Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX pairing delivers a decisive performance profile in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. The data shows this combo is remarkably strong at 1080p and 1440p, with the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck at 4K. The Ultra 5 225, with its 10 cores and 10 threads, provides ample headroom for this title, while the RX 7900 XTX’s raw rasterization power drives exceptionally high frame rates across all tested settings. The benchmark results indicate that players targeting high refresh rates at 1440p will find this combination ideal, while 4K users will need to prioritize either visual fidelity or frame rate.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is built on the Arrow Lake architecture and operates with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. This 10-core, 10-thread processor lacks hyper-threading, but its high boost clock is the critical factor for Minimum. This game, released in 2014, does not scale heavily with thread counts; instead, it relies on strong single-core performance. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3655 and Passmark single-thread score of 4412 confirm its capability to handle the game’s primary simulation and game logic threads without creating a bottleneck.

In synthetic multi-threaded workloads, the Ultra 5 225 achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 25891 and a Passmark multithread score of 30459. While these numbers are robust, the game’s engine rarely utilizes all 10 cores simultaneously. The data strongly suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is not the limiting factor. For instance, at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo reaches 325 FPS average. This high frame rate is a direct result of the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU quickly. The 20 MB of shared L3 cache also helps reduce latency for frequently accessed game data, further ensuring the GPU receives a steady stream of instructions.

The CPU’s 85th percentile ranking among all tested CPUs underscores its position as a high-end part, but its nearest rivals show it is not an outlier. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F scores an average of 36945, which is a 0% delta from the Ultra 5 225’s average benchmark score of 36938. Similarly, the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D is only 0.2% slower, and the Intel Core i9-12900T is 0.5% slower. This indicates that while the Ultra 5 225 is not the absolute fastest CPU available, its performance is squarely in the top tier for gaming, providing a stable foundation for the RX 7900 XTX. The benchmark results show that the CPU’s role here is to stay out of the way, and it succeeds, as evidenced by the massive FPS gains when resolution drops from 4K to 1080p.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

*Q: What is the maximum average frame rate this combo achieves in Minimum?*

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 325 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This shows the combo’s extreme headroom at the lowest resolution and settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has an average benchmark score of 36938, which is essentially identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F’s score of 36945 (a 0% delta). It is also 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D and 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core i9-12900T.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the main bottleneck at 4K Ultra settings?

A: The data shows the GPU is the primary bottleneck. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 55. This is a 66% reduction from the 159 FPS at 1080p Ultra, indicating the RX 7900 XTX is struggling to maintain frame rates as the pixel count increases.

Q: What is the combo’s overall ranking among all tested hardware combinations?

A: The combo ranks 368th out of 2939 tested combinations. This places it in the top 12.5% of all tested systems for Minimum, indicating a very strong overall performance level.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded at 1440p Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the combo produces an average of 160 FPS, with a minimum of 136 FPS and a maximum of 184 FPS. This shows a stable frame time performance with no significant dips.

Q: Does the CPU’s lack of hyper-threading hinder performance in this game?

A: No. The CPU has 10 cores and 10 threads, and the performance data indicates it is sufficient. The game does not appear to need more than 10 threads, as frame rates scale dramatically with resolution changes, pointing to the GPU as the limiting factor rather than the CPU’s thread count.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

Analyzing the resolution scaling reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p, the combo is massively overqualified, with frame rates soaring past 300 FPS. Specifically, at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average is 325 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440, the same Low settings yield 209 FPS, a drop of 116 FPS (35.7%). This significant reduction is due to the increased pixel count requiring more GPU work. The CPU, with its high boost clock and strong single-core performance, can still feed the GPU adequately at this resolution.

The trend becomes even more pronounced at 4K. At 3840x2160 with Low settings, the average FPS falls to 113. This is a 65% reduction from the 1080p Low result. This steep decline strongly indicates that the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is now the definitive bottleneck. The GPU’s 24 GB of GDDR6 memory and 960.0 GB/s bandwidth are not enough to maintain the same frame rates as the resolution quadruples the pixel workload.

The data for High settings tells a similar story. The FPS drops from 209 at 1080p to 135 at 1440p, and finally to 72 at 4K. This pattern shows a consistent scaling curve where the GPU’s rendering throughput is the limiting factor. The CPU is not the cause of these drops; if it were, the frame rates would plateau regardless of resolution. Instead, the continuous decline with increasing resolution confirms the GPU is doing the heavy lifting. The 4K Ultra result of 55 FPS further cements this, as it demonstrates the GPU’s absolute limit in this title, even with a high-end CPU available.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

For the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, the Medium preset is the clear winner. At 2560x1440, Medium settings deliver an average of 160 FPS, with a minimum of 136 FPS. This provides a smooth, high-refresh-rate experience that is far more immersive than the 103 FPS average at Ultra. The 57 FPS gain from dropping from Ultra to Medium is substantial, and the minimum FPS of 136 ensures no noticeable stutter.

At 1920x1080, the Medium preset is also excellent, yielding 249 FPS average. While Low settings push this to 325 FPS, the visual improvement at Medium is worth the 76 FPS sacrifice for most users, as both are well above the refresh rate of standard 144Hz monitors. For 4K, the decision is more constrained. The Medium preset at 3840x2160 provides 86 FPS average, which is playable and looks good. The High preset at 72 FPS is also acceptable, but the Ultra preset’s 55 FPS average is too low for a smooth experience in a fast-paced third-person shooter.

Therefore, the recommendation is to use Medium settings for the optimal experience. It provides the highest frame rate that still maintains a significant visual upgrade over Low, and it avoids the performance penalty of High and Ultra. If a player has a 120Hz or 144Hz display at 1440p, the Medium preset is the only option that fully utilizes the display’s capabilities without compromise. The measured data shows that the jump from Medium to High costs 25 FPS at 1440p (from 160 to 135), which is a steep price for marginal visual gains.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX ranks 368th out of 2939 tested combinations in Minimum. This placement is a strong indicator of its overall capability. It places the combo in the top 12.5% of all systems tested, which is an impressive feat given the game’s age and the diversity of hardware tested. This ranking is a holistic measure, suggesting that the pairing is well-balanced for this specific title.

However, the ranking does not tell the whole story. The synthetic benchmarks for the GPU show a lower percentile rank of 64, while the CPU is at 85. This discrepancy is interesting. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 19410 puts it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB, which scores 19334 (a 0.4% delta). This is a surprising result, as the RX 7900 XTX should be far superior. This suggests that the GPU benchmark suite may not accurately reflect gaming performance in all titles, or that Minimum is particularly well-optimized for the GPU’s architecture.

Despite the GPU’s lower synthetic percentile, the in-game rank of 368 is excellent. This implies that the combination of the CPU’s high single-core speed and the GPU’s raw power (61.39 TFLOPS FP32) works exceptionally well in Minimum. The rank also indicates that many other tested combos, perhaps with weaker CPUs or mismatched GPUs, perform worse. The data suggests that this combo is a high-tier option for players seeking maximum performance in this game, even if it is not the absolute top combination.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across all settings and resolutions. Here is the full breakdown:

1920x1080:

• Low: Average 325 FPS. This is the maximum performance ceiling of the combo.
• Medium: Average 249 FPS, with a minimum of 211 and a maximum of 286. This is the recommended preset for high-refresh displays.
• High: Average 209 FPS. A solid result, but the drop from Medium is notable.
• Ultra: Average 159 FPS. Still very playable, but the performance cost of Ultra is high.

2560x1440:

• Low: Average 209 FPS. This matches the 1080p High result, showing the impact of resolution.
• Medium: Average 160 FPS, with a minimum of 136 and a maximum of 184. This is the sweet spot for 1440p.
• High: Average 135 FPS. A good result for 1440p, but slightly below the 144Hz threshold.
• Ultra: Average 103 FPS. This is the first sign of significant GPU strain.

3840x2160:

• Low: Average 113 FPS. This is a playable 4K result, but far from the 144Hz target.
• Medium: Average 86 FPS, with a minimum of 73 and a maximum of 99. This is the best 4K experience for balanced visuals and speed.
• High: Average 72 FPS. This is at the edge of smooth playability.
• Ultra: Average 55 FPS. This is the lowest result and is not recommended for competitive play.

The data shows a clear pattern: the combo excels at 1080p and 1440p, where it can easily push high refresh rates. At 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and users must choose between settings to maintain playable frame rates. The Medium preset at 4K offers the best compromise, with an average of 86 FPS that stays above the 60 FPS standard. The absence of min/max FPS data for several settings (notably Low and Ultra at all resolutions) means the analysis of frame time consistency is limited to the Medium preset, which shows a healthy variance of 26 FPS at 1440p and 26 FPS at 1080p.