Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT combination delivers a highly capable experience in Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014. The measured frame rates across three resolutions and four quality presets show a system that is clearly GPU-limited at higher settings but possesses enough headroom to push very high refresh rates at 1080p. This analysis breaks down the performance data, scaling characteristics, and the individual roles of the processor and graphics card.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent, confirming that the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 179 FPS at 1920x1080 to 115 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 64 FPS. Moving to 3840x2160, the average drops further to 62 FPS, which is a 65% decrease from the 1080p figure. This pattern indicates that pixel throughput, not CPU processing, is the limiting factor as resolution increases.

The scaling is even more dramatic at Low settings, where the 1080p average of 278 FPS drops to 179 FPS at 1440p and then to 97 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1440p and 4K at Low settings is 82 FPS, highlighting how the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are taxed by the sheer number of pixels. At Medium settings, the averages are 213 FPS, 137 FPS, and 74 FPS for 1080p, 1440p, and 4K respectively, showing a consistent 35-45% performance hit with each step up in resolution.

Ultra settings produce the lowest frame rates across the board, yet the scaling remains linear. The 136 FPS average at 1080p falls to 88 FPS at 1440p and bottoms out at 47 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the only configuration in the dataset that dips below the 60 FPS threshold, suggesting that this preset is too demanding for smooth gameplay at maximum resolution. The data clearly shows that 1080p and 1440p are the sweet spots for this combo, with 4K reserved for High or Low settings if playable frame rates are the priority.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark data provides a clear hierarchy for optimizing the visual experience. At 1920x1080, the High preset achieves 179 FPS, which is more than sufficient for high-refresh-rate monitors. The jump to Ultra yields 136 FPS, a 24% performance penalty for what is likely a marginal visual improvement in a 2014 title. The Medium preset at 213 FPS is the best choice for competitive play, as it offers a 34 FPS advantage over High while still maintaining reasonable visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the High preset delivers 115 FPS, which is ideal for 120Hz displays. The Ultra preset drops to 88 FPS, still playable but with a noticeable reduction in smoothness. The Medium preset at 137 FPS is the optimal balance for 1440p, providing a 22 FPS boost over High without sacrificing too much in terms of graphical detail. Low settings at 179 FPS are only recommended for esports-style play where maximum frame rates are paramount.

For 3840x2160, the High preset at 62 FPS is the only option that stays above the 60 FPS line. The Medium preset at 74 FPS is also viable, though the 12 FPS difference between Medium and High suggests that High is the better choice for visual quality. Ultra at 47 FPS is not recommended for 4K, as the frame rate falls below the standard for smooth gameplay. Low settings at 97 FPS are surprisingly effective at 4K, making them the best choice for players who prioritize frame rate over visual detail at this resolution.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is the dominant component in this pairing, as evidenced by the resolution scaling data. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s. This memory configuration is sufficient for 4K textures, as the High preset at 3840x2160 maintains a 62 FPS average without apparent stuttering. The boost clock of 2970 MHz and game clock of 2400 MHz are high for a RDNA 4.0 architecture, contributing to the card's ability to handle the pixel workload.

The GPU's 4096 shading units and 128 ROPs are directly responsible for the frame rate differences between presets. At 1080p Low, the card achieves 278 FPS, demonstrating that its raw compute power is not the limiting factor at lower resolutions. However, at 4K Ultra, the 47 FPS average indicates that the GPU is fully saturated, with the 760.3 GTexel/s texture rate and 380.2 GPixel/s pixel rate being overwhelmed by the combination of high resolution and maximum detail settings.

The Radeon RX 9070 XT's 48.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is a strong figure for a 2025 card, but the data shows that Minimum's engine does not scale perfectly with raw compute. The 62 FPS at 4K High versus 74 FPS at 4K Medium suggests that memory bandwidth and cache efficiency play a larger role than raw shader throughput. The 16 GB VRAM is never fully utilized in this dataset, as even the most demanding preset at 4K does not cause a significant frame rate drop due to memory limitations.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT combination ranks 885th out of 3712 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the top 24% of all configurations, which is a respectable position for a mid-to-high-end desktop setup. The rank reflects the system's ability to maintain high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, though the 4K Ultra result drags down its overall standing.

In comparison to other combos, this pairing outperforms the majority of systems tested, likely due to the combination of a strong 20-core CPU and a capable GPU. The rank of 885 suggests that there are many systems with more powerful GPUs or newer architectures that achieve higher frame rates, particularly at 4K. However, the data shows that this combo is well-balanced for 1440p gaming, as the CPU and GPU work together without significant bottlenecks at that resolution.

The percentile ranking for the CPU is 93, indicating that the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is in the top 7% of all processors tested. The GPU's percentile is 55, which is closer to the median, suggesting that the graphics card is the weaker link in this pairing. This asymmetry explains why the combo rank is not higher, as the CPU has more headroom than the GPU, especially at higher resolutions where the GPU's limitations become more apparent.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. With a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, it provides ample single-thread performance for gaming. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5960 confirms that the CPU is not a bottleneck in Minimum, as even the 1080p Low preset at 278 FPS does not appear to be limited by processor throughput.

The CPU's 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB L2 cache per core are well-suited for game logic and draw call processing. In a title from 2014, the engine's single-threaded nature means that the boost clock of 5.30 GHz is more important than the core count. The PassMark single-thread score of 4689 and the Cinebench R15 single-core score of 600 both indicate strong per-core performance, which is critical for maintaining high frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios.

The multi-threaded capabilities are also substantial, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and a PassMark multi-thread score of 49682. However, the data shows that Minimum does not heavily utilize multiple cores, as the frame rates at 1080p Low are more than double those at 4K Low. This suggests that the GPU is the primary constraint, and the CPU's 20 threads are largely underutilized in this game. The 65W TDP and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth are adequate for the game's requirements, though the DDR5 memory support is not fully leveraged in this older title.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 with High settings achieves 115 FPS, which is the best balance of visual quality and performance. At 1920x1080, High settings reach 179 FPS, but the visual upgrade to 1440p is worth the 64 FPS drop for most players.

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

A: Yes, but with limitations. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the average frame rate is 62 FPS, which is playable. The Low preset at 97 FPS is smoother, while the Ultra preset at 47 FPS is not recommended for consistent gameplay.

Q: How much performance is lost when switching from Low to Ultra at 1080p?

A: The average frame rate drops from 278 FPS at Low to 136 FPS at Ultra at 1920x1080. This is a 51% reduction in performance, making the Ultra preset significantly more demanding on the GPU.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more limiting in this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as shown by the 65% frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings. The CPU's single-thread performance is sufficient for even the highest frame rates observed in the data.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Medium and High at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Medium settings average 137 FPS while High settings average 115 FPS. The 22 FPS difference indicates that High is a more demanding preset, but both are well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: Does the 16 GB of VRAM provide any benefit in this game?

A: The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory is more than sufficient for Minimum, as even the 4K Ultra preset does not show signs of memory-related stuttering. The 644.6 GB/s bandwidth is the more critical factor, as it helps maintain frame rates at higher resolutions.