Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB delivers a strictly 1080p experience in Minimum, with performance collapsing at higher resolutions. The data positions this combo in the 12th percentile of all tested configurations, ranking 2580 out of 2939 combos, indicating a fundamental hardware ceiling that no settings adjustment can overcome for 1440p or 4K gaming. At 1080p, the combo produces playable frame rates across all presets, but the 4 GB VRAM capacity and modest GPU compute power create a clear bottleneck that dominates all other hardware considerations.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB is the decisive component in this pairing, and its limitations are starkly visible in the measured data. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1545 MHz and a boost clock of 1740 MHz, built on the GA107 chip using an 8 nm process from Samsung. Its memory configuration is the primary constraint: 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a minimal allocation for a modern game, and the benchmark results reflect the consequences.

The GPU's shading units number 2048, with 64 TMUs and 32 ROPs, producing a pixel rate of 55.68 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 111.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance sits at 7.127 TFLOPS. These are entry-level figures, and they explain why the combo struggles so severely as resolution increases. The 4 GB VRAM is particularly problematic — at 4K resolution, even the Low preset yields only 42 FPS, while Ultra drops to 20 FPS. The memory bus width of 128 bits and the 192.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the data throughput required at 3840x2160, causing the GPU to become the limiting factor regardless of the CPU's capabilities.

The RTX 3050 4 GB ranks at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, placing it exactly in the middle of the performance distribution. However, this percentile is misleading in context — the 4 GB capacity means it cannot handle high-resolution textures or complex scenes without thrashing. The GPU's TDP of 90 W and dual-slot design suggest a power-efficient card, but efficiency does not translate to headroom. With RT cores (16) and tensor cores (64) present, the architecture supports modern features, but their utility is muted by the fundamental memory and compute constraints.

The data shows a clear pattern: at 1080p, the GPU can maintain playable rates, but each step up in resolution causes a disproportionate drop. The difference between 1080p Low (120 FPS) and 4K Low (42 FPS) is a 65% reduction, while the gap between 1080p Ultra (59 FPS) and 4K Ultra (20 FPS) is a 66% reduction. This consistent scaling indicates that the GPU is saturated at all settings, with no CPU-side relief available.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a textbook case of GPU-bound scaling, where the CPU's potential is never the constraint. Starting at 1920x1080, the combo achieves 120 FPS on Low, 92 FPS on Medium, 77 FPS on High, and 59 FPS on Ultra. Moving to 2560x1440, these figures drop to 78 FPS (Low), 59 FPS (Medium), 50 FPS (High), and 38 FPS (Ultra). At 3840x2160, the numbers fall further to 42 FPS (Low), 32 FPS (Medium), 27 FPS (High), and 20 FPS (Ultra).

The scaling ratios are telling. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS across all settings drops by roughly 35%, while from 1440p to 4K, the drop is another 40%. This is characteristic of a GPU that is running out of both compute throughput and memory bandwidth. The 4 GB VRAM is likely exhausted at 1440p, forcing the GPU to spill into system memory, which compounds the performance loss. The fact that even the Low preset at 4K cannot reach 60 FPS confirms that no software optimization can salvage this resolution.

The limiting component is unambiguously the GPU. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235, with 14 cores and 14 threads, provides ample headroom for this game's demands, but the RTX 3050 4 GB cannot translate that headroom into frames at higher resolutions. The data shows that at 1080p, the combo delivers 120 FPS on Low, which suggests the CPU can feed the GPU adequately — the bottleneck lies in the GPU's rendering pipeline, not in CPU-side instruction processing. Even the Medium preset at 1080p, with a minimum FPS of 78, shows that the combo can sustain playable rates, but the margin for error is thin.

The implication is that users should treat this combo as a 1080p solution exclusively. The 4K Ultra result of 20 FPS is effectively unplayable, and the 1440p High result of 50 FPS is marginal at best. The data does not support any expectation of higher-resolution gaming without substantial settings compromises that still fail to reach 60 FPS at 1440p.

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

The measured rows across all three resolutions and four settings presets provide a clear hierarchy for the best playable experience. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 92 FPS average with a minimum of 78 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS. This is the optimal balance — significantly smoother than High's 77 FPS, while only slightly below Low's 120 FPS. The jump from Medium to High costs 15 FPS, which is a substantial penalty for marginal visual gains. Ultra at 59 FPS is exactly at the threshold of playability, but it sacrifices too much fluidity for the added effects.

At 2560x1440, the situation changes. The Low preset delivers 78 FPS, which is the only setting that clears 60 FPS. Medium drops to 59 FPS, High to 50 FPS, and Ultra to 38 FPS. For users forced to use 1440p, Low is the only viable choice, but the data suggests that even this is a compromise — the 78 FPS at 1440p Low is still lower than the 92 FPS at 1080p Medium, indicating that the GPU is already struggling with the higher pixel count.

At 3840x2160, no preset is playable in a meaningful sense. Low yields 42 FPS, Medium 32 FPS, High 27 FPS, and Ultra 20 FPS. The 4K results are diagnostic rather than prescriptive — they show the GPU's absolute limits, but no combination of settings can produce a smooth experience at this resolution. The recommendation is unambiguous: run Minimum at 1080p with Medium settings for the best compromise between visual fidelity and frame rate stability. The minimum FPS of 78 at 1080p Medium ensures that even demanding scenes stay comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold, whereas the High preset's average of 77 FPS leaves less margin for dips.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo's position in the overall hierarchy is sobering. With a rank of 2580 out of 2939 tested combinations, this pairing sits in the bottom 12% of all configurations. This ranking is not a reflection of the CPU's capability, but rather the GPU's severe limitations. The RTX 3050 4 GB is an end-of-life product, and its 50th percentile standing among all GPUs is dragged down further by the game's specific demands for memory capacity and bandwidth.

The rank of 2580 means that the vast majority of tested combos outperform this one, and the margin is likely significant given the game's release date and the hardware available at the time of testing. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235, by contrast, ranks at the 89th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46062. This CPU is a high performer — its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (score 46030, delta 0.1%), the Intel Core i9-13900HX (score 46098, delta -0.1%), and the AMD EPYC 4364P (score 45970, delta 0.2%). The CPU is effectively tied with these top-tier parts, yet the combo's overall rank is near the bottom, proving that the GPU is the sole determinant of this system's gaming performance in Minimum.

The data indicates that the combo's rank is almost entirely a function of the GPU's 4 GB memory and entry-level compute. If the same CPU were paired with a more capable GPU, the rank would improve substantially, but as measured, this configuration is firmly in the lower tier of results. The 12th percentile placement is a hard ceiling that no driver update or game patch can overcome.

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 is 3.40 GHz, boosting to 5.00 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It has a 24 MB shared L3 cache, 3 MB per-core L2 cache, and 192 KB per-core L1 cache. The processor integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 24 execution units, but this is irrelevant for the gaming results since the discrete GPU handles rendering.

The CPU's benchmark scores are consistently strong. In Cinebench R23, it scores 14769 multi-core and 2085 single-core. In PassMark, it achieves 37816 multi-thread and 4516 single-thread. Its average benchmark score of 46062 places it at the 89th percentile of all CPUs, with nearest rivals within 0.2% — a tie at the top of the performance curve. The data compression score of 390711, encryption score of 29293, and floating-point math score of 117951 all indicate a processor with substantial throughput.

However, in the context of Minimum, the CPU's role is secondary. The measured FPS data shows no evidence of CPU bottlenecking — at 1080p Low, the combo hits 120 FPS, which is a typical ceiling for this GPU generation, not a CPU limitation. The fact that the same CPU could presumably drive much higher frame rates with a stronger GPU is supported by its benchmark results, but the combined system's performance is capped by the RTX 3050 4 GB. The CPU's 14 cores and 14 threads are more than sufficient for a 2014 third-person shooter, and its 5.00 GHz boost clock ensures that single-threaded performance is not a constraint.

The data suggests that the CPU is underutilized in this configuration. The measured FPS at 1080p Ultra (59 FPS) is far below what the CPU could feed, and the 4K results are purely GPU-bound. This is not a criticism of the CPU — rather, it highlights that this combo's limitations are entirely on the graphics side. The 65 W TDP and 14-core design make this a capable processor for other workloads, but in Minimum, it is essentially waiting on the GPU.

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

The complete measured FPS table is as follows:

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 20 FPS. The High preset yields 27 FPS. The Medium preset produces 32 FPS average, with a minimum of 27 FPS and a maximum of 37 FPS. The Low preset achieves 42 FPS. None of these are playable for a third-person shooter requiring responsive aiming.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset averages 38 FPS. The High preset reaches 50 FPS. The Medium preset delivers 59 FPS average, with a minimum of 50 FPS and a maximum of 68 FPS. The Low preset achieves 78 FPS. Only the Low preset clears the 60 FPS threshold, and it does so with 78 FPS, which is acceptable but not ideal.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset averages 59 FPS. The High preset reaches 77 FPS. The Medium preset delivers 92 FPS average, with a minimum of 78 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS. The Low preset achieves 120 FPS. This is the only resolution where the combo performs adequately across all presets, though Ultra is borderline at 59 FPS.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each resolution step down from 4K to 1080p roughly doubles the frame rate at equivalent settings. The Medium preset, which has the most complete data, shows the scaling: 32 FPS at 4K, 59 FPS at 1440p, and 92 FPS at 1080p. This is not linear scaling — the jump from 4K to 1440p is an 84% improvement, while the jump from 1440p to 1080p is a 56% improvement. The diminishing returns at lower resolutions suggest that the GPU is less memory-constrained at 1080p, allowing its compute units to work more efficiently.

The minimum FPS values, where recorded, are instructive. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 78 FPS is only 15% below the average, indicating stable performance. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 50 FPS is 15% below the average of 59 FPS, showing similar stability but at a lower absolute level. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 27 FPS is 16% below the average of 32 FPS, confirming that the frame pacing issue is consistent across resolutions — the problem is not stutter, but raw performance. These figures collectively paint a picture of a combo that is predictable and stable, but fundamentally limited by the GPU's 4 GB memory and 7.127 TFLOPS of compute power. The 1080p Medium preset is the only configuration that offers both visual quality and smooth gameplay, with the 92 FPS average providing ample headroom for the game's action sequences.