Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti pairing in Minimum presents an extreme example of component bottlenecking, where the GPU’s age significantly caps the experience. The data shows a combo rank of 2895 out of 2939 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 1.5% of all tested combos. This analysis breaks down how the CPU’s modern architecture interacts with a legacy graphics card to produce these results.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a modern 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a 65W TDP. This is a desktop-class CPU released in January 2025, and its benchmark scores reflect its high-end positioning. For instance, it scores 32,924 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4,648 in single-core, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and Intel Core i5-14600K, with average score deltas of -0.5% and +0.8% respectively, indicating the Ultra 5 245 is firmly competitive at the top of the desktop stack.

However, in the context of Minimum, the CPU’s theoretical prowess is largely irrelevant. The game, a Third-Person Shooter released in 2014, does not appear to stress modern multi-core architectures heavily. The benchmark results show that at 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 66 FPS, which is the highest score in the entire measured set. This suggests that even at its best, the system is not CPU-bound; rather, the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU’s 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support (with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth) are more than sufficient for a title from this era. The data implies that the CPU is likely idle for most of the frame, waiting on the GPU to render. The 14 cores are a surplus resource here; the game’s performance is dictated almost entirely by the graphics pipeline, not by processing power. The high single-thread score (4,648 in R23) does not translate to higher FPS because the GPU cannot keep up with the frames the CPU is ready to feed it.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combined rank of 2895 out of 2939 combos is catastrophic, placing this system in the bottom 1.5% of all tested hardware pairings. This ranking is not a reflection of the CPU’s capability, but rather the GPU’s severe limitation. The data suggests that pairing a top-tier 90th percentile CPU with a 25th percentile GPU creates a massive imbalance. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 4,193, which is only 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M330 and 1.8% lower than the AMD Radeon Vega 3. These rivals are entry-level or integrated graphics solutions, underscoring how outclassed the GTX 1050 Ti is in the current landscape.

When looking at the combo rank, it is useful to consider what this means for the overall experience. A rank of 2895 out of 2939 means that almost every other combination of CPU and GPU tested produces better average frame rates in Minimum. The delta between this combo and the top performers is enormous, likely hundreds of FPS. The bottleneck is so severe that the CPU’s performance is essentially wasted. For example, the CPU’s Passmark multithread score is 38,706, but the GPU’s Passmark G3D score is a mere 6,340. The system is only as fast as its slowest component, and that component is the GTX 1050 Ti. This rank serves as a warning that component selection must be balanced; a high-end CPU cannot compensate for a low-end GPU in gaming scenarios.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions clearly illustrates the GPU bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 66 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 42 FPS, a 36% decrease. At 4K Low, it falls to 23 FPS, a further 45% decrease from 1440p. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU that is overwhelmed by pixel count. The GTX 1050 Ti has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. At higher resolutions, the demand for fill rate and memory bandwidth increases exponentially, and this GPU simply does not have the resources.

If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see a more flat FPS curve across resolutions, as the CPU’s workload (draw calls, physics) remains relatively constant. Instead, the data shows a steep decline, confirming that the GPU’s rendering capabilities are the primary constraint. The 1080p Medium result (50 FPS) versus the 1440p Low result (42 FPS) also highlights this; even lowering settings at a higher resolution cannot match the performance of a lower resolution. The 4K Ultra setting yields a paltry 11 FPS, which is unplayable. The data suggests that this combo is only viable for 1080p gaming, and even then, only at Low or Medium settings. The 4K results are purely academic, demonstrating the GPU’s absolute limits.

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

*Q: What is the best average FPS this combo can achieve in Minimum?*

A: The highest measured average FPS is 66, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that breaks the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the GTX 1050 Ti compare to its nearest rivals in raw benchmark score?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has an average benchmark score of 4,193. This is 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4,170) and 1.0% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4,151), but it is 1.1% lower than the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4,241) and 1.8% lower than the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (4,268).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the primary bottleneck in this configuration?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The CPU is a 90th percentile processor, while the GPU is in the 25th percentile. The FPS drops significantly with resolution increases, which is a hallmark of GPU limitation, not CPU limitation.

*Q: What is the combo's ranking among all tested systems in Minimum?*

A: The combo ranks 2895 out of 2939 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 1.5% of all tested hardware pairings for this game.

Q: What is the difference in FPS between 1080p Low and 4K Low?

A: The average FPS drops from 66 at 1080p Low to 23 at 4K Low, a reduction of 43 FPS or approximately 65% performance loss.

Q: Does the CPU's high single-thread score help in this game?

A: No. The CPU scores 4,648 in Cinebench R23 single-core, but the game’s performance is limited by the GPU. The FPS does not increase in a way that correlates with CPU power, confirming the GPU is the sole limiting factor.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a Pascal-generation GPU from 2016, built on a 14 nm process by Samsung. It has a base clock of 1291 MHz and a boost clock of 1392 MHz, with 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its memory configuration is 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. These specs are modest by modern standards, and the GPU’s percentile rank of 25% confirms its position as an entry-level part. Its FP32 performance is 2.138 TFLOPS, which is the raw computing power available for shaders.

In Minimum, these specifications directly correlate with the measured FPS. The 4 GB VRAM is likely a limiting factor at higher resolutions, but the core clock and shading units are more relevant at 1080p. The GPU’s low fill rate (44.54 GPixel/s) and texture rate (66.82 GTexel/s) explain why performance degrades so heavily at 4K. The 1080p Low setting (66 FPS) shows the GPU’s absolute ceiling; pushing to Medium (50 FPS) or High (42 FPS) increases the shading load and reduces frame rate. The GPU’s nearest rivals are all older or integrated parts, and the data shows it barely outperforms them, which is why the combo ranks so low. The GPU is the definitive bottleneck, and its end-of-life production status suggests it is not capable of handling modern game demands, even a 2014 title at high settings.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the only playable experience is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which yields an average of 66 FPS. This is the only preset that consistently achieves a smooth frame rate. The Medium preset at 1080p drops to 50 FPS, which is still playable for some, but the 16 FPS loss is significant. The High preset at 1080p (42 FPS) and Ultra (32 FPS) are increasingly less viable, falling below the 60 FPS target. For a competitive Third-Person Shooter, frame rate is often prioritized over visual fidelity, so Low is the recommended choice.

At 2560x1440, the best option is Low at 42 FPS, but this is below the 60 FPS threshold and may feel sluggish. The Medium preset at 1440p (32 FPS) is borderline, while High (27 FPS) and Ultra (21 FPS) are not recommended for smooth gameplay. At 3840x2160, all settings are unplayable, with the highest being Low at 23 FPS and the lowest being Ultra at 11 FPS. The data strongly suggests that users should stick to 1080p Low for the best experience, as any increase in resolution or settings results in a disproportionate FPS drop. The GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and limited bandwidth cannot support higher workloads without severe performance penalties.

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

The following is the complete measured FPS data for Minimum with the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti.

1920x1080:

• Low: 66 FPS average
• Medium: 50 FPS average (min 43, max 58)
• High: 42 FPS average
• Ultra: 32 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 42 FPS average
• Medium: 32 FPS average (min 28, max 37)
• High: 27 FPS average
• Ultra: 21 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 23 FPS average
• Medium: 17 FPS average (min 15, max 20)
• High: 15 FPS average
• Ultra: 11 FPS average

The data shows a clear pattern: every step up in resolution or settings halves the already low frame rates. At 1080p, the system can achieve playable frame rates only on Low. At 1440p, even Low struggles to maintain smoothness. At 4K, the system is completely overwhelmed, with all settings producing sub-24 FPS results. The Medium settings at each resolution provide min/max FPS data, which shows some variance, but the averages are consistently poor. This breakdown confirms that the combo is only suitable for 1080p gaming at the lowest settings, and any attempt to increase quality will result in a poor experience. The 4K data is particularly telling, as it shows the GPU’s absolute failure to render at high pixel counts, making this configuration unsuitable for modern high-resolution displays.