Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 delivers a playable but constrained experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. Across the measured resolution and settings matrix, the combo shows a clear pattern: the RTX 2060 becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution climbs, while the Core Ultra 7 265 provides ample headroom at lower resolutions. This analysis draws exclusively from the measured FPS data and the hardware specifications provided.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all four settings presets, revealing a GPU-bound workload at higher resolutions. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 155 FPS at 1920x1080 to 100 FPS at 2560x1440, a 35% reduction, and then further to 54 FPS at 3840x2160, a 46% drop from 1440p. The total scaling from 1080p Low to 4K Low is a 65% loss in average FPS, which is substantial but not unexpected given the pixel count increase from roughly 2 million to 8.3 million pixels.

High settings show a similar trajectory: 100 FPS at 1080p, 64 FPS at 1440p, and 35 FPS at 4K. That is a 36% decrease from 1080p to 1440p, followed by a 45% decrease from 1440p to 4K. Medium settings produce 119 FPS at 1080p, 77 FPS at 1440p, and 41 FPS at 4K, with the same proportional pattern — a 35% drop to 1440p and a 47% drop to 4K. Ultra settings are the most punishing: 76 FPS at 1080p, 49 FPS at 1440p, and 26 FPS at 4K. Here the 1080p-to-1440p fall is 36%, and the 1440p-to-4K fall is 47%.

The consistency of these percentage drops across presets indicates that resolution scaling is almost purely a function of the GPU’s pixel throughput. The RTX 2060’s 1920 shading units and 48 ROPs, combined with its 336.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, are simply not enough to maintain high frame rates at 4K. At 1080p, the GPU is less stressed, and the CPU’s role becomes more prominent — the Core Ultra 7 265’s 20 cores and 20 threads, with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, can feed the GPU effectively. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo reaches 155 FPS, which is close to what the GPU can deliver without being limited by the CPU.

The most telling observation is the gap between Low and Ultra at each resolution. At 1080p, Low delivers 155 FPS while Ultra delivers 76 FPS — a 51% difference. At 1440p, the gap narrows slightly: 100 FPS versus 49 FPS, a 51% difference. At 4K, Low hits 54 FPS and Ultra drops to 26 FPS, again a 52% difference. This near-constant ratio suggests that the settings presets scale uniformly, with each step from Low to Medium to High to Ultra imposing a roughly 20-30% performance penalty. The RTX 2060’s 6 GB of GDDR6 memory is a fixed constraint, and the measured 4K Medium average of 41 FPS with a minimum of 35 FPS shows that even medium-quality settings at 4K push the hardware to its limits.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is a Turing-architecture part with a base clock of 1365 MHz and a boost clock of 1680 MHz. Its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory operates at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) across a 192-bit bus, yielding 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU has 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 80.64 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 201.6 GTexel/s. These specs place it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 15290. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (0% delta), AMD Radeon 680M (0.1% delta), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (0.6% delta), and AMD Radeon RX 7600 (0.8% delta) — all within a narrow performance band.

In Minimum, the GPU’s VRAM capacity and memory bandwidth are critical. The 6 GB frame buffer is adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the data shows a significant performance collapse. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 26, which is below the 30 FPS threshold often considered the minimum for playability. The 4K Medium result of 41 FPS with a minimum of 35 FPS suggests that the GPU is swapping or struggling with memory pressure. The RTX 2060’s 192-bit bus and 336 GB/s bandwidth are modest by modern standards, and the measured results confirm that 4K is not a viable option for this combo.

The GPU’s compute capabilities — 6.451 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.90 TFLOPS FP16 — are sufficient for a 2014 title, which was designed for much older hardware. The passmark DirectX 11 score of 110 and DirectX 12 score of 53 indicate that the GPU handles legacy APIs well, but the game’s engine likely relies on older rendering paths. The RTX 2060’s 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores are irrelevant for this title, as Minimum predates ray tracing and DLSS by several years. The GPU’s 58th percentile ranking relative to all GPUs means it sits in the mid-range, and the measured FPS data reflects that positioning.

The boost clock of 1680 MHz is the maximum sustained frequency under load, and the data shows that at 1080p Low, the GPU can push 155 FPS, which is a strong result for a mid-range card. However, at 4K Ultra, the same GPU falls to 26 FPS, a 83% reduction. This aligns with the pixel rate and texture rate figures: 80.64 GPixel/s means that at 4K (8.3 million pixels), the theoretical fill rate caps out at around 9.7 FPS if the GPU were solely limited by ROPs — but the measured 26 FPS at Ultra indicates that shading and memory bandwidth are also factors. The 201.6 GTexel/s texture rate is less of a constraint in a game from 2014, but the overall GPU load at 4K is clearly beyond the RTX 2060’s comfort zone.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a 30 MB shared L3 cache and 3 MB L2 per core. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, yielding 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Its passmark multithread score is 49682, and its single-thread score is 4689, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The average benchmark score is 64640, with nearest rivals including the AMD EPYC 4464P (-0.3% delta), Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (0.3% delta), AMD EPYC 7343 (0.7% delta), and AMD EPYC 9124 (-0.7% delta).

In Minimum, the CPU’s role is most evident at 1080p Low, where the combo hits 155 FPS. At this resolution and settings level, the GPU is not fully saturated, and the CPU’s high single-thread performance (5960 in Cinebench R23 single-core) ensures that frame times remain low. The 20 cores are overkill for a 2014 shooter, which likely uses only a few threads, but the boost clock of 5.30 GHz provides the raw speed needed for high FPS. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the average FPS is 155, which is likely near the game’s engine limit or the GPU’s capability, not a CPU bottleneck.

As resolution increases, the CPU’s influence diminishes. At 4K Low, the average FPS drops to 54, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 26. These numbers are far below what the CPU could deliver — even a weaker processor would produce similar results because the GPU is the limiting factor. The Core Ultra 7 265’s 20 threads and 30 MB L3 cache are irrelevant for a game that likely uses fewer than 8 threads. However, the CPU’s strong single-thread performance (4689 in passmark single-thread, 5960 in Cinebench R23 single-core) ensures that there is no CPU-induced stuttering at any resolution. The measured minimum FPS at 1440p Medium is 65 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it is 101 FPS, both of which are healthy and suggest consistent frame delivery.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s is also sufficient for this title. The game’s data set is small, and the 30 MB L3 cache can hold large portions of active data, reducing memory latency. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking versus all CPUs means it is a top-tier part, and in Minimum, it never becomes a bottleneck — the GPU is the clear limiting component at 1440p and 4K, while at 1080p the combo achieves frame rates that are competitive with much newer hardware. The Core Ultra 7 265’s launch MSRP is $394, and its benchmark scores (Cinebench R23 multicore 42216, passmark multithread 49682) indicate a strong all-around performer, but in this specific game, the GPU is the star — or the weak link, depending on resolution.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 155, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Is 4K gaming viable with the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and RTX 2060 in this game?

A: At 4K, the best average FPS is 54 on Low settings, while Ultra drops to 26 FPS. Medium settings yield 41 FPS with a minimum of 35 FPS. This is borderline playable only on Low or Medium, not a smooth experience.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 compare to its nearest rivals in raw GPU benchmarks?

A: The RTX 2060 has an average benchmark score of 15290. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580, scores 15283 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270 (0.1% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM scores 15199 (0.6% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 scores 15171 (0.8% delta). All are within 1% of each other.

Q: What is the CPU’s percentile ranking and how does it affect this game?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its high single-thread performance (5960 in Cinebench R23 single-core) ensures no CPU bottleneck in Minimum, as evidenced by the 155 FPS at 1080p Low.

Q: Which settings preset provides the most consistent frame pacing?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 shows a minimum FPS of 101 and a maximum of 137, giving a narrow band. At 2560x1440, Medium produces a minimum of 65 and maximum of 88, also consistent. Low and High presets lack minimum/maximum data in the measurements.

Q: Does the RTX 2060’s VRAM capacity cause issues at 4K?

A: The RTX 2060 has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory. At 4K Medium, the average FPS is 41 with a minimum of 35, suggesting memory pressure but not a hard failure. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 26 FPS, likely due to both VRAM capacity and compute limits.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks 2292 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the lower 22% of all combinations, which is a poor showing given the CPU’s strength. The rank is dragged down by the GPU’s mid-range performance — the RTX 2060 sits in the 58th percentile of all GPUs, and its 15290 average benchmark score is modest. The CPU, by contrast, is in the 93rd percentile, so the combo’s ranking reflects the GPU’s limitations rather than any CPU deficiency.

The combo’s position at 2292 out of 2939 means that roughly 78% of tested combinations deliver higher average FPS in this game. This is expected, as the RTX 2060 is an end-of-life product from 2019, while the CPU was released in 2025. The GPU’s nearest rivals — GTX 580, Radeon 680M, RTX 3050 OEM, and RX 7600 — all have similar average scores, so any of those GPUs paired with this CPU would likely produce a similar rank. The CPU’s 20 cores provide no advantage in a game that is GPU-bound at higher resolutions, but at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 155 FPS, which is competitive with many newer mid-range GPUs.

The rank of 2292 is below the median, but the data shows that this is not a poorly balanced pairing for 1080p gaming. At 1080p Medium, the combo delivers 119 FPS, and at 1080p High, it delivers 100 FPS — both are playable. The rank worsens at higher resolutions, but the combo’s overall standing is determined by the aggregate of all measured settings, which included 4K results that pull the average down. The CPU’s high percentile (93%) versus the GPU’s lower percentile (58%) creates an imbalance, but for a 2014 game, the GPU is the more important component. A stronger GPU, such as one in the 90th percentile, would push this combo significantly higher in the rankings, but with the RTX 2060, the 2292 rank is the outcome.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance: 119 average FPS, with a minimum of 101 and a maximum of 137. This ensures smooth gameplay with no dips below 100 FPS. High settings at 1080p deliver 100 FPS, which is also playable, but Medium provides a 19% higher average with likely similar visual fidelity for a 2014 title. Low settings at 1080p hit 155 FPS, but the visual downgrade is unnecessary given that Medium is already well above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is again the sweet spot, producing 77 average FPS with a minimum of 65 and a maximum of 88. This is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play, and the minimum of 65 FPS means no noticeable stuttering. High settings at 1440p drop to 64 FPS, which is borderline, and Low settings hit 100 FPS but sacrifice too much visual detail. Ultra at 1440p is not recommended, as it falls to 49 FPS, which is below the ideal range for a fast-paced third-person shooter. The recommendation is to use Medium at 1440p for a consistent experience.

At 3840x2160, no preset delivers ideal performance. Low settings achieve 54 FPS, which is playable but not smooth, while Medium produces 41 FPS with a minimum of 35 — this is marginal. High drops to 35 FPS, and Ultra falls to 26 FPS, which is not recommended for active gameplay. The data suggests that 4K is only viable on Low settings, and even then, the 54 FPS average is below what many players would consider comfortable. For this combo, the best experience is at 1080p Medium or 1440p Medium, where the frame rates are high and consistent. If resolution is a priority, 4K Low is the only option, but the visual quality trade-off is severe. The measured minimum FPS values for Medium at 1080p and 1440p (101 and 65, respectively) indicate that this preset offers the most stable frame pacing, which is crucial for a shooter where reaction time matters.