Minimum

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 paired with the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 produces a wide range of frame rates in Minimum, depending on resolution and quality settings. At 1080p, the combo delivers playable to excellent performance, but 4K Ultra is the only configuration that falls below 30 FPS on average. The data indicates a system that is well-balanced at lower resolutions, with the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck as resolution increases.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. This processor sits in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong overall compute capability. Its average benchmark score is 48995, which places it in a tight competitive group: it trails the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G by 0.4% and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 by 0.5%, while leading the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H by 0.6% and the Intel Core i5-14600K by 0.8%. These deltas are minimal, meaning the CPU’s raw processing power is effectively on par with those rivals.

In terms of cache, the Core Ultra 5 245 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The 14 threads are arranged as 14 physical cores without hyperthreading, which is a design choice that favors power efficiency and consistent multi-core throughput. For a third-person shooter like Minimum, the CPU’s single-thread performance is important, and the R15 single-core score of 468 and R23 single-core score of 4648 indicate robust per-thread capability.

The measured FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 156 FPS average, while at 1080p Ultra it drops to 76 FPS. The fact that the CPU can feed the GPU at these rates suggests that the processor is not the limiting factor at lower settings. At 1080p, scaling from Low to Ultra reduces performance by roughly 51%, which is a typical GPU-bound pattern for a 2014 title. The CPU’s high percentile rank (90th) and relatively modern architecture mean it has ample headroom to handle the game’s logic and draw calls, allowing the RX 6600 to dictate frame rates.

The processor’s memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s over dual-channel DDR5, which is generous for this workload. The PCIe Gen 5 interface with 20 lanes (CPU only) also ensures the GPU has a high-bandwidth connection, though the RX 6600 runs on PCIe 4.0 x8. Given that the game is from 2014, the CPU’s capabilities far exceed the game’s requirements, so the bottleneck is almost entirely on the graphics side. The data supports this: the largest FPS differences occur when changing resolution or GPU-heavy settings, not when moving between CPU-intensive scenarios.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

*Q: What is the best average frame rate achieved by this combo in Minimum?*

A: The highest recorded average is 156 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Does the combo maintain playable frame rates at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but barely at the highest settings. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the average FPS is 26, which is below 30 FPS. At 4K High, the average is 35 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it is 41 FPS. Only 4K Low, at 54 FPS, offers a comfortable margin above 60 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995. It is 0.4% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196), 0.5% slower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228), 0.6% faster than the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698), and 0.8% faster than the Intel Core i5-14600K (48618). The performance difference among these four is less than 1%, making them effectively equivalent in raw compute.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the combo averages 100 FPS on Low settings and 49 FPS on Ultra settings. This represents a 51 FPS drop, or a 51% reduction in average frame rate when moving from Low to Ultra.

Q: Is there a resolution where the combo consistently exceeds 100 FPS?

A: Yes, at 1920x1080 with Low settings (156 FPS) and with High settings (100 FPS). At 2560x1440 with Low settings, it also hits 100 FPS. No other configurations in the measured data reach the 100 FPS mark.

Q: How does the GPU’s benchmark score compare to its nearest rival?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 has an average benchmark score of 19036. It is exactly 0% different from the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19030), 0.1% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19049), 0.3% slower than the NVIDIA Tesla K20m (19089), and 0.4% faster than the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (18954). The RX 6600 sits in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs.

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

The measured data reveals a clear trend of diminishing frame rates as resolution increases, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 156 at 1080p to 100 at 1440p, then down to 54 at 4K. This represents a 35.9% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 46% drop from 1440p to 4K. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 102 FPS, or a 65.4% reduction.

At High settings, the pattern is similar: 100 FPS at 1080p, 65 FPS at 1440p, and 35 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 35 FPS (35%), and from 1440p to 4K is 30 FPS (46.2%). At Ultra settings, the frame rates are 76 FPS at 1080p, 49 FPS at 1440p, and 26 FPS at 4K. The relative drops are 35.5% and 46.9%, respectively.

These consistent percentage drops across all settings strongly indicate that the GPU is the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU’s workload (draw calls, physics, game logic) is largely independent of resolution. The fact that FPS scales inversely with pixel count, and does so at a predictable rate, points to the Radeon RX 6600’s rendering throughput as the primary constraint.

The RX 6600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s. At 4K, the memory bus width and bandwidth are likely saturated, leading to the steep drop from 1440p. The GPU’s pixel rate is 159.4 GPixel/s, which is reasonable for 1080p but insufficient for 4K at high settings, explaining the sub-60 FPS results at 4K. The data shows that the combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where the GPU can maintain higher utilization without being overwhelmed by pixel fill requirements.

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

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. With Low settings, the average FPS is 156, the highest in the entire dataset. High settings yield an average of 100 FPS, while Medium settings produce 119 FPS with a minimum of 101 and a maximum of 137. Ultra settings drop the average to 76 FPS. This shows a clear hierarchy where Medium is a strong compromise, offering 119 FPS average, which is 19 FPS higher than High and 43 FPS higher than Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down proportionally. Low settings average 100 FPS, which is the same as 1080p High. High settings at 1440p average 65 FPS, Medium averages 77 FPS (min 65, max 88), and Ultra averages 49 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p is notable for maintaining a 77 FPS average, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, while High and Ultra fall below it.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low settings average 54 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for competitive play. Medium settings average 41 FPS (min 35, max 48), High settings average 35 FPS, and Ultra settings average 26 FPS. None of these 4K configurations reach 60 FPS, and only the Low preset stays above 50 FPS. The Medium setting at 4K has a minimum FPS of 35, indicating potential stutters in demanding scenes.

The data also shows that the gap between High and Ultra is significant at all resolutions: 24 FPS at 1080p, 16 FPS at 1440p, and 9 FPS at 4K. This suggests Ultra settings impose a heavy rendering cost that is not justified by the modest visual gains in this older title. Conversely, the gap between Low and Medium is 37 FPS at 1080p, 23 FPS at 1440p, and 13 FPS at 4K, indicating that Medium is a substantial upgrade over Low without the steep penalty of Ultra.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 6600 ranks 2267 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the ranking, at roughly the 77th percentile (since 2939 - 2267 = 672 combos below it). The rank is determined by the overall performance across all tested settings and resolutions, which is heavily weighted by the GPU’s ability to handle high resolutions.

Given that the RX 6600 is in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs, the combo’s 77th percentile ranking in this game is actually higher than the GPU’s raw percentile rank. This suggests that Minimum is not particularly demanding compared to other modern titles, allowing the RX 6600 to perform relatively better than its general-purpose benchmark score would indicate. The CPU’s high percentile (90th) helps ensure that it does not drag down the combo’s ranking, even though the game is from 2014 and likely does not utilize all 14 cores effectively.

The ranking also reflects the fact that the combo cannot achieve 60 FPS at 4K, which is a significant penalty in the ranking algorithm. Many higher-ranked combos likely use more powerful GPUs that can hit 60+ FPS at 4K. However, for 1080p gaming, this combo would rank much higher, as it achieves over 100 FPS in multiple settings. The 2267 rank is thus a holistic measure that penalizes the 4K Ultra result of 26 FPS, which is below the playable threshold.

Compared to the GPU’s nearest rivals, the RX 6600 is effectively tied with several NVIDIA workstation cards, meaning the combo’s ranking is not due to an unusually weak GPU. Instead, it reflects the GPU’s mid-range position in the overall market. The combo rank of 2267 out of 2939 is a clear indicator that this is a solid 1080p or 1440p setup, but not a high-end 4K solution.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, the Medium preset is the clear winner for most users. It delivers an average of 119 FPS, with a minimum of 101 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay without any noticeable frame drops. This is significantly better than High, which averages 100 FPS, and much better than Ultra, which drops to 76 FPS. The 119 FPS average on Medium is also closer to the Low setting’s 156 FPS, but with presumably better visual quality. For competitive play where maximum frame rate is paramount, Low at 156 FPS is the choice, but Medium offers the best balance of fluidity and fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset again proves to be the best recommendation. It averages 77 FPS with a minimum of 65 FPS, which keeps the experience above 60 FPS consistently. High settings drop to 65 FPS average, which is still playable but closer to the 60 FPS threshold, and Ultra falls to 49 FPS, which is noticeably less smooth. Low settings at 1440p average 100 FPS, which is excellent, but the visual quality loss may be too great for some users. Medium at 1440p is the sweet spot, offering a 77 FPS average that is 12 FPS higher than High and 28 FPS higher than Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. The only settings that achieve a playable average are Low (54 FPS) and Medium (41 FPS). High (35 FPS) and Ultra (26 FPS) are below the 40 FPS threshold and will feel stuttery. For 4K users, Low is the recommended preset, as it is the only one that stays above 50 FPS. Medium at 4K offers a 41 FPS average, which may be acceptable for slower-paced gameplay, but the minimum of 35 FPS suggests occasional dips. If the user prioritizes frame rate over visuals, Low is the only sensible choice at 4K; otherwise, dropping to 1440p Medium is a better overall experience.

The data indicates that the Medium preset is the most efficient in terms of FPS per setting increment. It consistently provides a large FPS boost over High while maintaining a comfortable margin above 60 FPS at 1080p and 1440p.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, specifically the Navi 23 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 1626 MHz, a game clock of 2044 MHz, and a boost clock of 2491 MHz. The GPU features 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 28 ray-tracing cores. Its FP32 performance is 8.928 TFLOPS, which is moderate for a 2021 release but sufficient for a 2014 title like Minimum.

The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) and a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is a critical factor in the 4K performance. At 3840x2160, the pixel fill rate of 159.4 GPixel/s is a bottleneck, and the 224 GB/s bandwidth cannot sustain high frame rates at that resolution. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is not an issue for Minimum given its age, but the bus width limits the data throughput.

The GPU’s benchmark scores show a mixed profile: it scores 15096 in Passmark G3D, which places it in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs. Its DirectX 12 score is 51, while its DirectX 11 score is 152, indicating that the GPU is more efficient with older APIs, which is relevant for a 2014 game. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1492. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 19036, putting it in a tie with the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (0% delta), slightly behind the RTX 4050 Mobile (-0.1%) and Tesla K20m (-0.3%), and slightly ahead of the RTX 2000 Ada Generation (0.4%).

In practice, the RX 6600’s clock speeds and memory bandwidth determine the measured FPS. At 1080p, the GPU is not fully saturated, allowing it to reach 156 FPS on Low. As settings increase to Ultra, the shader workload increases, but the GPU still manages 76 FPS. The transition to 1440p and 4K reveals the memory bandwidth limitation. The 128-bit bus is insufficient for high pixel counts, leading to the steep FPS drops observed. The GPU’s TDP of 132 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W indicate it is a mid-range part, and the data confirms it performs as such: excellent for 1080p, good for 1440p, and inadequate for 4K high-refresh gaming. The 8 GB VRAM is ample for this title, but the bandwidth is the constraining factor, not capacity.