Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX paired with the AMD Radeon 8060S delivers a mid-pack performance tier for Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. With a combo rank of 1677 out of 2939 tested configurations, this pairing sits just above the median, offering playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p but struggling at 4K with higher presets. The data reflects a balanced system where the GPU becomes the primary constraint as resolution increases, while the CPU provides ample headroom across all tested scenarios.

FAQ

*Q: What is the overall ranking of this CPU-GPU combination in Minimum?*

A: The combo ranks 1677th out of 2939 tested combinations, placing it in the 57th percentile of all tested systems. This indicates a slightly above-average performer among the database’s measured configurations.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX has an average benchmark score of 63173, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-13790F (63080) and 0.7% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX (62738). It trails the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G by 0.2% (63331) and leads the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 by 0.5% (62839).

Q: What is the GPU’s performance percentile compared to all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 8060S sits in the 87th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 55757. Its closest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, scores 55698, a 0.1% difference, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 scores 54247, putting the Radeon 8060S 2.8% ahead.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the measured average FPS is 143, with a minimum of 122 and a maximum of 165. This provides a smooth experience for fast-paced third-person shooter gameplay.

Q: Is 4K gaming feasible with this combination?

A: At 3840x2160, only the Low preset achieves an average above 60 FPS (65 FPS). Medium averages 50 FPS, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra drops to 32 FPS. For consistent 60+ FPS at 4K, players must use Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU’s boost clock compare to its base clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, representing a 103.8% increase. This headroom allows significant single-thread performance when needed.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1677 out of 2939 tested combinations places it in the upper-middle tier of the database. This position indicates that while the system is not a top-tier performer, it outperforms a majority of tested configurations. The 2939 combos span a wide range of hardware, from entry-level to enthusiast, so ranking in the 57th percentile suggests this pairing handles Minimum competently but without exceptional headroom for demanding settings.

Breaking down the rank, the CPU’s synthetic performance is a strong contributor. With an average benchmark score of 63173, the Core Ultra 7 265HX lands in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outclasses most processors in the database. The GPU, however, is less dominant. The Radeon 8060S sits in the 87th percentile of all GPUs, which is still strong but indicates that the graphics card is the more limiting factor in this pairing.

The delta between CPU and GPU percentiles (93 vs 87) suggests a slight imbalance, where the CPU has more headroom than the GPU can utilize. This is evident in the measured FPS data, where higher resolutions and settings show diminishing returns. The combo’s rank reflects this: it performs well at lower resolutions where the CPU’s strength shines, but drops off as GPU load increases. Compared to the nearest rival combos, this system’s position is consistent with its component scores—neither overperforming nor underperforming relative to its parts.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 8060S is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, using the Strix Halo chip on a 4 nm process. It features 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output pipelines. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1295 MHz with a boost clock of 2900 MHz, a 124% increase that provides substantial dynamic performance scaling. Memory is system-shared, meaning the GPU draws from the CPU’s DDR5 memory pool rather than dedicated VRAM, with bandwidth dependent on the system configuration.

In Minimum, the GPU’s role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 187 FPS, but this drops to 120 FPS at High settings—a 35.8% reduction. The pattern continues at 1440p, where Low yields 121 FPS and High drops to 78 FPS (35.5% reduction). At 4K, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck: Low produces 65 FPS, while High falls to 42 FPS, a 35.4% reduction. This consistent percentage drop across resolutions indicates that settings scaling, not resolution alone, drives the GPU load.

The GPU’s 87th percentile ranking among all GPUs positions it near the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (0.1% slower) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 (2.8% slower). However, the Radeon 8060S lacks dedicated memory, relying on shared system memory, which can impact performance in texture-heavy scenes. The FP32 compute of 14.85 TFLOPS and texture rate of 464.0 GTexel/s suggest sufficient raw throughput for a game from 2014, but the shared memory architecture limits how much data can be fed to the GPU at high resolutions. The measured FPS data confirms this: 4K Ultra averages just 32 FPS, a 50.8% drop from 4K Low, showing that the GPU struggles with the combined load of high resolution and maxed settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system delivers strong results across all presets. Low settings produce an average of 187 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the entire dataset. Medium averages 143 FPS with a minimum of 122 and maximum of 165, while High averages 120 FPS. Ultra drops to 92 FPS, still comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 95 FPS, indicating that settings have a significant impact but even the most demanding preset remains playable.

At 2560x1440, performance scales down predictably. Low settings average 121 FPS, Medium averages 92 FPS (minimum 79, maximum 106), High averages 78 FPS, and Ultra averages 59 FPS. The 1440p Ultra result is notable—at 59 FPS, it falls just below the 60 FPS mark, meaning players seeking a locked 60 FPS experience must use High settings or lower. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 62 FPS, a smaller absolute gap than at 1080p but a similar relative reduction.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s limitations become apparent. Low settings average 65 FPS, which is the only 4K preset above 60 FPS. Medium averages 50 FPS with a minimum of 42 and maximum of 57, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS. The 4K Ultra result represents the worst measured performance, with a 82.9% drop from the 1080p Low peak. Across all resolutions, the Medium preset consistently provides the most balanced metrics, with recorded minimum and maximum values that indicate stable frame pacing. The 1080p Medium range (122-165 FPS) and 1440p Medium range (79-106 FPS) show narrower variance than other presets, suggesting Medium is the most predictable setting for competitive play.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 4K reveals how this combo distributes workload between CPU and GPU. At Low settings, moving from 1920x1080 (187 FPS) to 2560x1440 (121 FPS) results in a 35.3% drop. Moving further to 3840x2160 (65 FPS) from 1440p produces a 46.3% drop, and from 1080p to 4K the total reduction is 65.2%. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the CPU’s 20 cores and 20 threads provide ample processing power.

For Medium settings, the scaling is similar but slightly less severe in percentage terms. From 1080p (143 FPS) to 1440p (92 FPS) is a 35.7% drop, and from 1440p to 4K (50 FPS) is a 45.7% drop. The total 1080p-to-4K reduction is 65.0%. High settings show the same trend: 1080p (120 FPS) to 1440p (78 FPS) is a 35.0% drop, 1440p to 4K (42 FPS) is a 46.2% drop, and the total is 65.0%. Ultra settings follow suit with a 35.9% drop from 1080p (92 FPS) to 1440p (59 FPS), a 45.8% drop to 4K (32 FPS), and a 65.2% total reduction.

The consistency of these percentages—all hovering around 35% for the first step and 46% for the second—points to a uniform scaling factor tied to pixel count. From 1080p to 1440p, the pixel count increases by 77.8%, yet FPS drops by only ~35%. This suggests the CPU is partially masking the GPU load increase. From 1440p to 4K, the pixel count doubles (from 3.7 million to 8.3 million), and the ~46% FPS drop aligns more closely with pure GPU-bound scaling. The data indicates the system transitions from a CPU-influenced regime at 1080p to a GPU-limited regime at 4K, with 1440p serving as the crossover point where both components contribute meaningfully.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates at a base clock of 2.60 GHz and boosts to 5.30 GHz, with a 55 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 30 MB L3 cache. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, which the GPU shares for its memory pool.

In Minimum, the CPU’s role is primarily to feed the GPU and maintain frame pacing. The game’s 2014 release date means it does not stress modern multi-core processors heavily, and the 265HX’s 20 threads provide substantial headroom. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 40642 and single-core score of 5737 indicate strong both-threaded and single-threaded performance. The PassMark single-thread score of 4500 further confirms the CPU’s capability to handle the game’s logic and physics without becoming a limiting factor.

The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 63173, places it just ahead of the Intel Core i7-13790F (0.1% faster) and behind the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G (0.2% slower). This tight grouping suggests that any of these CPUs would yield similar results in a GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p Low, where the system achieves 187 FPS, the CPU is likely near its practical limit for this game, but the measured data shows no stutter or minimum FPS values below 122 at Medium settings, indicating consistent frame delivery. The boost clock of 5.30 GHz is particularly relevant for single-threaded game logic, and the measured FPS at 1080p High (120 FPS) demonstrates that the CPU can sustain high frame rates even when the GPU is less stressed.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1920x1080, all four presets deliver playable results, but Medium offers the best combination of visual fidelity and performance. The 143 FPS average with a 122 FPS minimum ensures smooth gameplay even during intense action sequences. High settings reduce the average to 120 FPS, which is still excellent, but Medium provides a 19.2% higher frame rate with minimal visual difference. Ultra at 92 FPS is acceptable for single-player but may dip below 90 FPS in busy scenes, making Medium the safer choice for competitive play.

At 2560x1440, High settings average 78 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold but leaves little headroom for demanding moments. Medium, with an average of 92 FPS and a minimum of 79 FPS, provides a more comfortable margin. The 59 FPS average at Ultra is technically playable but risks frequent drops below 60 FPS, which can be jarring in a shooter. For 1440p, Medium is the recommended preset, offering a 17.9% improvement over High while maintaining stable frame pacing.

For 3840x2160, the options are more limited. Low settings average 65 FPS, which is the only 4K preset that consistently exceeds 60 FPS. Medium averages 50 FPS, High averages 42 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS—all below the 60 FPS threshold. Players seeking a smooth 4K experience should use Low settings, accepting reduced visual quality for playable performance. Those prioritizing visuals over frame rate may choose Medium, but the 42 FPS minimum at this preset suggests potential stutter in fast-paced scenes. The data clearly shows that 4K gaming with this combo requires significant compromises, and 1440p Medium is the sweet spot for balancing visual quality and performance across the board.