Minimum

Minimum is a 2014 third-person shooter whose benchmark behavior on the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 combination reveals a clear hierarchy between resolution scaling and settings presets. The data shows a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, yet surprisingly responsive to CPU capabilities at 1080p, where frame rates exceed what many modern titles would deliver. This analysis examines the measured FPS rows to determine optimal configurations, the balance between components, and the practical limits of this pairing.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 achieves a rank of 107 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the top 3.6% of all configurations. This is a strong result, though not a top-tier one, suggesting that other pairings with more aggressive CPU or GPU variants can extract higher frame rates in this specific title.

Looking at the CPU alone, the Core Ultra 7 265 sits in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64640. Its nearest rivals show how tightly packed the mid-high desktop market is: the AMD EPYC 4464P scores 64823, a delta of -0.3%, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64438, a delta of 0.3%. The AMD EPYC 7343 and AMD EPYC 9124 are similarly close at 64202 and 65104, respectively. This indicates that the 265 is positioned in a performance cluster where small architectural differences matter more than raw core counts.

For the GPU, the RTX 4090 is in the 88th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 60347. Its nearest rivals are unexpected: the Intel Arc Pro A60 matches it at 60326 (0.0% delta), while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 trails at 60140 (0.3% delta). The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M leads by 2.5% at 61896, and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 trails by 2.9% at 58657. These deltas suggest that in synthetic benchmarks, the 4090’s massive specifications do not translate into an insurmountable lead over workstation-class competitors, but in Minimum’s real-world FPS data, the 4090’s dominance is clearer.

The rank of 107 means that roughly 2832 other combos outperform this pairing in Minimum, which is notable given the hardware involved. This implies that Minimum’s engine favors certain CPU-GPU combinations, possibly those with higher single-thread performance or specific memory configurations, and that the 265’s 20-core, 20-thread design is not fully leveraged by a game from 2014.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear picture of how settings affect performance. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 394 FPS, Medium 301 FPS, High 253 FPS, and Ultra 193 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium is a 93 FPS drop (23.6%), while Medium to High is a 48 FPS drop (15.9%), and High to Ultra is a 60 FPS drop (23.7%). For competitive play, Low is the clear choice, offering nearly double the frame rate of Ultra while presumably reducing visual clutter in a shooter.

At 1440p, the numbers scale down: Low delivers 254 FPS, Medium 194 FPS, High 163 FPS, and Ultra 124 FPS. The relative drops are similar to 1080p, indicating that the GPU is still not the primary bottleneck at this resolution. The Medium preset at 1440p, with an average of 194 FPS and a minimum of 165 FPS, offers a balanced experience for high-refresh-rate monitors without sacrificing too much visual fidelity.

At 4K, the picture changes dramatically. Low delivers 137 FPS, Medium 105 FPS, High 88 FPS, and Ultra 67 FPS. Here, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, as the 4090’s 24 GB of VRAM and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth are taxed by the higher pixel count. The Medium preset at 4K, with a minimum of 89 FPS and maximum of 120 FPS, is the best compromise for a smooth experience, as it stays above 60 FPS in all measured instances. Ultra at 4K drops to 67 FPS average, which may be acceptable for cinematic play but is not ideal for fast-paced action.

The data suggests that for maximum frame rates, the Low preset is optimal at any resolution. For a balance of visual quality and performance, the Medium preset is the sweet spot, particularly at 1440p where it delivers 194 FPS with a minimum of 165 FPS. At 4K, Medium is the only preset that consistently exceeds 60 FPS in the minimum frame rate, making it the recommended choice for that resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the bottleneck characteristics of this combo. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 394 at 1080p to 254 at 1440p (a 35.5% reduction) and then to 137 at 4K (a 46.1% reduction from 1440p). This steep decline indicates that the GPU is being pushed harder as resolution increases, but the absolute frame rates remain high, suggesting that the CPU is still feeding the GPU effectively.

At Medium settings, the scaling is similar: 301 FPS at 1080p, 194 FPS at 1440p (35.5% drop), and 105 FPS at 4K (45.9% drop from 1440p). The consistency of these percentages across presets suggests that the game’s rendering load scales predictably with pixel count, and that neither component is causing unexpected stalls.

At High settings, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 253 to 163 FPS (35.6%), and from 1440p to 4K is 163 to 88 FPS (46.0%). Ultra shows a similar pattern: 193 to 124 FPS (35.8%) and then 124 to 67 FPS (46.0%). This uniformity across all four presets strongly indicates that the limiting factor is the GPU’s pixel throughput, not the CPU’s ability to issue draw calls or process game logic.

The 4K to 1080p ratio is roughly 2.9x for Low (394/137) and 2.9x for Medium (301/105), while High is 2.9x (253/88) and Ultra is 2.9x (193/67). This near-perfect scaling with resolution suggests that the RTX 4090 is being utilized efficiently, but also that the game does not introduce additional CPU overhead at higher resolutions, which is typical for a 2014 title with simpler physics and AI.

The limiting component is clearly the GPU at 4K, given that even the lowest preset cannot break 137 FPS, while at 1080p the CPU is the more likely constraint, as the 4090 could theoretically push higher than 394 FPS if the game’s engine allowed it.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for competitive play at 1080p?

A: The Low preset delivers 394 FPS average at 1080p, which is the highest measured frame rate. This is 201 FPS higher than Ultra, making it the optimal choice for reducing input lag and maximizing refresh rate utilization.

Q: Can this combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K with maximum settings?

A: No. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 67, but there is no minimum FPS recorded for this preset. In contrast, the Medium preset at 4K has a minimum of 89 FPS and an average of 105 FPS, so it is the highest preset that reliably stays above 60 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640, which is 0.3% lower than the AMD EPYC 4464P (64823) and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64438). It also trails the AMD EPYC 9124 by 0.7% but leads the AMD EPYC 7343 by 0.7%.

Q: What is the frame time consistency at 1440p Medium?

A: The 1440p Medium preset shows an average FPS of 194, with a minimum of 165 and a maximum of 223. The 28 FPS spread between minimum and average indicates some frame time variance, but the minimum is still well above 144 Hz, making it suitable for high-refresh-rate displays.

Q: Does the GPU show a significant advantage over its nearest rivals in synthetic tests?

A: The RTX 4090’s average benchmark score of 60347 is essentially tied with the Intel Arc Pro A60 at 60326 (0.0% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 at 60140 (0.3% delta). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M by 2.5% but leads the AMD Radeon PRO V710 by 2.9%.

Q: How does the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 253 at 1080p to 163 at 1440p (a 35.6% reduction) and then to 88 at 4K (a 46.0% reduction from 1440p). This consistent scaling indicates a GPU-bound workload at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is the dominant component in this pairing, with a 24 GB GDDR6X memory pool on a 384-bit bus providing 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 2235 MHz with a boost clock of 2520 MHz, and the memory runs at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). The GPU has 16384 shading units, 512 texture mapping units, and 176 raster operation pipelines, along with 128 ray tracing cores and 512 tensor cores. Its peak FP32 performance is 82.58 TFLOPS, with a pixel rate of 443.5 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,290.2 GTexel/s.

In Minimum, the GPU’s role becomes apparent in the resolution scaling. At 1080p, the 4090 is not fully taxed, as evidenced by the 394 FPS at Low settings, which is likely close to the engine’s frame rate ceiling. As resolution increases to 1440p and then 4K, the GPU’s pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth become the limiting factors. The 4K Medium preset, with an average of 105 FPS and a minimum of 89 FPS, shows that the GPU can handle the higher resolution but with diminishing returns compared to lower presets.

The 24 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for Minimum, which is a 2014 title that likely uses less than 4 GB even at 4K Ultra. This means that the memory capacity is not a constraint, but the bandwidth and compute throughput are what drive the FPS differences across resolutions. The GPU’s 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs is consistent with its measured performance, but the synthetic benchmark scores from nearest rivals suggest that in other workloads, the 4090’s lead is not as pronounced as its specifications would imply.

The 4090’s end-of-life production status and launch MSRP of 1,599 USD position it as a high-end part, and its performance in Minimum confirms this, but the game’s age means that the GPU is never pushed to its limits except at 4K Ultra, where it still manages 67 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. It has a 30 MB shared L3 cache and a dual-channel DDR5 memory interface with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU’s TDP is 65 watts, and it is fabricated on a 3 nm process by TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 265 achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and a single-core score of 5960, indicating strong multi-threaded and single-threaded performance. Its PassMark multi-thread score is 49682, with single-thread at 4689. These scores place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64640.

In Minimum, the CPU’s role is most evident at 1080p Low, where the 394 FPS suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with draw calls faster than the engine can render. The 20 cores are not fully utilized by a 2014 game, which likely uses only a few threads, but the high boost clock of 5.30 GHz ensures that single-threaded performance is sufficient. The L3 cache of 30 MB is ample for the game’s data, and the DDR5 memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s is not a bottleneck.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks, such as the AMD EPYC 4464P and Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, show negligible performance differences, which suggests that swapping the 265 for one of these would have minimal impact on Minimum’s frame rates. The CPU’s role is to provide a stable foundation, and the data shows that it does so without becoming a limiting factor at any resolution or preset.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 394 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate in the entire dataset. Medium drops to 301 FPS with a minimum of 256 and a maximum of 347. High averages 253 FPS, and Ultra averages 193 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 201 FPS, indicating that the settings have a significant impact on performance at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 254 FPS, Medium 194 FPS (minimum 165, maximum 223), High 163 FPS, and Ultra 124 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 130 FPS, which is proportionally similar to 1080p. The Medium preset’s minimum of 165 FPS is notable, as it stays above 144 Hz, making it ideal for high-refresh-rate gaming.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 137 FPS, Medium 105 FPS (minimum 89, maximum 120), High 88 FPS, and Ultra 67 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 70 FPS, and the Medium preset’s minimum of 89 FPS is the only one that exceeds 60 FPS at this resolution. The data shows that 4K is the only resolution where the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck, as the FPS drops are more severe than the resolution scaling alone would predict.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset provides the most consistent frame times, with recorded minimums that are within acceptable ranges for smooth gameplay. The High and Ultra presets do not have recorded minimums, but their averages suggest they are less suitable for competitive play. The measured data confirms that this combo is capable of delivering high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, with 4K requiring a trade-off between visual quality and performance.