Minimum

Minimum is a 2014 third-person shooter that, on paper, should not stress modern hardware, yet the measured results for the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H paired with the AMD Radeon 880M reveal a system that is severely constrained by its integrated graphics. The data shows a combination that lands at rank 2866 out of 2939 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 2.5% of all systems benchmarked for this title, which suggests that while the CPU is a modern mobile powerhouse, the GPU is the definitive bottleneck across every resolution and settings preset tested.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance ranking of the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H + AMD Radeon 880M combo in Minimum?

A: The combination ranks 2866 out of 2939 tested combos, placing it in the bottom percentile of systems. This indicates that despite the hardware being relatively modern, its performance in this specific game is at the very low end of the spectrum.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H has an average benchmark score of 29093, which is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X at 29123 (a -0.1% difference) and the Intel Core i5-13500HX at 29270 (-0.6%). It is slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT, which scores 28940, by 0.5%.

Q: What is the best average FPS achievable at 1080p with this hardware?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded at 1920x1080 is 79 FPS, but this is only achieved with the Low settings preset. Dropping to Medium yields 61 FPS, while High and Ultra presets produce 51 FPS and 39 FPS, respectively.

Q: Does the game become unplayable at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, the data indicates that 4K performance is critically low. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages only 14 FPS, and even the Low preset only reaches 28 FPS. The Medium preset shows an average of 21 FPS with minimums dipping to 18 FPS, which is well below playable thresholds.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile compared to all other GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M sits at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 8436 is essentially on par with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8427), which is 0.1% slower, and slightly behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8458) by -0.3%.

Q: How much of a frame rate drop occurs when moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 51 FPS at 1920x1080 to 33 FPS at 2560x1440. This represents a significant 35% reduction in frame rate, highlighting the GPU's inability to handle the increased pixel count.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is a mobile processor built on the Meteor Lake architecture, featuring 14 cores and 18 threads. Its base clock is 3.60 GHz, which can boost up to 4.60 GHz, and it is manufactured on a 7 nm process by Intel. The CPU's benchmark scores are robust, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11875.5 and a single-core score of 1700, placing it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs. This data suggests the processor has substantial computational headroom for a game like Minimum, which was released in 2014 and likely does not require high thread counts or current-generation instruction sets.

However, the benchmark results indicate that this CPU power is largely irrelevant to the gaming performance in this title. The CPU's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, scores nearly identically in synthetic benchmarks (a -0.1% delta), yet the combination's rank is abysmal. This suggests that the game's frame rates are not being limited by the CPU's ability to process game logic or draw calls. The cache layout includes an 18 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache, which is ample for a game of this generation. The processor's TDP of 28 W and dual-channel memory support with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth are also standard for a mobile part, but with the GPU relying on system memory, this bandwidth is shared and could be a contributing factor to performance limits.

The data implies that the CPU is essentially idle in this scenario. In a game like Minimum, which is a third-person shooter from 2014, the physics and AI calculations are likely minimal. The Core Ultra 5 135H's Passmark multithread score of 22422 and single-thread score of 3521 are more than sufficient to feed frames to any integrated GPU. The bottleneck must lie elsewhere, and the FPS scaling across resolutions confirms this. If the CPU were the limiting factor, frame rates would remain consistent across different resolutions. Instead, we see a clear drop from 79 FPS at 1080p Low to 28 FPS at 4K Low, which is a classic sign of GPU limitation.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 2866 out of 2939 is a stark indicator of where this hardware sits in the grand scheme of tested configurations. With 2939 total combinations, this system is in the bottom 2.5% of all results, meaning that nearly every other tested CPU and GPU pairing delivers higher frame rates in Minimum. This is not a reflection of the CPU's quality—which is in the 81st percentile—but rather a direct consequence of the integrated GPU's limitations.

The AMD Radeon 880M, with its 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, is designed for efficiency rather than raw gaming power. Its benchmark scores place it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 8436. When we look at its nearest rivals, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8427) and the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462), we see that the 880M is competing with discrete GPUs from over a decade ago. This explains why the combination ranks so poorly; it is essentially delivering performance equivalent to a legacy entry-level discrete graphics card.

The fact that the CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks all show similar deltas (less than 1% difference) but the combo rank is so low suggests that no amount of CPU horsepower can overcome the GPU's deficit. The data points to a system that is unbalanced for gaming purposes, where the processor's potential is completely wasted in this specific workload. The rank serves as a warning that this configuration is not suitable for Minimum at any resolution above the lowest settings, and even then, it barely achieves playable frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive look at how this system struggles across all settings and resolutions. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low preset averages 79 FPS, Medium averages 61 FPS (with a minimum of 52 and maximum of 70), High averages 51 FPS, and Ultra averages 39 FPS. These numbers show that at 1080p, the system is capable of delivering playable frame rates, but only at the cost of graphical fidelity. The jump from Low to Medium incurs a 22% performance hit, while the jump from Medium to High is another 16% reduction, and High to Ultra is a further 24% drop.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades significantly. The Low preset averages 51 FPS, which is a 35% drop from the 1080p Low result. Medium averages 39 FPS (minimum 33, maximum 45), High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages just 25 FPS. At this resolution, only the Low preset is consistently playable, and even then, it hovers near the edge of what most players would consider smooth. The gap between Low and Medium is 12 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 6 FPS, showing that the GPU is running out of headroom.

At 3840x2160, the results are catastrophic. The Low preset averages 28 FPS, Medium averages 21 FPS (minimum 18, maximum 24), High averages 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 14 FPS. None of these are playable, and the frame times would likely be inconsistent and stuttery. The data shows a clear trend: for every doubling of resolution pixel count, the frame rate nearly halves, which is the expected behavior of a GPU-bound scenario. The measured FPS values are the only data points available, so we must rely on these averages to draw conclusions, but they paint a consistent picture of a system that is only viable at 1080p with lower settings.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is the primary factor limiting performance in Minimum. This integrated GPU, based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture and built on a 4 nm process by TSMC, has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. It features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, along with 12 ray tracing cores. The GPU's memory configuration is "System Shared," which means it relies on the CPU's DDR5 memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." This is a critical weakness, as the iGPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth.

The GPU's benchmark results are telling. Its Passmark G3D score is 7615, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 535. The average benchmark score of 8436 places it in the 43rd percentile, which is below average. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8427), NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8458), and AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462), all of which are older discrete GPUs. This comparison demonstrates that the 880M is not a gaming powerhouse; it is an efficient iGPU designed for everyday tasks and light gaming.

In the context of Minimum, the GPU's role is to render the game's graphics, and it clearly struggles. The FP32 performance of 4.454 TFLOPS is decent on paper, but the system-shared memory and low bandwidth likely bottleneck the fill rate. The pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s are insufficient for higher resolutions. The data suggests that at 4K, the GPU is overwhelmed, likely due to memory bandwidth limitations rather than raw compute. The fact that the FPS drops by roughly half when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and again from 1440p to 4K, indicates that the GPU's memory subsystem is the primary constraint, as the computational load does not scale linearly with resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this hardware are at 1080p with the Low preset, which yields 79 FPS. This is the only configuration that provides a frame rate comfortably above 60 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 1080p delivers 61 FPS, which is also playable but requires a trade-off in visual quality. Given that the game is from 2014, the visual difference between Low and Medium may not be substantial, but the 18 FPS difference in performance is significant.

For players who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, the High preset at 1080p offers 51 FPS, which is borderline playable but may result in noticeable dips during intense action sequences. The Ultra preset at 1080p, with 39 FPS, is not recommended, as it falls below the threshold for a smooth third-person shooter experience. At 1440p, the Low preset is the only viable option, averaging 51 FPS, but this is a marginal experience. The Medium preset at 1440p, averaging 39 FPS, is too inconsistent, with minimums dropping to 33 FPS.

The data clearly indicates that 4K resolution is not a viable option for this hardware. Even the Low preset at 28 FPS is unplayable, and the Ultra preset at 14 FPS is a slideshow. The best experience, per the measured rows, is unequivocally 1080p with the Low preset. This provides the highest average FPS and ensures that the system's limited GPU resources are not wasted on unnecessary visual effects. If the game's engine allows for it, further tweaking of individual settings—such as shadow quality and anti-aliasing—might yield a better balance, but the preset data suggests that Low is the sweet spot.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior of this system is a textbook example of a GPU-bound workload. From 1080p Low to 1440p Low, the average FPS drops from 79 to 51, a 35% reduction. From 1440p Low to 4K Low, the FPS drops from 51 to 28, another 45% reduction. This pattern holds across all settings presets. For instance, at High settings, the FPS drops from 51 at 1080p to 33 at 1440p (a 35% drop) and then to 18 at 4K (a 45% drop). The consistency of these percentage drops across different presets is a strong indicator that the GPU is the limiting component, as the relative performance hit of increasing resolution is independent of the graphics settings.

If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar FPS numbers at 1080p and 1440p, as the CPU's workload would not increase significantly with resolution. Instead, we see a clear halving of frame rates with each resolution step, which is exactly what happens when the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are saturated. The system-shared memory of the AMD Radeon 880M means that as resolution increases, the amount of data that needs to be read from and written to system memory grows exponentially, and the memory bus becomes the limiting factor.

The data implies that the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is never the limiting factor in this game. Even at 1080p Low, where the FPS is highest, the GPU is still the constraint, as evidenced by the fact that lowering settings from Medium to Low only yields a 29% FPS increase (61 to 79 FPS), whereas lowering resolution from 1080p to 1440p yields a 35% decrease at the same settings. This suggests that the GPU is stretched thin at even the lowest settings, and the CPU's 14 cores and 18 threads are largely idle. The resolution scaling analysis reinforces the conclusion that this combo is severely GPU-limited, and no amount of CPU headroom can compensate for the integrated graphics' lack of memory bandwidth and raw pixel throughput.