Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H and AMD Radeon 760M combination delivers a playable experience for Minimum only at 1080p with the Low preset, according to the measured data. This pairing ranks 2930th out of 2939 tested combinations for this game, placing it in the bottom percentile of systems. The data shows a clear pattern: the system struggles with higher resolutions and more demanding settings, with a dramatic performance cliff as resolution increases.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H is a 16-core, 22-thread processor from the Meteor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 7 nm process. It features a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, with a 28 W TDP. The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a mobile processor designed for laptops, using the Intel BGA 2049 socket with dual-channel DDR5 memory support and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

In terms of raw compute, the CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 15028, while single-core performance reaches 1743. These scores place the processor in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating solid overall performance. Looking at nearest rivals, the Intel Core i5-14600T scores 32707 on average, a 0% delta, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 scores 32662, just 0.1% behind. The data suggests this mobile chip trades blows with desktop and other mobile parts, making it a capable processor for gaming workloads.

For a third-person shooter like Minimum, the CPU's single-thread performance matters for game logic, physics, and AI. The PassMark single-thread score of 3468 indicates strong per-core capability, while the multi-thread score of 24873 shows the chip can handle heavy background tasks. The CPU's 22 threads provide ample parallelism, but the benchmark results for this game suggest that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck — the GPU is.

The processor's boost clock of 4.80 GHz is respectable for a mobile part, and the 3.80 GHz base clock ensures sustained performance under load. The 24 MB L3 cache helps with data locality, which can benefit game engines that repeatedly access the same data structures. At 1080p Low settings, where the GPU load is lighter, the CPU has enough headroom to maintain frame pacing, as evidenced by the 58 FPS average. However, as resolution increases, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU's capabilities become less relevant to the final frame rate.

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

The AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, using the Phoenix chip built on TSMC's 4 nm process. It features 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 8 ray tracing cores. The GPU runs at a base clock of 800 MHz and boosts to 2599 MHz. Memory is system-shared, meaning the GPU uses the same DDR5 memory as the CPU, with bandwidth labeled as "System Dependent" — this is a critical limitation for gaming performance.

The GPU's compute capabilities include 5.323 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, with a pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s. The integrated nature of the GPU means it has a 15 W TDP and uses PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. This is not a discrete solution; it shares power and thermal budget with the CPU.

Benchmark scores show the Radeon 760M sits in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, with a PassMark G3D score of 5310. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001, 0.3% ahead) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000, 0.3% ahead), while the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 is 0.5% ahead at 6049. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 400, and Geekbench Vulkan reaches 30336, indicating moderate DirectX 12 and Vulkan readiness.

For Minimum, the GPU's system-shared memory is the primary constraint. At 1080p Low, the GPU manages 58 FPS, suggesting it can handle the geometry and texture loads at modest settings. However, the performance drop to 37 FPS at 1440p Low and 20 FPS at 4K Low shows how quickly the integrated GPU falls behind. The 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 resolutions require significantly more pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth, which the shared memory architecture cannot provide efficiently. The GPU's 16 ROPs are particularly limiting at high resolutions, as pixel throughput becomes a bottleneck. The 2599 MHz boost clock helps at lower resolutions, but it cannot compensate for the fundamental bandwidth limitations.

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

The measured data reveals a stark resolution scaling pattern that clearly identifies the AMD Radeon 760M as the primary bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 58 FPS, which is the only playable result in the entire dataset. Moving to 1440p Low, the frame rate drops to 37 FPS, a reduction of 21 FPS or approximately 36% lower. At 4K Low, the system manages only 20 FPS, a 65% drop from the 1080p result.

This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is heavily resolution-bound. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect frame rates to stay relatively flat across resolutions, since the CPU workload remains similar regardless of pixel count. Instead, the steep decline with each resolution increase points to the integrated GPU's inability to sustain fill rate and memory bandwidth demands at higher pixel counts.

The Medium preset shows a similar trend, with 44 FPS at 1080p, 29 FPS at 1440p, and 15 FPS at 4K. The High preset follows the same curve: 37 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p, and 13 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings are the most demanding, yielding 28 FPS at 1080p, 18 FPS at 1440p, and just 10 FPS at 4K. The consistent pattern across all settings confirms that resolution is the dominant factor in performance degradation.

The data also shows diminishing returns as resolution increases. The gap between 1080p and 1440p is significant, but the gap between 1440p and 4K is even larger in percentage terms. This is typical of integrated GPUs, which lack the dedicated memory bandwidth of discrete solutions. The system-shared memory architecture means the GPU must compete with the CPU for the same memory bus, and at 4K, the bandwidth requirement simply exceeds what the system can provide. The result is a sub-30 FPS experience at 4K across all settings, making the resolution effectively unplayable for this title.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for Minimum on this hardware?

A: The only playable configuration is 1080p with Low settings, which achieves an average of 58 FPS. All other combinations fall below 45 FPS, with 4K Ultra dropping to just 10 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The CPU scores 32697 on average benchmark performance, placing it within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F (32750) and 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (32812). It is effectively tied with the Intel Core i5-14600T at 32707.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon 760M suitable for 1440p gaming in Minimum?

A: No. At 1440p, even the Low preset only reaches 37 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset drops to 29 FPS, and Ultra falls to 18 FPS.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: Low settings deliver 58 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 28 FPS. This represents a 30 FPS difference, meaning Ultra settings roughly halve the frame rate compared to Low.

Q: Does the GPU outperform its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Radeon 760M scores 6019 on average, which is 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001) and 0.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000). It is 0.5% slower than the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6049).

Q: Will the 4K resolution ever be playable on this system?

A: No. The highest 4K result is 20 FPS on Low settings, and the Ultra preset produces only 10 FPS. The GPU lacks the memory bandwidth and pixel throughput for 4K gaming in Minimum.

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

At 1920x1080, the system shows its best performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 58 FPS, the only result above 50 FPS in the entire dataset. Medium settings drop to 44 FPS average, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 51 FPS. High settings produce 37 FPS average, while Ultra settings fall to 28 FPS. This resolution offers the widest range of playable options, though only Low truly hits a smooth frame rate.

At 2560x1440, performance degrades noticeably. Low settings average 37 FPS, which is exactly half the 1080p Low result. Medium settings average 29 FPS, with a minimum of 24 FPS and a maximum of 33 FPS. High settings reach 24 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 18 FPS. None of these results provide a consistently smooth experience, though Low and Medium might be tolerable for less demanding players.

At 3840x2160, the system is largely unplayable. Low settings average 20 FPS, Medium settings average 15 FPS with a minimum of 13 FPS and a maximum of 18 FPS. High settings fall to 13 FPS, and Ultra settings bottom out at 10 FPS. The gap between 1080p Low (58 FPS) and 4K Low (20 FPS) is 38 FPS, illustrating the severe resolution penalty. The Medium preset at 4K shows the tightest frame time variance, with a 5 FPS spread between minimum and maximum.

The data shows that the Low preset consistently outperforms higher settings by a significant margin at every resolution. At 1080p, the gap between Low and Ultra is 30 FPS. At 1440p, the gap is 19 FPS. At 4K, the gap narrows to 10 FPS, as the GPU approaches its absolute limits regardless of settings. The Medium preset at 1080p (44 FPS) is closer to High at 1080p (37 FPS) than to Low (58 FPS), suggesting that the quality steps between Medium and High are less demanding than the step from Low to Medium.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the only viable configuration for Minimum is 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which delivers 58 FPS average. This is the sole result that approaches the 60 FPS target typically desired for a third-person shooter. Every other combination falls below 45 FPS, which introduces noticeable stutter and input lag in a fast-paced game.

The 1080p Medium preset, at 44 FPS, offers a playable but compromised experience. The minimum frame rate of 38 FPS suggests occasional dips that could affect gameplay during intense firefights. The High preset at 1080p drops to 37 FPS, which is borderline for a shooter. The Ultra preset at 1080p, at 28 FPS, is not recommended for any competitive play, as the frame rate is too low for responsive aiming.

At 1440p, the Low preset's 37 FPS matches the 1080p High result, but the higher resolution does not justify the performance cost. The Medium preset at 1440p (29 FPS) and High preset (24 FPS) are both below the threshold for comfortable play. The Ultra preset at 1440p (18 FPS) is effectively a slideshow. At 4K, all results are below 20 FPS, making the resolution entirely unsuitable for Minimum.

The data suggests that players should prioritize frame rate over visual quality. The Low preset at 1080p provides the best experience by a wide margin, offering more than 30% higher FPS than the next best option (1080p Medium at 44 FPS). The quality difference between Low and Medium in a game from 2014 is likely minimal, while the 14 FPS gain is substantial. For players who absolutely require higher settings, 1080p Medium is the only reasonable compromise, but the 38 FPS minimum may cause issues during combat sequences. The recommendation is clear: run Minimum at 1080p Low for the smoothest possible experience on this integrated graphics solution.