Minimum

Minimum is a 2014 third-person shooter whose modest engine demands are well within reach of this pairing, yet the benchmark data reveals a system that is far more balanced than its component ages suggest. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER combination produces a wide spread of results, from a highly playable 170 FPS at 1080p Low to a borderline 29 FPS at 4K Ultra, indicating that the experience is heavily dictated by resolution and settings choices rather than a single bottleneck. This analysis breaks down exactly how the CPU and GPU contribute to these figures, what the scaling patterns imply about the limiting factor, and which configurations offer the most sensible path to a smooth experience.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. Its base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz provide the raw frequency headroom that older titles like Minimum often rely upon for consistent frame pacing. The processor's benchmark scores are notably strong, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769 and a single-core score of 2085, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs tested. This performance class suggests that the CPU is rarely the primary constraint in a game from 2014, as even its PassMark single-thread score of 4516 is substantial for the era.

The data confirms this interpretation when examining the FPS deltas between settings at the same resolution. At 1080p, moving from Low to High settings drops average FPS from 170 to 109, a 36% reduction. This is a significant drop, but it is not the catastrophic collapse one would expect if the CPU were struggling to feed the GPU; rather, it points to the GPU taking on more work. The CPU's 14 threads, while more than enough for Minimum's threading model, provide ample headroom for background tasks and frame generation overhead. The 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 192 KB per-core L1 cache further help by keeping frequently accessed game data close at hand, reducing latency spikes that could cause stutter in a fast-paced shooter.

However, the CPU's role becomes more apparent at the lower resolution and settings where the GPU has less to do. At 1080p Low, the 170 FPS average is likely near the upper ceiling of what this processor can sustain in this engine. The PassMark multi-thread score of 37816 and the Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 6202 indicate a processor that excels in sustained workloads, but Minimum's engine may not perfectly scale across all 14 cores. The delta between the CPU's nearest rivals is minimal—it sits just 0.1% above the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and 0.1% below the Intel Core i9-13900HX in average benchmark score—suggesting that any of these processors would produce nearly identical results in a CPU-bound scenario. The data implies that the Core Ultra 5 235 is a capable, if not overkill, partner for this GPU, ensuring that the graphics card is the primary variable in the performance equation.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is built on the 12 nm Turing architecture, featuring 2176 shading units, 136 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivers a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s, a figure that proves more than sufficient for a 2014 title. The GPU's base clock of 1470 MHz and boost clock of 1650 MHz, combined with its 7.181 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, allow it to render Minimum's environments with ease at most settings. The benchmark data shows the GPU performing admirably at 1080p and 1440p, but it is the memory capacity and bandwidth that become critical at higher resolutions.

The GPU's benchmark scores, such as a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2011 and a PassMark G3D score of 16462, place it in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile, scores just 0.4% higher on average, indicating that this desktop card holds its own against a newer mobile part. In Minimum, the GPU's role is clearly dominant at 4K, where the average FPS drops to 38 on High settings and 29 on Ultra. This 24% reduction from High to Ultra at 4K is a clear sign that the GPU is hitting its limits, likely due to the increased shading and texture work rather than memory exhaustion, as 8 GB is ample for a 2014 game even at 4K.

The scaling from 1440p to 4K at High settings shows a drop from 71 FPS to 38 FPS, a 46% decrease. This is a substantial penalty that points to the GPU's fill rate and compute capabilities being the limiting factor at the higher resolution. The 175 W TDP and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are the physical constraints here; while the card can deliver smooth 1080p gameplay, 4K demands more than its 7.181 TFLOPS can consistently provide. The data suggests that the RTX 2060 SUPER is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming in Minimum, where it can leverage its boost clock to maintain high frame rates without hitting the architectural walls that 4K exposes.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve a consistent 60+ FPS?

A: The data shows that at 1440p High, the combo achieves 71 FPS on average, and at 1080p Ultra, it reaches 83 FPS. Both of these configurations provide a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, making 1440p High the highest resolution that maintains this threshold without sacrificing visual quality.

Q: How does the CPU's single-thread performance impact Minimum's frame rates?

A: The CPU's Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2085 and PassMark single-thread score of 4516 indicate strong single-thread capability. At 1080p Low, where the CPU is more likely to be a bottleneck, the 170 FPS average shows that the processor has enough headroom to avoid limiting the GPU in most scenarios.

Q: Is the 8 GB VRAM sufficient for 4K gaming in Minimum?

A: Yes, the data indicates that 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is not a constraint at 4K. The 4K High preset averages 38 FPS, and the 4K Ultra preset averages 29 FPS, suggesting that the limits are compute-based rather than memory-based, as the game's textures from 2014 do not require the full 8 GB.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 2047 out of 2939 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle range of all possible pairings. This is consistent with the RTX 2060 SUPER being a mid-range GPU from 2019, while the CPU is a newer, high-end part that helps push the combo slightly higher in the overall ranking.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, Low settings yield an average of 110 FPS, while Ultra settings yield an average of 54 FPS. This 56 FPS difference (a 51% reduction) highlights the significant GPU load increase from the Ultra preset's effects.

Q: Can this system handle 240 Hz monitors at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 170, which is below the 240 FPS target. However, at 1080p Medium, the average drops to 130 FPS. The data suggests that a 144 Hz monitor is the realistic ceiling for this combo, as even the lowest settings cannot consistently exceed 170 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The benchmark data provides a clear picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results: Low settings average 170 FPS, Medium averages 130 FPS with a minimum of 111 FPS and a maximum of 150 FPS, High averages 109 FPS, and Ultra averages 83 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a consistent decline, with the most significant drop occurring between Medium and High (a 21 FPS decrease) and between High and Ultra (a 26 FPS decrease). This pattern suggests that each settings tier adds a similar computational burden, with the GPU managing the load well up to the Ultra preset.

Moving to 2560x1440, the FPS figures scale down proportionally. Low settings produce an average of 110 FPS, Medium averages 84 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS and a maximum of 97 FPS, High averages 71 FPS, and Ultra averages 54 FPS. The 1440p data shows a more pronounced gap between Medium and High (13 FPS) and between High and Ultra (17 FPS), indicating that the GPU's shading units are being tasked more heavily at this resolution. The minimum FPS of 71 FPS at Medium settings is notable, as it suggests that even in demanding scenes, the frame rate remains playable.

At 3840x2160, the RTX 2060 SUPER begins to struggle. Low settings average 59 FPS, Medium averages 45 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 52 FPS, High averages 38 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS. The 4K results reveal a clear ceiling: the card cannot maintain 60 FPS even at Low settings, and the Ultra preset dips below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum for playable frame rates in fast-paced games. The 4K Medium data is the only configuration with a recorded minimum and maximum, showing a range of 38 to 52 FPS, which indicates some scene-dependent variance but no catastrophic stuttering.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling data reveals a predictable but informative pattern. From 1080p to 1440p at High settings, the average FPS drops from 109 to 71, a 35% reduction. From 1440p to 4K at High settings, the average drops from 71 to 38, a 46% reduction. This increasing penalty with higher resolutions is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario, where the number of pixels being rendered doubles (from 2.07 million at 1080p to 3.69 million at 1440p, and then to 8.29 million at 4K), and the GPU's fixed compute resources are spread thinner.

The scaling at Low settings is even more telling. From 1080p Low (170 FPS) to 1440p Low (110 FPS), the drop is 35%, identical to the High preset scaling. However, from 1440p Low to 4K Low (59 FPS), the drop is 46%, again matching the High preset. This consistency across different settings indicates that the resolution is the primary driver of performance loss, not the graphics features enabled. The fact that the scaling percentages are nearly identical between Low and High presets suggests that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors, as these are resolution-dependent.

The data implies that the CPU is not a significant bottleneck at any resolution. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see smaller FPS drops at higher resolutions (since the GPU would be waiting on the CPU less). Instead, the consistent 35-46% drops per resolution step point to the GPU being the sole constraint. This is further supported by the 4K Low result of 59 FPS, which is just below the 60 FPS threshold despite Low settings being computationally light. The RTX 2060 SUPER simply does not have the pixel throughput to handle 4K in this title, regardless of how many effects are disabled.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1080p gaming, the High preset at 109 FPS average is the best balance of visual quality and performance, as it provides a smooth experience on a 100 Hz or 120 Hz monitor. The Ultra preset at 83 FPS is also viable, but the 26 FPS penalty over High may not be worth the marginal visual improvements in a 2014 game. For players with 144 Hz monitors, the Medium preset at 130 FPS is the recommended choice, as it offers a 21 FPS advantage over High while still looking respectable.

At 1440p, the data suggests that High settings at 71 FPS are the sweet spot, as this is the highest preset that maintains a 60+ FPS average. The Medium preset at 84 FPS offers a more comfortable margin for those with 75 Hz or 100 Hz monitors, but the visual downgrade may be noticeable. The Ultra preset at 54 FPS is playable but drops below the 60 FPS threshold, making it less ideal for competitive play. For 1440p, the recommended setup is High settings, which provides a stable 71 FPS average without sacrificing too many graphical features.

At 4K, the options are limited. The Low preset at 59 FPS is the only setting that approaches playability, but it still misses the 60 FPS mark. The Medium preset at 45 FPS is borderline, while High and Ultra (38 FPS and 29 FPS, respectively) are not recommended for a smooth experience. The data indicates that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combo in Minimum, and players should either drop to 1440p or accept a lower frame rate with reduced settings. The best overall experience, per the measured rows, is 1080p High at 109 FPS, which balances visual fidelity with a frame rate that exceeds the refresh rate of most standard monitors.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER combination ranks 2047 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the 30th percentile of all systems. This ranking is somewhat surprising given the CPU's high performance (89th percentile) and the GPU's mid-range standing (62nd percentile). The low rank can be attributed to the GPU's age and its relative weakness at higher resolutions, which is where many benchmark comparisons are made. In a game from 2014, the GPU's compute capabilities are the primary driver of performance, and the RTX 2060 SUPER is outclassed by newer cards with higher TFLOPS and more memory bandwidth.

Comparing to its nearest rivals, the CPU's performance is virtually identical to its peers, with a 0.1% delta against the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and a -0.1% delta against the Intel Core i9-13900HX. This means that swapping the Core Ultra 5 235 for either of these processors would result in a negligible change in Minimum's frame rates, reinforcing that the GPU is the bottleneck in this pairing. Similarly, the GPU's nearest rivals—the RTX 3060 Mobile (0.4% faster), AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (0.5% faster), AMD Radeon RX 460 (1.5% faster), and Intel Arc A770M (1.6% faster)—are all within a narrow performance band, suggesting that the RTX 2060 SUPER's performance is well-characterized by its 62nd percentile standing.

The combo's rank of 2047 out of 2939 indicates that there are over 800 configurations that perform better, likely featuring newer GPUs with higher memory bandwidth and more shading units. However, the data also shows that this combo is far from the bottom, and its 1080p performance is excellent for a 2014 title. The rank should be interpreted with caution: it reflects the GPU's limitations at 4K and Ultra settings, but for players targeting 1080p or 1440p, this combo delivers a highly playable experience that belies its overall rank. The combination reflects the CPU's strength, but it is ultimately the GPU that determines the system's place in the hierarchy.