Minimum

# Minimum: Intel Core Ultra 5 225 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER produces benchmark results in Minimum that place it at rank 439 out of 2939 tested combinations, putting it in the top 15% of all systems evaluated. The pairing delivers playable frame rates across all tested resolutions, though the scaling pattern between settings reveals a system that is clearly GPU-bound at higher resolutions while showing CPU headroom at 1080p. The data indicates a balanced mid-to-high-tier setup that handles this 2014 third-person shooter with substantial margin at lower settings, but begins to show strain at 4K with maximum quality presets.

How This Combo Ranks

The measured performance from this specific CPU-GPU pairing places it at rank 439 out of 2939 combinations in the database for Minimum. This percentile position reflects a system that outperforms roughly 85% of all tested configurations, which aligns closely with the individual component rankings — the CPU sits at the 85th percentile among all processors, while the GPU holds the 83rd percentile among all graphics cards. The near-identical percentile rankings suggest the two components are well-matched for this title, neither one dramatically outperforming the other to create a bottleneck.

When examining the CPU's position relative to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks, the Core Ultra 5 225 produces an average benchmark score of 36938, which is essentially identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F at 36945 (a 0% delta). The AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D scores 37018, just 0.2% higher, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 reaches 37093, a 0.4% advantage. The Intel Core i9-12900T rounds out the comparison at 37112, 0.5% ahead. These margins are negligible in real-world gaming scenarios, meaning the CPU's standing among its closest competitors offers no meaningful advantage or disadvantage in Minimum.

On the GPU side, the RTX 4070 SUPER achieves an average benchmark score of 43223, placing it 0.1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB (43262) and 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (43268). The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 scores 43301 (0.2% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile leads the group at 43667, just 1% higher. These synthetic scores suggest the GPU is competitively positioned within its immediate performance class, though the measured frame rates in Minimum provide a more direct picture of real-world capability.

The combination's rank of 439 out of 2939 indicates that while this system is firmly in the upper tier, there are still 438 configurations that deliver higher average frame rates in this specific title. The performance headroom available in this game is substantial, particularly at lower resolutions and settings, which means the ranking could improve significantly if the game were more demanding or if higher refresh rate targets were the primary goal.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER brings 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 504.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. For a game released in 2014, this memory configuration is exceptionally generous; Minimum's texture and geometry demands from that era are unlikely to approach the capacity limits of this GPU even at 4K resolution. The core operates with a base clock of 1980 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz, with memory running at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). These clock speeds, combined with 7168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output units, deliver 35.48 TFLOPS of FP32 compute performance.

The GPU's role in Minimum becomes clear when examining the frame rate progression across settings at each resolution. At 4K, the gap between Low and Ultra settings spans from 108 FPS down to 53 FPS, a 55 FPS spread that demonstrates the GPU is the primary driver of performance scaling. The fact that Ultra at 4K drops to 53 FPS — below the 60 FPS threshold — indicates the GPU is fully utilized at this resolution and preset combination. The RTX 4070 SUPER's 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores are present but largely irrelevant for this title, which predates widespread ray tracing adoption and relies on traditional rasterization techniques.

The GPU's average benchmark score of 43223 and its 83rd percentile standing among all GPUs suggest it is a strong performer in synthetic workloads. In Minimum, the measured data shows the GPU handles 1440p with ease — even Ultra settings produce 98 FPS, well above playable thresholds. At 1080p, the GPU becomes less of a limiting factor, with Low settings reaching 310 FPS, a figure that likely exceeds the refresh rate capabilities of most displays. The 12 GB VRAM capacity is more than sufficient for this game; no measured results indicate memory-related performance degradation or texture loading issues at any resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Minimum?

A: The data shows 2560x1440 with Medium settings delivers 153 FPS average with a minimum of 130 FPS, making it the sweet spot for high refresh rate gaming. At 4K, the best average is 108 FPS on Low settings, while 1080p reaches 310 FPS on Low but 237 FPS on Medium.

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K with maximum settings?

A: Yes, but just barely. The measured Ultra preset at 3840x2160 produces an average of 53 FPS, which is technically playable but below the 60 FPS target most users prefer. Dropping to High at 4K raises the average to 69 FPS, providing a more comfortable margin.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 SUPER compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: In synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 4070 SUPER scores 43223, which is 0.1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB, 0.1% behind the RTX 5050 Mobile, 0.2% behind the Quadro M6000, and 1% behind the RTX 4090 Mobile. These differences are minimal and unlikely to produce noticeable frame rate variations in Minimum.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the GPU is still the primary limiting factor. The frame rate scales significantly with settings — from 310 FPS on Low to 152 FPS on Ultra — which indicates the GPU workload is the dominant constraint. The CPU's 10 cores and 10 threads are sufficient to feed the GPU at these frame rates.

Q: What is the performance difference between Medium and High settings?

A: Across all resolutions, the gap is consistent. At 1080p, Medium averages 237 FPS versus 199 FPS on High (a 38 FPS difference). At 1440p, the gap is 153 FPS versus 128 FPS (25 FPS difference). At 4K, Medium produces 82 FPS versus 69 FPS on High (13 FPS difference).

Q: How does this CPU compare to its nearest rival in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225 scores 25891 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with a single-core score of 3655. Its average benchmark score of 36938 is within 0.5% of all four nearest rivals, making it essentially performance-equivalent to the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, Ryzen 5 5500X3D, Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, and Core i9-12900T.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured frame rates span from 310 FPS on Low settings to 152 FPS on Ultra. Medium settings produce an average of 237 FPS with a minimum of 202 FPS and maximum of 273 FPS, while High settings deliver 199 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra represents a 158 FPS drop, or roughly 51% performance reduction, which demonstrates the substantial GPU workload increase as visual quality rises. Notably, even at Ultra, the 152 FPS average exceeds the refresh rate of most standard monitors, making this resolution entirely GPU-overkill territory for Minimum.

At 2560x1440, the results show a similar pattern but with reduced headroom. Low settings reach 200 FPS, Medium averages 153 FPS with a 130-176 FPS range, High produces 128 FPS, and Ultra drops to 98 FPS. The 102 FPS gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is smaller in absolute terms than at 1080p but represents a similar proportional reduction. The minimum of 130 FPS on Medium indicates that even in demanding scenes, this combination maintains high frame rates at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the performance envelope tightens considerably. Low settings still manage 108 FPS, but Medium averages 82 FPS with a range of 70-95 FPS, High drops to 69 FPS, and Ultra falls to 53 FPS. The 55 FPS spread between Low and Ultra at 4K is the smallest absolute gap across resolutions, reflecting that the GPU is approaching its limits at this pixel count. The minimum of 70 FPS on Medium confirms that even at 4K, this system avoids major frame drops, though Ultra dips below the 60 FPS line.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 features 10 cores and 10 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. Built on TSMC's 3 nm process, this Arrow Lake-S architecture processor includes 20 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, and its PCIe Gen 5 interface with 20 lanes provides ample bandwidth for the RTX 4070 SUPER.

In Minimum, the CPU's role is secondary to the GPU, as evidenced by the frame rate scaling patterns. At 1080p, where GPU load is lowest and frame rates are highest, the CPU's single-thread performance becomes more relevant. The measured Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3655 and multi-core score of 25891 indicate strong per-thread capability, which is crucial for maintaining high frame rates in games that rely heavily on a primary rendering thread. The PassMark single-thread score of 4412 further confirms the CPU's strength in lightly-threaded workloads.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 36938 places it in the 85th percentile among all processors, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.5% of its performance. This means the Core Ultra 5 225 offers no meaningful advantage or disadvantage over its closest competitors in synthetic tests. For Minimum, the CPU's 10 threads are more than adequate; the game's age means it likely does not scale well beyond a handful of cores, so the single-thread performance is the more critical factor. The boost clock of 4.90 GHz provides the high per-core speed needed to avoid bottlenecking the GPU at lower resolutions where frame rates exceed 200 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rates, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 237 FPS with a minimum of 202 FPS, making it the best choice for high-refresh-rate displays up to 240 Hz. The High preset at 199 FPS is also viable for 144 Hz or 165 Hz monitors, offering improved visual quality while still exceeding most display refresh rates. Ultra at 152 FPS remains playable but represents diminishing returns in visual fidelity relative to the frame rate cost.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings provide 153 FPS with a 130 FPS minimum, which is ideal for 144 Hz displays. High settings at 128 FPS remain above 120 FPS, making them suitable for 120 Hz or 144 Hz panels with a small compromise. Ultra at 98 FPS is the best choice for 100 Hz displays or users prioritizing visual quality over frame rate, as it stays comfortably above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the recommendation shifts based on refresh rate priorities. High settings at 69 FPS are the best balance for 60 Hz displays, providing a stable average above the refresh threshold. Medium at 82 FPS offers additional headroom and is preferable for variable refresh rate displays, while Low at 108 FPS is the only preset that approaches high-refresh-rate territory at 4K. Ultra at 53 FPS is not recommended for 60 Hz displays, as the average falls below the refresh rate and may result in noticeable judder.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the expected pattern of GPU-bound performance. At High settings, the progression is 199 FPS at 1080p, 128 FPS at 1440p, and 69 FPS at 4K. This represents a 36% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 46% drop from 1440p to 4K, consistent with the increasing pixel count demanding more GPU throughput. The pixel count increases by 78% from 1080p to 1440p and by 125% from 1440p to 4K, yet the frame rate drops are proportionally smaller, indicating some efficiency in the GPU's scaling.

At Medium settings, the scaling is 237 FPS at 1080p, 153 FPS at 1440p, and 82 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K is 46%, similar to the High preset, suggesting the GPU's memory bandwidth and compute resources scale predictably with resolution. At Low settings, the pattern is 310 FPS at 1080p, 200 FPS at 1440p, and 108 FPS at 4K, with a 46% drop from 1440p to 4K once again.

The consistency of the 4K scaling penalty across all settings — approximately 46% reduction from 1440p — suggests that the RTX 4070 SUPER's 12 GB of VRAM and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to avoid memory-related bottlenecks. The limiting factor is purely rasterization throughput. At 1080p, the frame rates are high enough that CPU limitations could theoretically emerge, but the measured data shows no evidence of a CPU ceiling; the GPU continues to scale with settings changes even at 310 FPS on Low. This indicates the Core Ultra 5 225 provides ample headroom for the GPU at all tested configurations.