Minimum

The data for Minimum with the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT presents a clear picture of a system where the graphics card is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, while the processor demonstrates ample headroom at lower settings. The measured frame rates across the three resolutions and four settings tiers reveal a performance curve typical of a mid-range GPU paired with a strong modern CPU. This analysis breaks down the scaling behavior, component roles, and practical settings recommendations based solely on the provided benchmark results.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 produces a dramatic and predictable decline in average frame rates, indicating that the rendering load scales heavily with pixel count. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 138 at 1080p to 89 at 1440p, a reduction of 49 FPS, and then further to 48 at 4K, representing a total decrease of 90 FPS from the starting point. This steep curve demonstrates that the Radeon RX 6750 XT is the limiting factor as resolution increases, with the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth being taxed by the fourfold increase in pixels from 1080p to 4K.

The scaling pattern is even more pronounced when examining the Low settings preset. At 1080p Low, the system achieves an average of 214 FPS, which drops to 138 at 1440p and then to 74 at 4K. The relative drop from 1080p to 1440p is 76 FPS, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 64 FPS. This suggests that while the CPU is capable of driving very high frame rates at 1080p, the GPU begins to saturate quickly as resolution climbs, with the 4K Low result of 74 FPS being less than half of the 1080p Low figure.

Examining the Medium settings row, which includes minimum and maximum FPS data, provides additional insight into the scaling behavior. At 1080p Medium, the average is 164 FPS with a minimum of 139 and maximum of 189. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 106 FPS (min 90, max 122), and at 4K Medium, it falls to 57 FPS (min 48, max 66). The consistency of the frame time variance, where the spread between min and max remains roughly 50 FPS at each resolution, suggests that the bottleneck is stable and not caused by sporadic CPU stalls but rather by sustained GPU workload limits.

The Ultra preset shows the most severe degradation, with 105 FPS at 1080p, 68 FPS at 1440p, and a playable-but-low 36 FPS at 4K. This 69 FPS total drop across the three resolutions reinforces that the RX 6750 XT is overwhelmed by the combination of high settings and high pixel counts. Benchmark results indicate that for 4K gaming, users would need to rely on Low or Medium settings to maintain acceptable frame rates, while 1080p and 1440p offer more flexibility across all presets.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT, built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 22 chip, is the central component determining the frame rate ceiling in this configuration. Its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s, which is sufficient for the texture and geometry loads of a 2014 third-person shooter but becomes a limiting factor at 4K Ultra where the average FPS drops to 36. The GPU’s boost clock of 2600 MHz and game clock of 2495 MHz indicate a high operating frequency, yet the data shows that raw clock speed cannot compensate for the sheer computational demands of higher resolutions.

The GPU’s benchmark scores place it in the 71st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26011. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (0.5% higher score), AMD FirePro W7100 (0.6% higher), and AMD FirePro D700 (0.7% higher), showing that the RX 6750 XT sits in a tightly contested performance tier. However, in Minimum, the measured FPS results demonstrate that this GPU is capable of exceeding 200 FPS only at 1080p Low, suggesting that its architectural strengths are best utilized at lower resolutions where the CPU can feed it frames quickly.

The GPU’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support and 40 ray tracing cores are specifications that do not directly impact this game’s results, as Minimum is a 2014 title that likely relies on older rendering paths. The pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 416.0 GTexel/s provide theoretical ceilings, but the practical measurements show that at 4K Ultra, the GPU is rendering only 36 FPS, indicating that the shading units (2560) and ROPs (64) are fully saturated. For users targeting 60 FPS, the data suggests that 1440p High (89 FPS) or 4K Medium (57 FPS) are the boundary conditions where the GPU can keep up with the display’s refresh demands.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235, a 14-core, 14-thread processor from the Arrow Lake architecture, plays a supporting role in this configuration, as evidenced by the frame rate data. With a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz, the CPU has ample single-thread performance to drive high frame rates in a game like Minimum, which is not known for heavy multi-threaded workloads. The CPU’s benchmark results, including a passmark single-thread score of 4516 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2085, indicate strong per-core performance that is more than adequate for the 1080p Low setting where the system achieves 214 FPS.

The CPU’s role becomes less critical as resolution increases, as the GPU becomes the bottleneck. At 4K Ultra, the 36 FPS average is clearly GPU-limited, as the CPU has no trouble feeding the graphics card at that frame rate. The data shows that the CPU’s 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s) provide sufficient memory bandwidth to avoid stalling the GPU, even at the highest settings. The lack of minimum FPS data for most presets suggests that CPU-induced frame pacing issues are minimal, with the only recorded minimums (at Medium settings) showing consistent drops that align with GPU load rather than CPU bottlenecks.

Comparing the CPU to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46062, placing it 0.1% behind the Intel Core i9-13900HX and 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375. This places it in the 89th percentile among all CPUs, indicating that it is a high-end processor that will not hold back the RX 6750 XT in most scenarios. The 14 cores and 14 threads (no hyperthreading) are sufficient for modern game engines, and the 3 nm process node from TSMC ensures efficient power delivery, though the TDP of 65 W suggests that thermal throttling is unlikely to affect performance in a well-ventilated case.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 1284 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the upper-middle tier of all possible system configurations. This rank of 1284 out of 2939 (roughly the 56th percentile) reflects a system that is capable of delivering high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p but falls short of top-tier performance at 4K. The ranking suggests that while this combo is not a flagship setup, it outperforms a significant majority of tested systems, particularly those with older or lower-end GPUs.

The combo’s ranking is influenced more by the GPU than the CPU, as the RX 6750 XT’s 71st percentile performance among GPUs is the primary determinant of gaming performance. The CPU’s 89th percentile ranking provides a solid foundation, but in Minimum, the frame rate data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at resolutions above 1080p. This means that the combo rank of 1284 is likely representative of systems with similar mid-range GPUs, where the CPU is powerful enough to avoid being a bottleneck but not so powerful as to boost the combo into the top tier.

In practical terms, this ranking means that users with this combo can expect a smooth experience at 1080p with all settings, and at 1440p with High or Medium settings, but will need to compromise at 4K. The gap between the combo’s rank and the top 10% of systems is primarily due to the GPU’s inability to maintain high frame rates at 4K Ultra, where even the fastest GPUs struggle with the pixel count. For a game released in 2014, this combo is more than adequate, but it does not represent the extreme high-end that would be required for maxed-out 4K gaming at high refresh rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance, with the Low preset achieving an average of 214 FPS, which is more than sufficient for any high-refresh-rate monitor. The Medium preset averages 164 FPS (min 139, max 189), High averages 138 FPS, and Ultra averages 105 FPS. These results show that at 1080p, the system is CPU-bound at Low settings, as the GPU has enough headroom to render frames as fast as the CPU can submit them, but becomes progressively GPU-limited as settings increase. The 109 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p highlights the significant impact of graphical settings on the GPU workload.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain playable across all presets, with Low averaging 138 FPS, Medium at 106 FPS (min 90, max 122), High at 89 FPS, and Ultra at 68 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across settings, averaging a 35% reduction in frame rate. This resolution is the sweet spot for this combo, as even the Ultra preset stays above 60 FPS, providing a good balance between visual fidelity and smoothness. The Medium preset’s minimum of 90 FPS ensures that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate does not dip below what most users would consider smooth.

At 3840x2160, the system’s limitations become apparent. The Low preset averages 74 FPS, which is acceptable for 4K gaming, but the Medium preset drops to 57 FPS (min 48, max 66), High drops to 48 FPS, and Ultra falls to 36 FPS. The data shows that 4K gaming is only viable at Low or Medium settings, with the latter providing a borderline 60 FPS experience that will suffer from occasional dips below 50 FPS. The lack of minimum FPS data for Low, High, and Ultra at 4K suggests that the frame pacing is consistent, but the averages clearly indicate that the GPU is at its limit. For users with a 4K display, the recommendation is to stick with Medium settings for a playable experience, as the drop from 74 to 57 FPS when moving from Low to Medium is a worthwhile trade-off for the visual improvements.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS is 214, achieved at 1080p with the Low settings preset. This is the only measured configuration that exceeds 200 FPS.

Q: Is this combo capable of 60 FPS at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, where the average is 74 FPS. At Medium settings, the average drops to 57 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold, and at High and Ultra, it falls to 48 and 36 FPS respectively.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46062, which is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and 0.1% lower than the Intel Core i9-13900HX. It is also 0.2% ahead of both the AMD EPYC 4364P and AMD EPYC 7303.

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is in the 71st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26011. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon R9 M395X, which is 0.5% faster.

Q: At which resolution and settings does the system achieve the most consistent frame times?

A: The Medium settings preset provides the most data, with minimum and maximum FPS recorded at all three resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 139-189 FPS (average 164), at 1440p it is 90-122 FPS (average 106), and at 4K it is 48-66 FPS (average 57), showing consistent variance across resolutions.

Q: Does the combo rank higher due to the CPU or GPU?

A: The GPU is the primary determinant, as it is the bottleneck at resolutions above 1080p. The CPU ranks in the 89th percentile, while the GPU ranks in the 71st percentile, and the combo’s rank of 1284 out of 2939 reflects the GPU’s mid-range positioning.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user’s display resolution and target frame rate. For 1080p displays, the High preset at 138 FPS is the best recommendation, as it provides a significant visual improvement over Medium (164 FPS) while still maintaining frame rates well above 120 FPS. The Ultra preset at 105 FPS is also viable for users with 144Hz monitors, but the 33 FPS drop from High to Ultra may not justify the visual gains in a game from 2014. For users seeking the highest possible frame rates for competitive play, Low at 214 FPS is the clear choice, though the visual quality suffers considerably.

For 1440p displays, the High preset at 89 FPS offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, staying comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset at 68 FPS is also playable and provides the maximum visual quality, but users with 144Hz displays will notice the drop from High. The Medium preset at 106 FPS is the best option for high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming, as it provides a 17 FPS advantage over High while maintaining decent visuals. Low at 138 FPS is recommended only for esports-style play where frame rate is prioritized over graphics.

For 4K displays, the Medium preset at 57 FPS is the only viable option for a near-60 FPS experience, though users should be prepared for occasional dips to 48 FPS. The Low preset at 74 FPS is smoother but sacrifices significant visual detail. High (48 FPS) and Ultra (36 FPS) are not recommended for 4K, as the frame rates drop below the threshold for smooth gameplay. The data clearly shows that this combo is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming, with 4K requiring compromises that undermine the visual experience. For most users, the 1440p High preset offers the best overall experience, balancing the GPU’s capabilities with the CPU’s headroom.