Minimum

# Minimum — Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT delivers playable frame rates across most of Minimum's settings and resolution tiers, though 4K Ultra pushes the hardware to its limit. The measured data shows a clear pattern: the RX 6600 XT becomes the primary constraint as resolution climbs, while the Core Ultra 5 245 provides ample headroom even at 1080p. At 1080p Low, the system hits 170 FPS average, but that drops to 83 FPS at Ultra — a 51% reduction that points directly at GPU-bound rendering. The combo ranks 2064th out of 2939 tested configurations in this game, placing it in the lower-middle tier of all possible pairings.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate curve from 1080p to 4K reveals a system that scales predictably with pixel count, but the slope is steep. At 1080p Low, the average is 170 FPS; at 1440p Low, it falls to 110 FPS (a 35% drop); at 4K Low, it reaches 59 FPS (a 65% drop from the 1080p baseline). This is textbook GPU-bound scaling — the CPU is not the limiting factor at any resolution, as evidenced by the fact that even the most demanding 1080p preset (Ultra, 83 FPS) stays well above the 4K Low result.

The gap between Low and Ultra settings widens dramatically as resolution increases. At 1080p, the spread between Low (170 FPS) and Ultra (83 FPS) is 87 FPS. At 1440p, that spread narrows to 56 FPS (110 vs 54). At 4K, it compresses further to 30 FPS (59 vs 29). This compression is the signature of a GPU that is becoming saturated: at 4K, the rasterization workload dominates, and lowering settings from Ultra to Low only recovers 30 FPS, whereas at 1080p the same settings change recovers 87 FPS.

The 4K Medium result (45 FPS average, with a minimum of 38 and maximum of 52) is the only 4K row with frame time variance data, and it shows a relatively tight range. The 1440p Medium row (84 FPS, min 71, max 97) and 1080p Medium row (130 FPS, min 111, max 150) both demonstrate that Medium is the most stable preset in terms of frame pacing, with spreads of 26 and 39 FPS respectively.

Interpreting the resolution scaling data: the RX 6600 XT's 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but 4K Ultra (29 FPS) is effectively unplayable, and 4K High (38 FPS) only approaches console-like smoothness. The 59 FPS at 4K Low suggests that if the target is 4K, settings must be minimized to achieve a playable experience. The GPU's 70th percentile ranking among all GPUs and its nearest rival comparison — 1.1% ahead of the RTX 2080 SUPER and 0.7% ahead of the GTX 1630 — contextualizes this as a mid-range card that excels at 1080p but struggles with 4K.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. Its 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units provide the raw throughput for this game's DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) rendering path. The boost clock of 2589 MHz and game clock of 2359 MHz are the operative frequencies during gaming workloads, with the base clock of 1968 MHz serving as the floor. The memory subsystem consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth — a figure that becomes increasingly relevant as resolution climbs.

The pixel rate of 165.7 GPixel/s and texture rate of 331.4 GTexel/s are the theoretical limits that the measured FPS data reflects. At 4K Ultra, the card produces 29 FPS, which corresponds to roughly 71.7 million pixels per second at that frame rate (3840×2160×29) — well below the theoretical pixel rate, indicating that shading and texture work, not pure fillrate, are the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, 170 FPS translates to about 352.5 million pixels per second, which approaches the texture rate limit, suggesting the card is nearly saturated even at the lowest settings.

The RX 6600 XT's 70th percentile ranking places it below the RTX 2080 SUPER (which it beats by 1.1% in average benchmark score) and above the GTX 780 Ti (which it beats by 0.8%). The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1804 and PassMark G3D score of 16461 provide synthetic context, but the game-specific data is more telling: the card's performance in Minimum is consistent with its mid-range positioning. The 160 W TDP and single 8-pin power connector indicate modest power requirements, and the PCIe 4.0 x8 interface (half bandwidth of a full x16 slot) does not appear to bottleneck performance in this title, as evidenced by the strong 1080p results.

The 4K results are the clearest indicator of GPU limitations. The jump from 4K Medium (45 FPS) to 4K High (38 FPS) costs 7 FPS, while the jump from 4K High to 4K Ultra (29 FPS) costs another 9 FPS. This non-linear degradation suggests that Ultra settings introduce effects that disproportionately tax the card's 8 GB frame buffer and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The minimum FPS of 38 at 4K Medium versus the average of 45 shows that even the playable 4K preset has occasional dips, though not to unplayable levels.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC. Its base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz provide the single-thread performance that Minimum's game engine relies on for physics, AI, and draw call processing. The 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache reduce memory latency, and the dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth ensures the GPU receives data without starvation.

The CPU's benchmark scores paint a picture of a strong all-rounder. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32924 and single-core score of 4648 indicate that both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads are handled competently. The PassMark multithread score of 38706 and single-thread score of 4394 corroborate this. The 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs — with nearest rivals including the Ryzen 9 7900 (0.5% faster) and Core i5-14600K (0.8% faster) — places this processor well above the GPU's 70th percentile. This asymmetry is the key insight: the CPU is substantially more capable than the GPU, which means the RX 6600 XT is the definitive bottleneck in Minimum.

In game-specific terms, the CPU's capability is evident from the 1080p Low result of 170 FPS. At this resolution and settings combination, the GPU is the constraint — a more powerful GPU would push higher, but the CPU would not be the limiting factor until frame rates far exceed this. The fact that 1080p Ultra (83 FPS) is less than half of 1080p Low (170 FPS) shows that the game's Ultra settings add GPU-heavy effects (shadows, post-processing, reflections) that do not stress the CPU proportionally. The Core Ultra 5 245's 14 cores and 14 threads (no hyperthreading) are sufficient for Minimum's multi-threaded rendering tasks, and the 5.10 GHz boost clock handles the single-threaded engine logic without issue.

The CPU's integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU is irrelevant for this discrete GPU configuration, but the 17,800 million transistors and 243 mm² die size indicate a substantial processor that is not thermally constrained in typical desktop scenarios. The 65 W TDP is modest, and the LGA 1851 socket support with PCIe Gen 5 (20 lanes) ensures the RX 6600 XT's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is fully supported, though the card only uses half the available lanes. The measured FPS data shows no CPU-related frame pacing issues — the minimum FPS values at Medium settings (38 at 4K, 71 at 1440p, 111 at 1080p) are all within reasonable range of their averages, indicating consistent frame delivery.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, where the measured average is 59 FPS. At Medium, the average drops to 45 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS, while High and Ultra produce 38 FPS and 29 FPS respectively. For a smooth 4K experience, Low settings are required.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combination?

A: 1440p offers the best balance of visual quality and performance. At High settings, the system delivers 70 FPS, and at Medium it reaches 84 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS. 1080p is smoother (109 FPS at High) but does not utilize the CPU's headroom as effectively.

Q: How does the RX 6600 XT compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 6600 XT has an average benchmark score of 24442, which is 1.1% higher than the RTX 2080 SUPER (24170), 0.7% higher than the GTX 1630 (24277), and 0.8% higher than the GTX 780 Ti (24236). It trails the Intel Arc A350M (24647) by 0.8%.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 5 245 a bottleneck in this game?

A: No. The CPU's 90th percentile ranking and benchmark scores (Cinebench R23 multicore 32924, single-core 4648) far exceed the GPU's 70th percentile. The measured FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K shows GPU-bound behavior, with frame rates dropping by 65% from Low 1080p to Low 4K.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: The measured average is 130 FPS, with a minimum of 111 FPS and maximum of 150 FPS. This is a stable and smooth experience for third-person shooter gameplay, and it is the only 1080p preset with full frame time data available.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combination ranks 2064th out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the 70th percentile of all pairings. This is consistent with the GPU's 70th percentile ranking, confirming that the GPU defines the system's overall position.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 170 FPS, Medium yields 130 FPS (minimum 111, maximum 150), High reaches 109 FPS, and Ultra drops to 83 FPS. The 87 FPS gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is the largest of any resolution tier, indicating that the GPU has headroom to render additional effects at lower pixel counts.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates scale down proportionally. Low settings average 110 FPS, Medium averages 84 FPS (minimum 71, maximum 97), High averages 70 FPS, and Ultra averages 54 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 56 FPS, showing the GPU beginning to feel the pixel count pressure. The Medium preset's frame range (71-97 FPS) suggests occasional dips but generally stable performance.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low settings average 59 FPS, Medium averages 45 FPS (minimum 38, maximum 52), High averages 38 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS. The 30 FPS gap between Low and Ultra is the smallest of all resolutions, confirming that the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K. The Medium preset's minimum of 38 FPS indicates that even the middle settings tier can experience noticeable drops during intense scenes.

The full dataset shows a consistent pattern: each settings tier (Low to Medium to High to Ultra) costs approximately 20-30% performance at 1080p, with diminishing percentage losses at higher resolutions. The 1440p Medium row (84 FPS average) is the only resolution where Medium stays above 60 FPS, making it the highest resolution at which the system can maintain a consistent 60+ FPS experience with the medium preset.

Settings Recommendations

For 1080p displays, the Ultra preset at 83 FPS average is the best choice if visual fidelity is the priority, as it remains comfortably above 60 FPS. However, the Medium preset at 130 FPS (minimum 111) provides a significantly smoother experience for competitive play, and the frame time data confirms its stability. The Low preset at 170 FPS is excessive for most displays and sacrifices visual quality unnecessarily.

For 1440p displays, the High preset at 70 FPS is the recommended sweet spot — it maintains playable frame rates while offering better visual quality than Medium (84 FPS) at a modest 14 FPS cost. The Ultra preset at 54 FPS falls below the 60 FPS threshold and is not recommended for action-heavy scenes, as the minimum frame rates could dip further. The Medium preset at 84 FPS with a 71 FPS minimum is the safest choice for maintaining smooth gameplay.

For 4K displays, the Low preset at 59 FPS is the only viable option for consistent playability. The Medium preset at 45 FPS (minimum 38) is borderline — it will be playable in less demanding scenes but may feel stuttery during combat. High (38 FPS) and Ultra (29 FPS) are not recommended, as they fall well below the 60 FPS target and approach the 30 FPS slideshow threshold.

The data indicates that this system is best paired with a 1080p or 1440p monitor. At 1440p Medium, the combination delivers a 84 FPS average with a 71 FPS minimum, which is the most balanced configuration across all measured rows. The 1440p High preset at 70 FPS is the best visual-quality-per-frame-rate tradeoff, offering a 70 FPS average that stays above the 60 FPS threshold while providing higher fidelity than Medium. For players who prioritize frame rate stability above all else, 1080p Medium at 130 FPS (minimum 111) is the definitive choice — it offers the highest frame rates with known minimum performance, and the 39 FPS spread between minimum and maximum indicates excellent frame pacing.