Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT delivers a playable, if not flawless, experience in Minimum across most settings, though 4K Ultra remains out of reach. The data indicates a system that scales predictably with resolution and settings, highlighting the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions while the CPU provides ample headroom at 1080p. This combination ranks in the 62nd percentile (1828 out of 2939) of tested combos for this title, placing it in the upper-middle tier of the database.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, which is typical for a game of this era. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 179 FPS, which drops to 115 FPS at 1440p and further to 62 FPS at 4K. This represents a 36% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a 46% reduction from 1440p to 4K at Low settings. The scaling is steep, indicating that the RX 7600 XT’s 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 128-bit bus are becoming limiting factors as pixel count rises.

Moving to High settings, the trend continues but with a different slope. The 1080p High average of 115 FPS drops to 74 FPS at 1440p (a 36% decrease) and then to 40 FPS at 4K (a 46% decrease from 1440p). The percentage drops are nearly identical between Low and High, suggesting that the game’s engine scales resolution and quality settings somewhat independently. However, the absolute FPS numbers at 4K are telling: 62 FPS on Low versus 40 FPS on High. This 22 FPS gap shows that while resolution is a major factor, the quality preset still exerts significant pressure on the rendering pipeline.

The most revealing data point is the comparison of 4K Ultra (30 FPS) to 4K Low (62 FPS). This 32 FPS difference indicates that the Ultra preset imposes a heavy burden on the GPU’s shading units and ROPs. The RX 7600 XT has 2048 shading units and 64 ROPs, and at 4K Ultra, these are clearly saturated, dropping the frame rate to the edge of playability. The scaling from Medium to Ultra at 4K (48 to 30 FPS) is a 38% performance hit, which is substantial. In contrast, the scaling from 1080p Medium to 1080p Ultra (137 to 88 FPS) is a 36% hit, showing that the relative cost of Ultra settings is consistent across resolutions, but the absolute frame rates at 4K simply do not have enough headroom to absorb it.

Overall, the resolution scaling suggests that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming. At 1440p, the measured averages of 56 FPS on Ultra and 88 FPS on Medium indicate a viable experience, while 4K is only playable on Low settings, where the 62 FPS average is acceptable but far from ideal.

FAQ

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

A: The highest recorded average is 179 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with this CPU and GPU combination?

A: At 4K, the combo hits 62 FPS on Low and 48 FPS on Medium, but drops to 40 FPS on High and 30 FPS on Ultra. Low is playable, but higher presets fall below the 60 FPS threshold.

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

A: The combo ranks 1828 out of 2939 tested combos, placing it in the 62nd percentile of all systems tested for Minimum.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p and 4K on High settings?

A: The average FPS drops from 115 FPS at 1920x1080 to 40 FPS at 3840x2160 on High settings, a 65% reduction in frame rate.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU appear to be the limiting factor at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low, the 179 FPS average suggests the CPU is keeping pace, but the GPU is likely the limiting factor since the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has strong multi-core performance (42216 in Cinebench R23 multi-core).

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for Medium settings at 1440p?

A: The minimum FPS for Medium settings at 2560x1440 is 75 FPS, with an average of 88 FPS and a maximum of 101 FPS.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is the central component in determining this game’s frame rates, particularly at higher resolutions. The GPU’s 16 GB of GDDR6 memory is a notable feature, though the 128-bit bus width and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are modest by modern standards. In Minimum, these specifications translate to the observed performance ceiling. The GPU’s boost clock of 2755 MHz and game clock of 2470 MHz provide the raw compute throughput, but the data shows that the memory subsystem becomes a constraint at 4K.

The GPU’s benchmark scores provide context for its in-game performance. Its Passmark G3D score of 17132 places it at the 60th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (deltaPct 0.3%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (deltaPct -0.7%). This indicates that the RX 7600 XT is positioned competitively against older high-end cards and newer mid-range options. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2348 reinforces that this is a mid-range part, not a flagship.

The 16 GB VRAM capacity is double what many cards in this class offer, and while Minimum may not require it at 1080p or 1440p, it is a forward-looking feature. The measured FPS data does not show any VRAM-related stutters, but the min FPS figures for Medium settings (116 FPS at 1080p, 75 FPS at 1440p, 40 FPS at 4K) suggest that frame pacing is consistent, and the GPU is not spilling over into system memory. The FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS is sufficient for this 2014 title, but the game’s engine still scales heavily with resolution, as evidenced by the 30 FPS average at 4K Ultra.

The GPU’s role is best summarized by its performance at 4K. The gap between Low (62 FPS) and Ultra (30 FPS) is a 32 FPS spread, which is directly attributable to the GPU’s shading units and ROPs being overwhelmed. At 1080p, the GPU is less stressed, but the 179 FPS Low average still represents a ceiling set by the RX 7600 XT, not the CPU. This is a GPU-bound scenario across most settings, with the CPU only becoming relevant at the lowest resolution and quality settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT achieves a rank of 1828 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places the system in the 62nd percentile, meaning it outperforms 62% of all tested configurations but is bested by the top 38%. This is a solid mid-tier placement, but it is not exceptional, reflecting the GPU’s mid-range status more than the CPU’s high-end positioning.

The rank is determined by the measured FPS across all resolution and settings combinations. Given the CPU’s strong benchmark scores (93rd percentile vs all CPUs), it is clear that the rank is held back by the GPU. The RX 7600 XT’s 60th percentile ranking among GPUs aligns closely with the combo’s 62nd percentile in-game rank. This correlation suggests that the game is predominantly GPU-bound, and the CPU’s potential is not fully utilized in most scenarios.

Within the context of rival components, the CPU’s nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4464P (deltaPct -0.3%) and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (deltaPct 0.3%). These are server and identical-spec parts, respectively, indicating that the 265’s gaming performance is consistent with its synthetic benchmarks. The GPU’s nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (deltaPct 0.3%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (deltaPct -0.7%), are older or higher-tier parts, showing that the RX 7600 XT competes with hardware from different generations.

The 1828 rank is not a poor showing, but it does highlight the imbalance of the combo. A stronger GPU would likely push this rank significantly higher, as the CPU has demonstrated headroom in its 1080p Low results. The data indicates that this pairing is logical for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where the rank is acceptable, but it will struggle to compete with top-tier combos at 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Its benchmark results are impressive, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and a single-core score of 5960, placing it at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. In Minimum, this CPU provides a strong foundation, but the measured FPS data suggests it is rarely the bottleneck.

At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 179 FPS. This is the highest measured average, and it indicates that the CPU can feed the GPU effectively at lower resolutions. The Passmark single-thread score of 4689 and the Cinebench R15 single-core score of 600 show strong per-core performance, which is critical for a third-person shooter like Minimum that may not be heavily multi-threaded. The CPU’s 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache help reduce latency, which is beneficial for frame pacing.

However, the CPU’s role diminishes as resolution increases. At 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 30 FPS, and this is clearly a GPU limitation. The CPU’s 20 cores are mostly idle at this point, as the game’s rendering load is transferred entirely to the RX 7600 XT. The data shows that the CPU’s performance is sufficient to avoid bottlenecking even at 1080p High (115 FPS), but the GPU’s ceiling is reached well before the CPU’s.

The CPU’s memory support for DDR5 with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s also plays a role. While the GPU has its own memory, the system memory bandwidth can affect game loading and asset streaming. The measured min FPS values (e.g., 116 FPS at 1080p Medium) do not show any significant dips that would indicate CPU cache or memory issues. In summary, the CPU is a capable partner that provides a stable platform, but it is not the limiting factor in this game; the data shows the GPU is the primary constraint across all resolutions above 1080p Low.

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 combo delivers its best results. The Low preset averages 179 FPS, which is excellent for fast-paced gameplay. Medium lowers this to 137 FPS with a min of 116 FPS and a max of 157 FPS, showing solid frame consistency. High drops to 115 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 88 FPS. All 1080p presets are well above the 60 FPS threshold, and even Ultra maintains a high average.

At 2560x1440, the performance decreases noticeably. Low averages 115 FPS, which is still very playable. Medium averages 88 FPS with a min of 75 FPS and max of 101 FPS, indicating that frame dips are kept to a minimum. High averages 74 FPS, which is acceptable, but Ultra averages 56 FPS, dipping below the 60 FPS mark. This makes Ultra the first preset where the experience becomes less smooth at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly taxed. Low averages 62 FPS, which is just above the playable threshold. Medium averages 48 FPS with a min of 40 FPS and max of 55 FPS, showing that the game struggles to maintain consistency. High averages 40 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS, which is borderline unplayable for a third-person shooter. The data shows a consistent progression: each settings tier at a given resolution costs roughly 10-25% of the frame rate.

The min and max FPS data is only available for Medium settings. At 1080p, the spread between min (116) and max (157) is 41 FPS, which is a wide range but still maintains a high floor. At 1440p, the spread narrows to 26 FPS (75 to 101), and at 4K, it narrows further to 15 FPS (40 to 55). This indicates that as the GPU becomes more saturated, frame times become more consistent, but the overall performance drops.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution.

For 1080p gaming, the Ultra preset at 88 FPS is the recommended choice. It provides the highest visual quality while maintaining a frame rate that is well above 60 FPS. If a higher refresh rate display is used, the High preset at 115 FPS is a strong alternative, sacrificing some visual fidelity for a 27 FPS gain. The Low preset at 179 FPS is only necessary for competitive play where maximum frame rate is paramount.

For 1440p gaming, the Medium preset at 88 FPS offers the best balance between visual quality and performance. The min FPS of 75 FPS ensures that the experience remains smooth even during intense scenes. The High preset at 74 FPS is also viable, but it is closer to the 60 FPS threshold, and the Ultra preset at 56 FPS should be avoided as it will result in noticeable stutter. The Low preset at 115 FPS is an option for players who prioritize frame rate over graphics, but Medium is the sweet spot.

For 4K gaming, the only playable option is the Low preset at 62 FPS. The Medium preset at 48 FPS is below the 60 FPS target and will feel less responsive. High and Ultra are not recommended, as 40 FPS and 30 FPS respectively are too low for a smooth experience in a third-person shooter. Players with a 4K display should either accept Low settings or consider lowering the resolution to 1440p to unlock higher quality presets.

In summary, the data recommends: 1080p Ultra for the best experience, 1440p Medium for the best balance, and 4K Low for playability. The combo is clearly best suited for 1080p and 1440p, where it can deliver high-quality visuals with high frame rates.