Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H paired with the AMD Radeon 890M ranks 2767th out of 2939 tested combinations for Minimum, placing it in the bottom 6 percent of all systems evaluated. This is a poor result for a third-person shooter from 2014, indicating that the integrated graphics solution is the primary constraint holding back the experience. The combination finishes behind a significant majority of tested hardware, which aligns with the Radeon 890M’s 45th percentile ranking among all GPUs and the CPU’s 81st percentile standing. The data suggests that while the processor is competent, the overall combo is heavily bottlenecked by the iGPU, making it suitable only for modest gaming expectations.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 2767 out of 2939 is a decisive verdict: this is near-bottom-tier performance for Minimum. Only 172 other tested combinations perform worse, meaning 94% of all systems in the database deliver higher frame rates. This ranking is not surprising given the hardware composition. The AMD Radeon 890M sits at the 45th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 9210, placing it just below the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9221, -0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273, -0.7% delta). In direct comparison, the 890M trails the GTX 960 by 0.7% and the GTX 465 by 0.9%, while edging out the GTX 850M by 1%. These are marginal differences, but they underscore that the GPU is operating at a level comparable to entry-level discrete cards from a decade ago.

The CPU side tells a different story. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H achieves an average benchmark score of 29093, ranking at the 81st percentile across all CPUs. Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X at 29123, a minuscule 0.1% delta, and it also trades blows with the Intel Core i5-13500HX (29270, -0.6%) and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT (28940, +0.5%). This indicates the processor is more than capable of feeding the GPU, yet the combo rank is dragged down entirely by the integrated graphics. In practical terms, the 135H provides headroom that the 890M cannot exploit, resulting in a system where the GPU is the definitive limiting factor across all resolutions and settings tested.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data reveals a clear hierarchy: Low settings are the only viable path to smooth gameplay, and even then, only at 1080p. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 84 FPS average, which is the only configuration that breaks the 60 FPS threshold. This is the recommended preset for a playable experience, as it provides a comfortable margin above the minimum acceptable frame rate for a fast-paced shooter. Medium at 1080p drops to 64 FPS average (with a 55 FPS minimum), which is still technically playable but offers less headroom for demanding scenes. High at 1080p falls to 54 FPS, which is borderline, while Ultra at 1080p collapses to 41 FPS, making it unsuitable for competitive play.

At 1440p, the situation worsens significantly. Low settings yield 54 FPS average, which is just at the edge of playability but likely to dip in action-heavy moments. Medium drops to 41 FPS, and High to 35 FPS, both of which are marginal for a third-person shooter. Ultra at 1440p is unplayable at 27 FPS. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with Low settings reaching only 29 FPS, Medium at 22 FPS, High at 19 FPS, and Ultra at 14 FPS. Therefore, the data strongly suggests that users should stick to 1080p with Low settings for the best balance of fluidity and visual fidelity. The 84 FPS at 1080p Low is 32% faster than the 64 FPS at 1080p Medium, making the Low preset the clear choice for maintaining responsiveness.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent, revealing a GPU-bound system. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 84 FPS at 1080p to 54 FPS at 1440p, a 36% reduction, and then to 29 FPS at 4K, a further 46% drop from 1440p. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU that is overwhelmed by pixel count, as the Radeon 890M’s memory bandwidth is system-dependent and shared with the CPU, limiting its ability to handle higher resolutions. The transition from 1080p to 1440p at Medium settings shows a similar proportional decline: 64 FPS to 41 FPS, a 36% loss. At High settings, the drop is from 54 FPS to 35 FPS, a 35% reduction, while Ultra goes from 41 FPS to 27 FPS, a 34% loss.

The 4K results are particularly telling. At Low settings, the 29 FPS average is only 35% of the 1080p Low score, indicating that the GPU cannot scale resolution without massive frame rate penalties. The 890M’s 32 ROPs and 1024 shading units are simply insufficient for 3840x2160, even on a 2014 title. The fact that the 4K Ultra preset achieves just 14 FPS—a 66% drop from the 1080p Ultra’s 41 FPS—underscores that this combo is not designed for high-resolution gaming. The limiting component is unequivocally the GPU; the CPU’s 14 cores and 18 threads are not a bottleneck at any resolution, as evidenced by the consistent frame rate declines that track pixel count rather than scene complexity.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combo for this system?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 with Low settings delivers 84 FPS average, which is the only measured configuration above 60 FPS. This is the recommended setup for a playable experience.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming?

A: No. The best 4K result is 29 FPS at Low settings, which is below playable thresholds. Ultra at 4K averages only 14 FPS, making the resolution impractical.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 890M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 890M has an average benchmark score of 9210, placing it 0.1% below the AMD Radeon Vega 8, 0.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960, and 0.9% below the GTX 465. It is 1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this combo?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The CPU ranks at the 81st percentile (average score 29093), while the GPU sits at the 45th percentile (average score 9210), and frame rates scale directly with resolution, indicating GPU limitation.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low settings average 84 FPS, while Ultra averages 41 FPS, a 51% reduction. This shows the significant cost of enabling higher visual quality.

Q: Does the Radeon 890M have sufficient VRAM for Minimum?

A: The GPU uses System Shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, and the measured results show that it struggles at higher resolutions, suggesting the shared memory configuration is a limiting factor despite the game’s age.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 890M’s specifications paint a picture of an integrated GPU designed for efficiency rather than raw performance. It is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture with a 4 nm process node from TSMC, featuring 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units. The boost clock reaches 2900 MHz from a 400 MHz base, which is a substantial uplift that helps in lighter loads, but the pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s and texture rate of 185.6 GTexel/s are modest figures that cap its output. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 5.939 TFLOPS, a number that places it in the entry-level segment, and its average benchmark score of 9210 confirms this.

The 890M’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9221, -0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273, -0.7%), which are older discrete solutions. The fact that a modern integrated GPU trades blows with a 2015 discrete card highlights its limitations. In Minimum, the GPU’s role is decisive: at 1080p Low, it manages 84 FPS, but at 4K Low, this drops to 29 FPS, a 65% reduction. The 32 ROPs are insufficient for high-resolution pixel fill, and the system-shared memory bandwidth (system-dependent) creates a bottleneck when resolution increases. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 590 and Passmark G3D score of 8076 further corroborate its mid-low tier standing. The GPU’s 45th percentile rank means it outperforms only a minority of all GPUs, and the data shows that it cannot sustain playable frame rates beyond 1080p Low for this title.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is a 14-core, 18-thread processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 7 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, with a 28 W TDP, making it a power-efficient mobile chip. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3, which provides ample bandwidth for multi-threaded workloads. Its average benchmark score of 29093 ranks it at the 81st percentile of all CPUs, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11875.5 and a single-core score of 1700. These figures demonstrate a processor that is well-suited for gaming, as single-thread performance is critical for older titles like Minimum.

The CPU’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (29123, -0.1%), which is a desktop-class chip, and the Intel Core i5-13500HX (29270, -0.6%). The 135H is essentially on par with these options, indicating that its processing power is not a limiting factor in this combo. In the measured FPS data, the CPU’s influence is negligible—frame rates are consistently dictated by the GPU, as shown by the scaling from 1080p to 4K. The Passmark single-thread score of 3521 and multi-thread score of 22422 confirm its capability. However, the 135H’s integrated graphics, the Arc Xe-LPG 96EU, is separate from the Radeon 890M, and the combo relies on the latter for rendering. The CPU’s 81st percentile rank versus the GPU’s 45th percentile creates a mismatch where the processor has headroom that goes unused. For Minimum, the CPU’s role is to provide stable frame pacing, which it does, but it cannot compensate for the GPU’s lack of raw throughput at higher settings. The launch MSRP of $342 for the CPU reflects its mid-range positioning, but the bottleneck remains the GPU.