Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination delivers a highly capable 1080p and 1440p experience in Minimum, with 4K remaining viable but demanding significant settings adjustments. The data shows this pairing ranks in the 74th percentile of all tested combos for this game, indicating strong but not elite performance relative to the broader database.

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. It operates with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The processor’s cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration positions the CPU as a modern mid-range desktop part, and its benchmark results confirm strong single-thread and multi-thread capabilities.

In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 14,769 points in multicore and 2,085 points in single-core. The single-core score is particularly relevant for Minimum, a Third-Person Shooter where frame pacing and physics calculations often rely on strong single-thread performance. The PassMark single-thread score of 4,516 reinforces this strength, while the PassMark multithread score of 37,816 indicates substantial headroom for background tasks or heavily threaded game logic. The CPU’s percentile ranking against all CPUs is 89, meaning it outperforms 89% of processors in the database, and its average benchmark score of 46,062 places it in a tight cluster with its nearest rivals.

When compared to its nearest rivals, the Ultra 5 235’s average score is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, which scores 46,030, a delta of 0.1%. It is also within 0.1% of the Intel Core i9-13900HX, which scores 46,098. The AMD EPYC 4364P and AMD EPYC 7303 trail by 0.2%, with scores of 45,970 and 45,960, respectively. These deltas are negligible, meaning the CPU’s performance is statistically indistinguishable from these rivals in aggregate benchmarks. However, the gaming-specific results in Minimum suggest that the CPU’s high single-thread performance is sufficient to avoid bottlenecking the GPU at lower resolutions, as evidenced by the high frame rates at 1080p.

The CPU’s memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. This memory bandwidth is adequate for feeding the GPU in a game like Minimum, which is not particularly data-intensive by modern standards. The lack of ECC memory support is irrelevant for gaming. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU is present but not used for gaming when a discrete GPU is installed. The processor’s PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes provides ample bandwidth for the RTX 3080’s PCIe 4.0 interface, ensuring no data transfer bottleneck.

Benchmark results indicate that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combination. At 1080p Low, the average frame rate reaches 267 FPS, a figure that requires strong CPU throughput to maintain. The fact that the CPU can sustain such high frame rates without dipping significantly suggests its architecture and clock speeds are well-suited to this game’s engine. The boost clock of 5.00 GHz is the key enabler here, as it provides the raw single-thread speed needed for high-FPS scenarios.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is built on the Ampere architecture with the GA102 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It features 10 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 320-bit bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s. The GPU’s base clock is 1440 MHz with a boost clock of 1710 MHz, and its memory runs at 1188 MHz, translating to 19 Gbps effective. This memory configuration is crucial for Minimum at higher resolutions, as the game’s textures and geometry can consume significant VRAM.

The RTX 3080 has 8,704 shading units, 272 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. It also includes 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, which are irrelevant for a game like Minimum that does not support ray tracing or DLSS. The GPU’s raw compute performance is substantial, with an FP32 throughput of 29.77 TFLOPS and a texture rate of 465.1 GTexel/s. These figures translate directly to the high frame rates observed in the measured data.

Benchmark results for the GPU show a PassMark G3D score of 25,086 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 152,423. The GPU’s percentile ranking against all GPUs is 68, which is lower than the CPU’s 89th percentile, indicating that the GPU is the more average component in this pairing. The average benchmark score for the GPU is 23,172, and its nearest rivals are surprisingly close: the NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23,249 (delta -0.3%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 23,250 (delta -0.3%), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M scores 23,273 (delta -0.4%), and the AMD Radeon R9 M290X scores 23,276 (delta -0.4%). These deltas are all negative, meaning the RTX 3080’s average score is slightly lower than these rivals, but the differences are within 0.4%, which is negligible in real-world terms.

In Minimum, the GPU’s performance is the primary driver of frame rate differences across settings. At 4K Ultra, the average frame rate drops to 45 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold commonly desired for smooth gameplay. This indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor at maximum settings and 4K resolution. Conversely, at 1080p Low, the frame rate reaches 267 FPS, showing that the GPU has ample headroom when the workload is reduced. The GPU’s 10 GB of VRAM is sufficient for this game, as evidenced by the ability to run at 4K High with 60 FPS without apparent memory-related stuttering.

The GPU’s boost clock of 1710 MHz is the clock speed that matters for sustained gaming performance. The data shows that the GPU can maintain high frame rates at 1440p, with an average of 110 FPS at High settings. This suggests that the boost clock is being utilized effectively and that thermal throttling is not a significant issue in this scenario. The GPU’s 320 W TDP and suggested 700 W PSU are high, but these are hardware requirements, not performance metrics.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance scaling across resolutions. At 1080p High, the average frame rate is 171 FPS. Moving to 1440p High, the frame rate drops to 110 FPS, a decrease of 35.7%. At 4K High, the frame rate falls to 60 FPS, which is a 64.9% drop from 1080p. This steep decline indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component as resolution increases.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings. At 1080p Low, the average is 267 FPS; at 1440p Low, it is 172 FPS (a 35.6% drop); and at 4K Low, it is 93 FPS (a 65.2% drop from 1080p). The percentage drops are remarkably similar between Low and High settings, suggesting that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth are the constraining factors, rather than CPU limitations or VRAM capacity. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the frame rate to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU workload per frame is roughly constant. Instead, the frame rate drops proportionally to the increase in pixel count, confirming that the RTX 3080 is the limiting component.

For Medium settings, the 1080p average is 204 FPS, 1440p is 132 FPS, and 4K is 71 FPS. The 4K Medium result includes a minimum FPS of 60 and a maximum of 82, indicating some frame pacing variability but still maintaining playable performance. The 4K Ultra setting is the only configuration that falls below 60 FPS, with an average of 45 FPS. This result is the clearest indicator of GPU limitation, as the workload at 4K Ultra is too demanding for the RTX 3080’s compute and memory resources.

The data shows that the CPU’s influence on frame rates is minimal at all resolutions. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would see frame rates plateau at lower resolutions, but the 1080p Low score of 267 FPS demonstrates that the CPU can handle extremely high frame rates. The consistent percentage drops across settings further prove that the GPU is the scaling bottleneck. For users targeting 60 FPS, the data indicates that 4K High is the boundary, while 4K Medium provides headroom above 60 FPS. At 1440p, all settings including Ultra (84 FPS) exceed 60 FPS comfortably.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 ranks 776th out of 2,939 tested combos in Minimum. This places the combo in the top 26.4% of all combinations, which is a strong result given the GPU’s age and the fact that it was not a top-tier card even at launch. The rank indicates that while the combo is clearly capable of high performance, it is outclassed by many newer and more expensive combinations in the database.

The combo’s rank is more reflective of the GPU’s performance than the CPU’s, given that the CPU is in the 89th percentile while the GPU is in the 68th percentile. The 776th rank suggests that the RTX 3080 is the limiting factor in this pairing, as a higher-ranked GPU would likely push the combo into the top 500 or beyond. The rank also implies that there are 2,163 combinations that score higher, most of which likely feature newer GPUs with higher memory bandwidth and more shading units.

However, the rank should be interpreted in context. The combo still delivers playable frame rates at 4K High (60 FPS) and excellent performance at 1440p, with all settings exceeding 84 FPS. The 74th percentile ranking means that this combo outperforms the majority of systems in the database, which is a positive indicator for users with this hardware. The rank is also influenced by the game’s age; Minimum was released in 2014, and its engine is not particularly demanding by modern standards, which allows older GPUs to perform relatively well.

The data shows that the combo’s performance is consistent with its component rankings. The CPU’s high percentile rank (89) does not fully compensate for the GPU’s lower rank (68), resulting in a combined rank that is between the two. This suggests that the RTX 3080 is the bottleneck, and upgrading the GPU would yield a greater improvement in the combo’s rank than upgrading the CPU. For users considering this combo, the rank indicates that it is a balanced but GPU-bound system, with the CPU having headroom for a future GPU upgrade if desired.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Minimum with this combo for a 60 FPS target?*

A: The data shows that 4K High achieves an average of 60 FPS, while 4K Medium reaches 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 FPS. For a guaranteed 60 FPS with headroom, 4K Medium is the safest choice, as it provides a 71 FPS average.

*Q: Does the RTX 3080's 10 GB of VRAM limit performance in Minimum?*

A: The measured data does not indicate VRAM limitations. The GPU runs 4K High at 60 FPS and 4K Medium at 71 FPS, with no evidence of texture pop-in or stuttering that would suggest memory capacity issues. The 10 GB is sufficient for this game.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46,062, which is 0.1% higher than the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375's score of 46,030. This difference is negligible, meaning the two CPUs perform statistically identically in aggregate benchmarks.

*Q: Is this combo CPU-bound or GPU-bound in Minimum?*

A: The data indicates the combo is GPU-bound. The frame rate drops by approximately 35% from 1080p to 1440p and another 45% from 1440p to 4K, regardless of settings. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck, not a CPU bottleneck.

Q: What is the highest setting that maintains above 100 FPS on average at 1440p?

A: At 1440p High, the average frame rate is 110 FPS. The 1440p Medium setting achieves 132 FPS. Both settings exceed 100 FPS, but High is the highest quality setting that maintains this performance level.

Q: How does the RTX 3080's average benchmark score compare to the AMD Radeon RX 6600M?

A: The RTX 3080 has an average benchmark score of 23,172, which is 0.4% lower than the RX 6600M's score of 23,273. This difference is within the margin of error and does not represent a meaningful performance gap.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the optimal settings for different priorities. For users prioritizing maximum frame rate at 1080p, the Low preset delivers an average of 267 FPS, which is ideal for competitive play on high refresh rate monitors. The Medium preset at 1080p offers 204 FPS, still extremely high, while providing better visual fidelity. The High preset at 1080p drops to 171 FPS, which remains far above the 144 Hz threshold for most gaming monitors. The Ultra preset at 1080p yields 131 FPS, which is still smooth but offers the best image quality.

At 1440p, the Low preset delivers 172 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh 1440p displays. The Medium preset achieves 132 FPS, providing a good balance of visual quality and performance. The High preset is the recommended choice for most users, as it maintains 110 FPS while offering significantly better textures and effects than Medium. The Ultra preset at 1440p produces 84 FPS, which is playable but may not be ideal for users who prefer a solid 100+ FPS experience. For a 60 FPS target, the Ultra preset at 1440p is more than sufficient, but the high frame rates of lower presets suggest that users can afford to increase graphical fidelity.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. The Ultra preset averages 45 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and not recommended for a smooth experience. The High preset achieves exactly 60 FPS on average, making it the minimum viable option for 4K gaming. The Medium preset is the best overall choice for 4K, as it delivers 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 FPS, ensuring consistent performance without drops below the target. The Low preset at 4K reaches 93 FPS, which is playable but sacrifices significant visual quality.

The data suggests that the Medium preset is the "sweet spot" for this combo across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium provides 204 FPS; at 1440p, it provides 132 FPS; and at 4K, it provides 71 FPS. This preset consistently delivers frame rates that are 30-50% higher than the High preset, while the visual difference between Medium and High is often less noticeable in a fast-paced shooter. For users with high refresh rate monitors (144 Hz or above), the Low preset at 1080p or 1440p is the recommended choice to maximize frame rates. For users with standard 60 Hz displays, the Medium preset at 4K offers the best balance of visual quality and performance, with the High preset at 4K being a viable alternative if the user prefers better shadows and textures. The Ultra preset is only recommended at 1440p, where it still provides a smooth 84 FPS experience.