Minimum

Minimum, the 2014 third-person shooter, is a demanding title that scales heavily with GPU load, and the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti produces a playable experience only at specific settings and resolutions. The measured data shows that this pairing is firmly GPU-limited across all tested configurations, with the CPU's considerable headroom (20 cores, 5.30 GHz boost) never becoming the bottleneck. The GTX 1660 Ti, a 2019 GPU that sits at the 41st percentile of all tested graphics cards, struggles to maintain fluid frame rates at higher resolutions, but the combo can deliver a solid 60+ FPS experience at 1080p with the right preset. The data indicates a clear hierarchy: for a smooth experience, users must prioritize resolution over visual fidelity, as the GPU's raw throughput is the primary constraint.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is sharp and consistent, revealing the GTX 1660 Ti as the definitive limiting component. At the High preset, the average frame rate falls from 84 FPS at 1920x1080 to 54 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 30 FPS, and then plummets to 29 FPS at 3840x2160. This trajectory shows that the GPU's 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 5.437 TFLOPS of compute power are simply insufficient for the pixel throughput demanded at 4K. The scaling from 1440p to 4K represents a 46% drop in performance, which is a far steeper decline than the 36% drop observed from 1080p to 1440p, indicating that the GPU is hitting a memory bandwidth or fill-rate wall as resolution increases.

This behavior is typical of a system where the graphics card is saturated. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265, with its 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, is not the constraining factor here. If the CPU were the limit, we would expect to see frame rates plateau or become more consistent across resolutions, but instead they scale predictably with pixel count. The Low preset data reinforces this: 131 FPS at 1080p drops to 84 FPS at 1440p and 45 FPS at 4K. Even at the lowest settings, the 4K resolution proves too demanding for the GTX 1660 Ti, which falls below the 60 FPS threshold that is generally considered the baseline for smooth gameplay in a third-person shooter.

The implication is clear: for this specific combo, resolution is the primary lever for performance. Users targeting 4K will be limited to an average of 45 FPS on Low settings, which is playable but not ideal for a fast-paced shooter. The sweet spot for this pairing is 1920x1080, where the GPU has enough headroom to push higher frame rates across all presets. The data suggests that the CPU's performance headroom is never fully utilized, as even the most demanding 4K Ultra setting (22 FPS) is far below what the Core Ultra 7 265 could theoretically feed to a more powerful GPU.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Minimum with this CPU and GPU combo?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combo consistently achieves playable frame rates across all presets. At 1080p, the average FPS ranges from 64 on Ultra to 131 on Low, whereas 1440p drops below 60 FPS on the High and Ultra presets, and 4K fails to reach 60 FPS even on Low settings.

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

A: Yes, but only at reduced settings. The measured data at 3840x2160 shows an average of 45 FPS on Low, 35 FPS on Medium, 29 FPS on High, and 22 FPS on Ultra. While the Low preset is technically playable, the performance is marginal and does not provide the smooth experience most players expect from a shooter.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score of 7723 places it slightly above the AMD Radeon 540 (7673, a 0.7% difference) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580, a 1.9% difference). It is also ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557) and Intel Arc A310 (7550) by about 2.2% and 2.3%, respectively. These are marginal differences, suggesting the GTX 1660 Ti performs in a tightly contested tier of entry-level graphics cards.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 a bottleneck for the GTX 1660 Ti in this game?

A: No. The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU's synthetic scores (e.g., 42,216 in Cinebench R23 multicore) are far higher than what is needed to drive a GPU of this class. The consistent FPS drops with increasing resolution are characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, not a CPU limitation.

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

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 131 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 64 FPS. This represents a 67 FPS difference, or a 51% reduction in performance when moving to the highest visual quality settings. The Medium preset sits in between at 100 FPS, offering a balanced middle ground.

Q: How does the CPU's core count relate to this game's performance?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265 has 20 cores and 20 threads. While modern games can utilize multiple cores, the data here shows that the game's frame rate is not tied to core count. The FPS is directly correlated with GPU load and resolution, indicating that the CPU's 20 cores provide ample processing power for the game's logic and physics, leaving the GPU as the sole performance determinant.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is the recommended configuration. The data shows an average of 100 FPS at this setting, with a minimum of 85 FPS and a maximum of 115 FPS. This provides a smooth, responsive experience well above the 60 FPS target, while still offering a significant visual upgrade over the Low preset. The 100 FPS average gives enough headroom to ensure that drops in intense combat scenarios are unlikely to fall below the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset yields an average of 65 FPS (min 55, max 74), which is playable but with less margin for error. This could be a viable option for users with a 1440p monitor who are willing to accept slightly lower frame rates. However, the High preset at 1440p (54 FPS) is not recommended, as it falls below the 60 FPS target and may result in noticeable stuttering during fast-paced action. For 4K gaming, the Low preset (45 FPS) is the only configuration that avoids dropping into the 20-30 FPS range, but the experience is still sub-optimal.

The data strongly suggests that the Ultra preset is not a viable option for this combo. At 1080p, it achieves 64 FPS, which is passable, but at 1440p it drops to 41 FPS and at 4K to 22 FPS, making the game nearly unplayable at higher resolutions. The jump from Medium to Ultra at 1080p results in a 36% performance hit, which is a steep price to pay for marginal visual improvements, especially given the GPU's age and performance tier. Users should prioritize frame rate stability over maximum visual quality with this hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the GTX 1660 Ti delivers its best performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 131 FPS, which is exceptionally smooth for a shooter. The Medium preset averages 100 FPS, with a minimum of 85 FPS and a maximum of 115 FPS, providing a solid experience with improved visuals. The High preset drops to an average of 84 FPS, which is still playable. The Ultra preset is the weakest at this resolution, averaging 64 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold but may feel less consistent during heavy scenes.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades significantly. The Low preset averages 84 FPS, which is still respectable. The Medium preset averages 65 FPS (min 55, max 74), offering a playable experience near the 60 FPS mark. The High preset averages 54 FPS, which is below the ideal threshold. The Ultra preset falls to an average of 41 FPS, which is noticeably less smooth. The data shows a clear pattern of diminishing returns as resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is overwhelmed. The Low preset averages 45 FPS, which is the only setting that approaches playability. The Medium preset averages 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS, which would result in a choppy experience. The High preset averages 29 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 22 FPS, both of which are effectively unplayable for a fast-paced shooter. This resolution should be avoided unless the user is willing to tolerate significantly reduced frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti combination ranks 2525th out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the 14th percentile of all tested systems, indicating that it performs worse than the vast majority of configurations tested for this game. This low ranking is primarily driven by the GTX 1660 Ti, which is an older, entry-level GPU that sits at the 41st percentile of all GPUs. The CPU, on the other hand, is a high-end processor that ranks at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs.

The disparity between the CPU's high percentile and the GPU's low percentile highlights the unbalanced nature of this pairing. The Core Ultra 7 265 is capable of supporting a much more powerful graphics card, but it is held back by the GTX 1660 Ti's limited performance. This ranking suggests that users with this CPU would see a massive improvement in Minimum by upgrading the GPU, as the CPU's headroom is largely untapped. The combo's low ranking is a direct reflection of the GPU's age and performance class, not a deficiency in the CPU.

The data shows that this combo is not competitive with most modern systems for this game. The 2525th rank out of 2939 combos places it in the bottom 15% of all tested configurations. This is a clear indication that the GPU is the weak link, and that the system's overall gaming performance is far below what the CPU could potentially deliver. For users seeking a better experience, the priority should be on replacing the graphics card.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, running at a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. In synthetic benchmarks, it demonstrates exceptional multi-threaded performance, scoring 42,216 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 5,960 in single-core. These scores place it at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating it is a top-tier processor for productivity and gaming workloads. Its 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth provide ample data throughput for any application.

However, in the context of Minimum with the GTX 1660 Ti, the CPU's role is largely secondary. The measured FPS data shows that performance scales directly with resolution and settings, which is a hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost clock are more than sufficient to handle the game's physics and game logic, but the frame rate is ultimately dictated by the GPU's ability to render frames. The data does not show any evidence of CPU bottlenecking, as the frame rates do not plateau or become inconsistent in a way that would indicate processor limitations.

The CPU's high single-thread performance (5,960 in Cinebench R23) is particularly relevant for gaming, as many games still rely on single-threaded performance. This ensures that the CPU will not be a limiting factor even in scenarios with complex game logic. The 20 cores provide future-proofing for more demanding titles, but for Minimum, the CPU's performance is far beyond what is required. The bottleneck is unequivocally the GPU, and the CPU's capabilities are effectively wasted in this configuration, as it could easily support a much faster graphics card.