Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D combination in Minimum is the top-performing setup in the database, ranking 1st out of 2,939 tested combos. This pairing delivers exceptional frame rates across all settings, with the data showing that the RTX 5090 D is the dominant component even at 4K, though the CPU's 14-core configuration provides a robust foundation that prevents any significant bottlenecking at lower resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance curve as resolution increases, with the most dramatic drop occurring between 1080p and 4K. At Ultra settings, the average frame rate falls from 210 FPS at 1920x1080 to 136 FPS at 2560x1440, then further to 73 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 65% reduction from 1080p to 4K, indicating that the game becomes increasingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, which is expected given the pixel count increase from approximately 2 million to 8.3 million pixels.

The scaling pattern across all settings follows a similar trajectory. At Low settings, the drop from 430 FPS at 1080p to 277 FPS at 1440p and 149 FPS at 4K shows a 65% decrease overall. Medium settings exhibit the same proportional decline, moving from 329 FPS at 1080p to 212 FPS at 1440p and 114 FPS at 4K. High settings demonstrate the most consistent behavior, with 276 FPS at 1080p, 178 FPS at 1440p, and 96 FPS at 4K.

The fact that 4K performance remains above 60 FPS even at Ultra settings (73 FPS) suggests that the RTX 5090 D's massive 32 GB VRAM allocation and 1.79 TB/s memory bandwidth are sufficient to handle the game's texture and geometry demands without introducing memory-related stutters. The 176 ROPs and 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate contribute to the GPU's ability to maintain playable frame rates at 4K, though the data clearly shows that the GPU is the limiting component at this resolution.

Interestingly, the transition from 1440p to 4K produces a percentage drop that is nearly identical across all settings, with High settings falling 46%, Low falling 46%, Medium falling 46%, and Ultra falling 46%. This uniformity suggests that resolution scaling is purely pixel-bound and not influenced by settings-dependent effects like shadows or reflections, which would typically show different scaling curves.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 brings 14 cores and 14 threads to this configuration, operating at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The CPU's single-threaded performance is particularly relevant for Minimum, a third-person shooter where game logic and physics calculations often rely on single-core performance. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,085 and PassMark single-thread score of 4,516 indicate strong per-core capability that allows the CPU to keep up with the GPU's high frame output.

The processor's 24 MB of shared L3 cache, alongside 192 KB L1 per core and 3 MB L2 per core, provides sufficient on-die storage for game assets that need rapid access. The 102.4 GB/s dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth ensures that data can flow between the CPU and memory without creating a bottleneck, which is critical when the GPU is generating 430 FPS at 1080p Low settings.

The CPU's 89th percentile ranking against all CPUs places it in the upper tier, though the benchmark data shows it is statistically tied with its nearest rivals. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scores 46,030 against the Ultra 5 235's 46,062, a delta of just 0.1%. The Intel Core i9-13900HX scores 46,098, a 0.1% difference, and the AMD EPYC 4364P and EPYC 7303 also fall within 0.2% of the Ultra 5 235's average benchmark score of 46,062.

At 1080p with Low settings, the 430 FPS average suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough draw calls and game state updates to sustain extremely high frame rates. The 14-thread configuration, while not hyperthreaded, provides enough parallel processing headroom for the game's background tasks, audio processing, and network code without interfering with the main game thread. The PassMark multithread score of 37,816 and physics score of 2,570 further confirm that the CPU handles multi-threaded workloads competently, though Minimum likely does not stress all 14 cores simultaneously given its 2014 release date.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is the clear performance driver in this configuration, with its 92nd percentile ranking among all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 77,712. The GPU's 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus provides 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for Minimum's 2014-era textures and geometry. The 21,760 shading units and 680 TMUs allow the GPU to process the game's visual effects at very high throughput, while the 176 ROPs handle pixel output efficiently.

The GPU's clock speeds of 2,017 MHz base and 2,407 MHz boost, combined with its 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 performance, explain the exceptional frame rates observed. At 4K Ultra, the 73 FPS average is particularly impressive given the pixel count, and the GPU's 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate directly correlates with this performance level. The RTX 5090 D's nearest rivals in the database show interesting comparisons: the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT scores 76,904 (1.1% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT scores 78,940 (1.6% higher), and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 variants score 79,396 and 79,605 (2.1% and 2.4% higher respectively).

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 14,326 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 376,915 indicate that the GPU's architecture excels at modern rendering APIs, though Minimum likely uses DirectX 11 given its release date. The PassMark DirectX 11 score of 371 and DirectX 12 score of 219 show that the GPU handles both APIs competently, with the lower DirectX 12 score being typical for synthetic benchmarks that test different workloads.

The GPU's VRAM capacity of 32 GB is far beyond what Minimum would require, but this headroom means there is zero risk of texture thrashing or memory-related frame drops, even at 4K with Ultra settings. The 1.79 TB/s memory bandwidth ensures that even the most complex scenes with multiple characters and effects can be rendered without stalling on memory access. The RTX 5090 D's 92nd percentile ranking places it above the vast majority of GPUs, and the measured FPS data confirms that this performance translates directly to real-world gameplay.

FAQ

Q: Why does the 4K Ultra setting only achieve 73 FPS when lower resolutions exceed 200 FPS?

A: The data shows a consistent 46% performance drop from 1440p to 4K across all settings. This indicates that the RTX 5090 D is the limiting factor at 4K, as the pixel count quadruples from 1440p while the GPU's pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s becomes the binding constraint. The CPU's performance remains sufficient at this resolution, as evidenced by the fact that the frame rate scales proportionally with pixel count.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 a bottleneck for the RTX 5090 D in this game?

A: At 1080p with Low settings, the 430 FPS average suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU effectively. The CPU's Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,085 and boost clock of 5.00 GHz provide sufficient per-thread performance for Minimum's game logic. However, the fact that frame rates drop uniformly across all settings when moving to higher resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes the limiting component, not the CPU.

Q: How does the RTX 5090 D compare to its nearest competitors in raw benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 5090 D's average benchmark score of 77,712 places it within 2.4% of the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79,605), which is the highest-scoring rival. The AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT scores 78,940 (1.6% higher), the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB scores 79,396 (2.1% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT scores 76,904 (1.1% lower). These differences are relatively small, indicating the RTX 5090 D is competitive with its peers.

Q: What is the best resolution for achieving above 200 FPS with this configuration?

A: At 1920x1080, the data shows 210 FPS at Ultra, 276 FPS at High, 329 FPS at Medium, and 430 FPS at Low. All settings at 1080p exceed 200 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low (277 FPS), Medium (212 FPS), and High (178 FPS) settings are available, with Ultra falling to 136 FPS. For the highest refresh rate monitors, 1080p with any setting or 1440p with Low or Medium settings will achieve above 200 FPS.

Q: Does the 32 GB VRAM provide any benefit for this game?

A: Minimum was released in 2014 and likely does not require more than a few GB of VRAM even at 4K. The 32 GB capacity ensures there is no possibility of VRAM-related performance degradation, but the data does not indicate that the game utilizes this capacity. The GPU's 1.79 TB/s memory bandwidth is more relevant to performance, as it allows smooth texture streaming at high resolutions.

*Q: How does the CPU's performance in synthetic benchmarks translate to gaming in Minimum?*

A: The CPU's PassMark multithread score of 37,816 and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14,769 indicate strong overall processing capability. The 14 cores at 14 threads provide ample parallelism for the game's background processes. The single-thread performance, demonstrated by the R23 score of 2,085 and the 5.00 GHz boost clock, is critical for a shooter where frame pacing and input responsiveness depend on consistent single-core execution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the configuration produces its highest frame rates. Low settings yield an average of 430 FPS, which is the fastest measured result in the entire dataset. Medium settings produce 329 FPS with a minimum of 280 FPS and maximum of 379 FPS, showing a tight frame time distribution. High settings achieve 276 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 210 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 220 FPS, representing a 51% reduction from Low to Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the performance remains high but shows the expected scaling penalty. Low settings average 277 FPS, Medium settings produce 212 FPS with a minimum of 180 FPS and maximum of 244 FPS, High settings achieve 178 FPS, and Ultra settings deliver 136 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 141 FPS, a 51% reduction that mirrors the 1080p scaling pattern. The Medium setting's minimum of 180 FPS ensures that even the most demanding scenes remain above 144 Hz refresh rates.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates drop to the lowest levels in the dataset, though they remain playable. Low settings average 149 FPS, Medium settings produce 114 FPS with a minimum of 97 FPS and maximum of 131 FPS, High settings achieve 96 FPS, and Ultra settings deliver 73 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the only measured configuration that falls below 100 FPS, though 73 FPS is still well above the 60 FPS target for most displays. The Medium setting's 97 FPS minimum indicates that even in heavy scenes, the frame rate does not drop below 97 FPS.

The data shows that the Medium preset at each resolution provides the most balanced experience, with the minimum FPS figures available only for this setting. At 1080p Medium, the 280 FPS minimum ensures no drops below 240 Hz refresh rates. At 1440p Medium, the 180 FPS minimum keeps performance above 144 Hz. At 4K Medium, the 97 FPS minimum prevents any frame drops below 90 Hz, making it the recommended setting for 4K displays with high refresh rates.

Settings Recommendations

For 4K displays, the Medium preset at 3840x2160 provides the best experience based on the measured data. The 114 FPS average with a 97 FPS minimum ensures consistent performance without the 23% performance penalty seen when moving from Medium to High (96 FPS). The Ultra setting at 73 FPS is 36% slower than Medium and offers diminishing visual returns for a game from 2014. Low settings at 149 FPS are faster, but the visual quality reduction is substantial, and the 35 FPS difference between Low and Medium is not worth the quality loss.

For 1440p displays, the High preset at 2560x1440 achieves 178 FPS, which is 34 FPS lower than Medium's 212 FPS but provides better visual fidelity. The 178 FPS average and the fact that High settings do not have a recorded minimum FPS figure suggest the frame rate remains consistently high. The Ultra setting at 136 FPS is still above 120 Hz and may be preferred by users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, but the 42 FPS difference between High and Ultra is significant.

For 1080p displays, the Ultra preset at 1920x1080 delivers 210 FPS, which exceeds the refresh rate of most gaming monitors. The 276 FPS High setting provides additional headroom for competitive play, while the 329 FPS Medium and 430 FPS Low settings are only relevant for users with 360 Hz or higher refresh rate displays. The Ultra preset at 1080p offers the best visual quality while maintaining frame rates above 200 FPS, making it the recommended choice for this resolution.

The overall recommendation across all resolutions is to use the Medium preset if frame rate consistency is the primary concern, as it is the only setting with available minimum FPS data showing no severe drops. However, for users with standard 60 Hz or 144 Hz displays, the High preset provides the best balance of visual quality and performance, with the 4K High setting at 96 FPS still exceeding the 60 FPS target and the 1440p High setting at 178 FPS providing ample headroom. The Ultra preset should only be considered at 1080p, where the 210 FPS result remains competitive, or by users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate at 1440p.