs are 30 FPS, 16 FPS, and 20 FPS respectively. At 4K, the step costs are 16 FPS, 9 FPS, and 11 FPS.

The resolution scaling from 1080p to 1440p at each settings tier is roughly a 35-36% reduction in FPS, regardless of settings. From 1440p to 4K, the reduction is roughly 46-47% at High and Ultra, and 46% at Low and Medium. This consistency across settings tiers is strong evidence that the GPU's pixel throughput is the dominant factor in determining performance.

The min/max FPS data at Medium settings reveals a critical insight: the minimum FPS at 1080p (131) is higher than the average FPS at 1440p High (84) and 4K High (45). This means that even the worst-case frame delivery at 1080p Medium exceeds the average performance at higher resolutions, making 1080p the only resolution where frame drops are unlikely to be perceptible.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is built on the AD104 chip using TSMC's 5 nm process, with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. Its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory operates at 1313 MHz with a 192-bit bus, yielding 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's base clock is 1920 MHz with a boost clock of 2475 MHz. It has 5888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units, along with 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s, with FP32 and FP16 compute both rated at 29.15 TFLOPS.

In Minimum, the GPU's role as the primary performance limiter is evident from the resolution scaling data. The consistent FPS reductions as resolution increases — approximately 35% from 1080p to 1440p and 46% from 1440p to 4K at every settings tier — align with the expected pixel throughput demands. The 12 GB VRAM capacity is more than sufficient for a 2014 game, so memory capacity is unlikely to be a constraint. The memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s, however, could become relevant at 4K Ultra where the GPU must fetch and process significantly more texture data per frame.

The GPU's benchmark results place it at the 81st percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 37648. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla P4, scores 37628, a 0.1% difference. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 trails by 0.4%, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile leads by 1.3%. These small deltas indicate the RTX 4070 is performing right at the expected level for its class.

The boost clock of 2475 MHz and the 1920 MHz base clock provide a 555 MHz headroom, which is substantial. In a game like Minimum that is not pushing the GPU to its thermal limits at lower resolutions, the boost clock is likely sustained for extended periods. At 4K Ultra, however, the GPU is operating at maximum load, and the boost clock may fluctuate, which could explain the narrower min/max FPS spread at 4K Medium relative to 1080p Medium.

The GPU's 64 ROPs and 158.4 GPixel/s pixel rate are adequate for this game's rendering requirements. The 455.4 GTexel/s texture rate suggests that texture-heavy scenes should not cause significant frame drops. The 29.15 TFLOPS FP32 compute is more than sufficient for a game from 2014, meaning the GPU is unlikely to be compute-bound in most scenarios.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H is a mobile processor from the Core Ultra Series 1, built on Intel's 7 nm Meteor Lake architecture. 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 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel configuration, providing 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU's 28W TDP indicates a power-efficient design, and it uses the Intel BGA 2049 socket.

In Minimum, the CPU's role is secondary to the GPU at higher resolutions, but it becomes relevant at 1080p Low where the FPS reaches 202. The PassMark single-thread score of 3399 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1647.5 represent the CPU's ability to handle the game's main thread. The multi-thread score of 12804.5 in Cinebench R23 and 21100 in PassMark multithread indicate strong parallel performance, but a 2014 game may not fully utilize all 18 threads.

The CPU's boost clock of 4.50 GHz is the key specification for gaming performance in Minimum. The base clock of 3.60 GHz provides a solid floor, but sustained boost behavior depends on thermal headroom within the mobile chassis. The 14-core configuration with 18 threads (likely 6 performance cores with hyper-threading plus 8 efficiency cores without) means the game must schedule its threads appropriately. If Minimum only uses a few threads, the performance cores will handle the load, and the 4.50 GHz boost clock should be achievable.

The CPU's benchmark comparisons show it is closely matched with several desktop processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 scores 27535 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core i5-12600K scores 27578 (0.3% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X scores 27578 (0.3% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G scores 27382 (0.5% lower). These rivals are all desktop parts with higher power envelopes, yet the mobile Ultra 5 125H matches them within 0.5%. This is notable because the 28W TDP is substantially lower than typical desktop processors.

The Cinebench R20 scores of 7161 multi-core and 1010 single-core, along with the R15 scores of 2021.5 multi-core and 241 single-core, paint a picture of a processor that is strong for mobile but not exceptional. The PassMark data compression score of 236209 and data encryption score of 14251 indicate good integer performance, while the floating point math score of 51670 and extended instructions score of 13749 show solid compute capabilities.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s via dual-channel DDR5 is adequate for feeding the GPU at 1080p, but at higher resolutions, the GPU's own memory subsystem takes over as the primary data path. The 18 MB of L3 cache is shared across all cores, which helps with data locality in multi-threaded workloads. The 2 MB L2 per core is generous and should help reduce memory latency for the game's hot data.

Given that the combo ranks 1562 out of 2939 tested combos, the CPU does not appear to be a significant drag on performance in Minimum. The GPU's 81st percentile ranking versus the CPU's 79th percentile suggests they are well matched for this game. The 1080p Low result of 202 FPS may be near the CPU's practical frame delivery limit, which would explain why the FPS does not scale linearly with GPU load reduction at that resolution.