Minimum

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT paired with the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 in Minimum demonstrates a configuration where the graphics card is the primary arbiter of performance across the tested resolution and settings matrix. The data indicates a clear scaling pattern from 1080p to 4K, with the GPU's 8 GB memory and RDNA 2 architecture defining the experience at higher loads, while the 20-core processor provides ample headroom to avoid becoming a limiting factor.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for this combo shows a pronounced and predictable decline as resolution increases, which is a classic indicator of GPU-bound performance. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 177 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same Low preset, the average drops to 114 FPS, a reduction of 63 FPS. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls further to 61 FPS. This trajectory suggests that at lower resolutions, the frame rate is being throttled by the graphics card’s ability to process geometry and draw calls, but the CPU is still capable of feeding it data quickly enough.

The scaling pattern becomes more telling when examining the High settings tier. At 1080p High, the average is 114 FPS, which is identical to the 1440p Low result. At 1440p High, the average is 73 FPS, and at 4K High, it drops to 39 FPS. The percentage drop from 1080p High to 1440p High is roughly 36%, and from 1440p High to 4K High is roughly 47%. These steep declines indicate that the rendering load is scaling heavily with pixel count, which is typical for a GPU with a 128-bit memory bus and 8 GB of VRAM. The card’s pixel rate of 168.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 337.3 GTexel/s are being saturated as the resolution increases.

The most extreme example of this scaling is at the Ultra settings tier. The system manages 87 FPS at 1080p Ultra, but this plummets to 56 FPS at 1440p Ultra, and then to a near-unplayable 30 FPS at 4K Ultra. The data suggests that the 4K Ultra setting is beyond the practical capabilities of this GPU for smooth gameplay. The gap between 1080p and 4K at Ultra is 57 FPS, which is a 65% reduction in performance. This is not a linear scaling, indicating that the GPU is hitting a hard resource limit, likely related to memory bandwidth and fill rate, rather than just raw shader throughput.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the decisive component in this configuration for Minimum. Its specifications reveal why the performance curves behave as they do. The GPU is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with a Navi 23 chip, featuring 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The boost clock is listed at 2635 MHz, with a game clock of 2410 MHz. These clocks contribute to a FP32 throughput of 10.79 TFLOPS, which is a moderate figure for a card in its percentile bracket (65th percentile vs all GPUs).

The memory subsystem is a critical factor. The card has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 280.3 GB/s. In Minimum, the data shows that this bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p and most 1440p scenarios, but the 4K Ultra result of 30 FPS suggests that the bus width becomes a bottleneck. The effective memory clock of 17.5 Gbps is decent, but the narrow bus limits the total data throughput available to the GPU cores. This is why the difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K is only 31 FPS (61 vs 30), while at 1080p, the difference is 90 FPS (177 vs 87). At lower resolutions, the shader cores are the limiting factor, but at 4K, memory bandwidth and capacity become the wall.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 19765, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (deltaPct -0.6) and AMD FirePro W7000 (deltaPct -0.7). These rivals are close in synthetic benchmarks, but the RX 6650 XT’s real-world gaming performance in Minimum is defined by its DirectX 12 score of 62 in PassMark, which is relatively low compared to its DirectX 11 score of 169. This suggests that the card is better optimized for older APIs, which may explain why performance drops are so steep at higher settings that likely utilize more advanced rendering features. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is also a likely contributor to the 4K Ultra result, as texture-heavy presets can exceed this allocation, forcing the system to swap data.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 plays a supporting role in this combo, providing sufficient computational power to avoid bottlenecking the RX 6650 XT in Minimum. The CPU features 20 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. It is built on the Arrow Lake architecture using a 3 nm process node. The L3 cache is 30 MB shared, and the memory bandwidth is rated at 102.4 GB/s with dual-channel DDR5 support. These specifications are far beyond what is needed to feed a mid-range GPU in a third-person shooter.

The benchmark data for the CPU supports this assessment. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 42216 in multi-core and 5960 in single-core. The single-core score is particularly relevant for gaming, as it indicates strong per-thread performance that can handle game logic and draw calls efficiently. The PassMark single-thread score is 4689, and the multi-thread score is 49682. The CPU’s percentile vs all CPUs is 93, placing it in the top 7% of processors. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4464P (deltaPct -0.3) and Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (deltaPct 0.3), which are comparable in synthetic tests.

In the context of Minimum, the data shows that the CPU is not the bottleneck. For example, at 1080p Low, the system hits 177 FPS, which is a high frame rate that still does not saturate the CPU's capabilities. The 20 cores and 20 threads are likely underutilized in this game, as most titles do not scale perfectly across that many threads, but the high boost clock of 5.30 GHz ensures that the primary game thread is processed quickly. The CPU’s TDP of 65 W is modest, indicating that thermal throttling is unlikely to be an issue, but this is a minor factor when the GPU is clearly the limiting component at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

In the overall benchmark database for Minimum, this specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT holds a combo rank of 1895 out of 2939 tested combos. This places it in the lower-middle tier of all configurations tested, which is surprising given the CPU's high percentile ranking. The data suggests that the GPU is dragging the combo down, as the CPU alone is in the 93rd percentile, but the GPU is only in the 65th percentile.

The rank of 1895 indicates that there are 1894 other combos that perform better in this specific game. This is likely due to the fact that many other tested systems feature higher-end GPUs, which have a more significant impact on gaming performance than the CPU. The combo rank is a holistic measure, and the data shows that while the CPU is a top-tier component, the GPU's limitations at 4K and Ultra settings prevent this combo from achieving a higher rank. For context, the combo sits in the 64th percentile of all combos (1895/2939), meaning roughly 64% of tested systems are faster.

The deltaPct values for the CPU's rivals (e.g., AMD EPYC 4464P at -0.3%) show that the CPU is competitive with other high-end processors, but this does not translate to a high combo rank because the game is GPU-bound. The measured FPS data confirms this: the system can reach 177 FPS at 1080p Low, which is respectable, but the 30 FPS at 4K Ultra is a severe limitation that pulls the average performance down across the entire test suite. The rank reflects a balance of all tested resolutions and settings, and the 4K results are penalizing the combo significantly.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the combo's performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low averages 177 FPS, Medium averages 135 FPS with a minimum of 115 and maximum of 156, High averages 114 FPS, and Ultra averages 87 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 90 FPS, showing that the GPU has headroom at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low at 114 FPS, Medium at 87 FPS (min 74, max 100), High at 73 FPS, and Ultra at 56 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 58 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p has a minimum of 74 FPS, which is still above the threshold for smooth gameplay, but the Ultra preset's 56 FPS average is approaching the edge of playability for a fast-paced shooter.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low at 61 FPS, Medium at 47 FPS (min 40, max 54), High at 39 FPS, and Ultra at 30 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 40 FPS indicates that even this mid-tier setting will experience noticeable stutters. The High and Ultra settings at 4K are not viable for competitive play, with averages below 40 FPS. The data shows a clear hierarchy: 1080p is fully playable at all settings, 1440p is playable up to High, and 4K is only marginally playable at Low.

The Medium preset is the only one with min/max data across all resolutions. At 1080p, the min is 115 and max is 156, at 1440p the min is 74 and max is 100, and at 4K the min is 40 and max is 54. The frame time consistency degrades as resolution increases, with the 4K minimum being 47% lower than the average, suggesting memory pressure is causing frame drops.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Minimum?*

A: The highest average FPS is 177, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

*Q: Is this combo capable of 4K gaming in Minimum?*

A: At 4K with Low settings, the average FPS is 61, which is playable. However, at Ultra settings, the average drops to 30 FPS, which is not smooth.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640, which is 0.3% lower than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F and 0.3% higher than the AMD EPYC 4464P.

Q: What is the frame rate range for Medium settings at 2560x1440?

A: The Medium preset at 2560x1440 has a minimum of 74 FPS and a maximum of 100 FPS, with an average of 87 FPS.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor in this combo?

A: The data shows the GPU is the limiting factor, as frame rates drop significantly with resolution increases, while the CPU has a high percentile (93) and strong single-thread scores.

Q: What is the combo's rank out of all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 1895 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the best option for visual fidelity, delivering an average of 87 FPS, which is well above the threshold for smooth gameplay. The High preset at 114 FPS is also excellent if a higher refresh rate is preferred, but the Ultra preset does not sacrifice enough performance to warrant dropping down.

For 2560x1440, the High preset is the recommended choice, with an average of 73 FPS. This provides a good balance between visual quality and performance. The Medium preset at 87 FPS offers a more comfortable margin, but the High preset is still playable. The Ultra preset at 56 FPS is borderline, and the Low preset at 114 FPS is only recommended for competitive play where frame rate is paramount.

For 3840x2160, the Low preset is the only viable option, with an average of 61 FPS. The Medium preset at 47 FPS is playable but will have noticeable drops, as indicated by the minimum of 40 FPS. The High and Ultra presets are not recommended, as their averages of 39 and 30 FPS respectively will result in a poor experience. The data indicates that for a stable 60 FPS experience, users should stick to 1080p Ultra or 1440p High, and for 4K, they must accept Low settings. The Medium preset at 1440p offers the best compromise for frame time consistency, with a minimum of 74 FPS, making it a safe choice for users who prioritize smoothness over maximum detail.