Minimum

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 desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture and manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, which positions it as a high-frequency part capable of handling both lightly-threaded game logic and heavier background tasks. The processor includes 24 MB of shared L3 cache, with 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, and supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with a peak bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Its integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU provides a fallback display solution, though the discrete GPU does the heavy lifting in gaming workloads.

In the context of Minimum, the CPU's role is less about raw core count and more about sustained single-thread performance and memory throughput. The game, a third-person shooter released in 2014, was designed in an era when quad-core processors were the norm, so the Ultra 5 245's 14 cores are far beyond what the game's engine can fully utilize. Benchmark results show the processor achieves 4,648 points in Cinebench R23 single-core and 32,924 points in multi-core, placing it in the 90th percentile against all CPUs. The nearest rivals in aggregate benchmark scores are the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49,196 average, 0.4% higher), AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49,228 average, 0.5% higher), Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48,698 average, 0.6% lower), and Intel Core i5-14600K (48,618 average, 0.8% lower). These deltas are all within 1%, meaning the Ultra 5 245 is effectively performance-equivalent to its closest competitors in general compute tasks.

For Minimum specifically, the measured FPS data indicates that the CPU is rarely the limiting factor. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 214 FPS average, which is likely near the engine's practical ceiling for frame generation. The CPU's high boost clock of 5.10 GHz ensures that even the most demanding game-thread scenarios — such as rapid camera movements or multiple enemy AI units — are handled without introducing frame-time spikes. The 14 threads provide ample headroom for background processes like voice chat or streaming software without stealing cycles from the game's primary thread. The data shows that at 1440p Medium, the combo still delivers 106 FPS average, indicating that the CPU can feed the GPU efficiently at mid-range resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 36 FPS, but this is a GPU-bound scenario, not a CPU limitation, as evidenced by the resolution scaling patterns discussed later.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is a RDNA 2.0 graphics card built on the Navi 22 chip at a 7 nm process. It features 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units, along with 40 ray-tracing cores. The GPU runs at a base clock of 2150 MHz, a game clock of 2495 MHz, and a boost clock of 2600 MHz. Memory is provided by 12 GB of GDDR6 across a 192-bit bus, with a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This VRAM capacity is significant for a card in its class, and the pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 416.0 GTexel/s indicate strong fill-rate capabilities for a 2014 title.

The RX 6750 XT holds the 71st percentile among all GPUs in benchmark performance, with an average score of 26,011. Its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks are the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (25,891 average, 0.5% lower), AMD FirePro W7100 (25,856 average, 0.6% lower), AMD FirePro D700 (25,842 average, 0.7% lower), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740 average, 1.1% lower). These deltas show that the RX 6750 XT slightly outperforms its nearest competitors, though the margins are slim — all within 1.1%.

For Minimum, the GPU is the primary driver of frame rates at higher resolutions and settings. At 1080p Low, the card pushes 214 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 105 FPS — a 51% reduction that clearly demonstrates the GPU's workload scaling with graphical fidelity. The 12 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for a 2014 game, even at 4K Ultra, where texture memory usage rarely exceeds 6 GB in titles of that era. The memory bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s ensures that texture streaming at 4K does not become a bottleneck. The card's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility are forward-looking, but Minimum was released before these APIs were standardized, so the game likely runs on older DirectX paths where the GPU's raw rasterization throughput matters most.

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 resolution scaling that identifies the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 138 at 1080p to 89 at 1440p and further to 48 at 4K. This represents a 35% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 65% drop from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is roughly consistent with pixel-count increases: 1440p has 1.78 times the pixels of 1080p, and 4K has 4 times the pixels. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect smaller FPS differences between resolutions, as the CPU workload remains relatively constant regardless of resolution.

At Low settings, the pattern is more extreme: 214 FPS at 1080p drops to 138 FPS at 1440p (a 36% drop) and 74 FPS at 4K (a 65% drop from 1080p). The fact that even at Low settings the 4K frame rate falls to 74 FPS — still playable but well below the 1080p figure — indicates that the GPU's pixel-pushing capability is the limiting factor. The Ultra preset shows the most severe scaling: 105 FPS at 1080p, 68 FPS at 1440p, and 36 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result of 36 FPS is the lowest measured across all configurations, confirming that the RX 6750 XT cannot maintain high frame rates at 4K with maximum graphical settings in this title.

The Medium preset provides the only min/max FPS data across all resolutions, with 164 average (139 min, 189 max) at 1080p, 106 average (90 min, 122 max) at 1440p, and 57 average (48 min, 66 max) at 4K. The narrowing of the min-to-max spread at higher resolutions — from 50 FPS at 1080p to 18 FPS at 4K — suggests that at 1080p, frame times are more variable due to CPU-driven spikes, while at 4K, the GPU is consistently saturated, producing more uniform but lower frame rates. This pattern is characteristic of a system where the CPU can outpace the GPU at low resolutions but the GPU becomes the sole constraint at high resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 1,284 out of 2,939 tested combos for Minimum, placing it in the 56th percentile of all configurations. This mid-pack ranking reflects the fact that while both components are individually capable — the CPU in the 90th percentile and the GPU in the 71st percentile — the Minimum game engine does not fully leverage the CPU's multi-core advantage, and the GPU, while solid, is not a top-tier part.

The rank of 1,284 out of 2,939 means that 1,283 combos perform better and 1,655 perform worse. This puts the combo in the upper half of all tested configurations, which is a reasonable result for a mid-range CPU paired with a mid-to-upper-midrange GPU. The data indicates that the combo's performance is more strongly correlated with the GPU's capabilities than the CPU's, as evidenced by the resolution scaling analysis. At 1080p Medium, the combo achieves 164 FPS, which would be considered excellent by most standards, but higher-ranked combos likely feature more powerful GPUs that can sustain higher frame rates at 4K Ultra.

The ranking also implies that the CPU is not holding the system back. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the combo to rank lower relative to combos with the same GPU but faster CPUs. The fact that the Ultra 5 245's nearest CPU rivals are within 0.8% of its average benchmark score suggests that swapping to a similar-tier CPU would not meaningfully change the Minimum results. Conversely, upgrading the GPU would likely produce a substantial improvement in the 4K Ultra scenario, where the current GPU delivers only 36 FPS.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the combo achieves 164 FPS average with a min of 139 and max of 189, which provides a smooth experience on high-refresh-rate monitors. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 106 FPS with a min of 90 and max of 122, which remains comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for most displays. Even at 4K Medium, the combo delivers 57 FPS average with a min of 48 and max of 66, which is playable on standard 60 Hz monitors, though the min FPS of 48 may produce occasional stutter in demanding scenes.

The High preset is a reasonable alternative for users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate. At 1080p High, the combo achieves 138 FPS average, which is still excellent. At 1440p High, the average falls to 89 FPS, which is acceptable for most gamers. However, at 4K High, the average drops to 48 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and may feel sluggish. The Ultra preset is not recommended for any resolution: at 1080p Ultra, the average is 105 FPS, which is playable but not optimal for competitive play; at 1440p Ultra, the average falls to 68 FPS; at 4K Ultra, the average is 36 FPS, which is below the playability threshold for a third-person shooter.

The Low preset provides the highest frame rates — 214 FPS at 1080p, 138 FPS at 1440p, and 74 FPS at 4K — but the visual quality trade-off is significant. For competitive players who prioritize frame rate over graphics, Low at 1080p or 1440p is the optimal choice. For most players, Medium at 1440p offers the best combination of smoothness and visual detail, delivering 106 FPS with a min of 90, ensuring that frame drops stay above the 60 FPS threshold.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution and preset for this combo in Minimum?*

A: The Medium preset at 1440p provides the best balance, achieving 106 FPS average with a min of 90 and max of 122. This delivers smooth gameplay with good visual quality and avoids the frame drops seen at 4K Medium (min 48 FPS).

*Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Minimum?*

A: Yes, but only at Low or Medium settings. At 4K Low, the combo achieves 74 FPS average; at 4K Medium, it achieves 57 FPS average with a min of 48. The High preset drops to 48 FPS, and Ultra falls to 36 FPS, which is below the playability threshold.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is within 0.8% of its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmark scores. It is 0.4% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, 0.5% slower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, 0.6% faster than the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H, and 0.8% faster than the Intel Core i5-14600K.

Q: Is the GPU the bottleneck at 4K in this game?

A: Yes, the resolution scaling data shows that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 36, while at 1080p Ultra it is 105. This 65% drop from 1080p to 4K is consistent with GPU-bound behavior, as the CPU workload remains constant across resolutions.

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

A: The combo ranks 1,284 out of 2,939 tested combos, placing it in the upper half (56th percentile) of all configurations tested for Minimum.

Q: What is the highest frame rate achievable with this combo?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 214, achieved at 1080p with Low settings. The Medium preset at 1080p delivers 164 FPS average, while High at 1080p delivers 138 FPS average.