Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX paired with the AMD Radeon 880M is a mobile configuration that places a high-end 20-core processor alongside an integrated GPU. In Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014, this combination produces playable frame rates only at lower resolutions and settings. The benchmark data reveals a system where the CPU's substantial capabilities are largely held back by the integrated graphics solution, resulting in a combination rank of 2866 out of 2939 tested combos.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo achieves in Minimum?*

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 79, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the measured data that approaches high-refresh-rate playability.

*Q: Can this combo handle 4K resolution in Minimum?*

A: At 3840x2160, the average frame rates range from 14 FPS on Ultra settings to 28 FPS on Low settings. The Medium preset at 4K shows an average of 21 FPS, with minimum and maximum values of 18 and 24 FPS respectively, indicating that 4K is not a viable gaming resolution for this title with this hardware.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX has an average benchmark score of 63173, placing it 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13790F and 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX. It trails the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G by 0.2% and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 by 0.5%.

Q: What is the performance delta between the GPU and its closest competitor?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M has an average benchmark score of 8436. It is 0.1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX and 1.3% faster than the AMD Radeon R9 M375X, but it is 0.3% slower than both the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 and the AMD Radeon HD 8870M.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 79 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers an average of 39 FPS. This represents a 40 FPS drop, or roughly a 51% reduction in average frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

Q: Does the data show a consistent pattern in minimum frame rates across resolutions?

A: The only settings with recorded minimum and maximum FPS values are the Medium presets. At 1080p, the range is 52 to 70 FPS; at 1440p, it is 33 to 45 FPS; and at 4K, it is 18 to 24 FPS. This data suggests that the frame time variance scales with resolution, with tighter ranges at lower resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a TDP of 55 W. This processor sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, demonstrating that its raw computational power is substantial. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

In the context of Minimum, the CPU's role appears to be providing ample headroom that the integrated GPU cannot utilize. The CPU's multi-threaded performance is strong, as evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 40642 and a Passmark multi-thread score of 47985. Single-thread performance is also respectable, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5737 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4500. Given that Minimum is a title from 2014, its engine is likely not designed to fully leverage 20 cores, but the high boost clock of 5.30 GHz ensures that the primary game thread has ample processing power available.

The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this configuration. The measured FPS values are consistently low at higher resolutions, which points to the GPU being the bottleneck. The CPU's memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and support for DDR5 memory provide a fast data path, but the integrated GPU's "System Shared" memory architecture relies on this same bandwidth, potentially creating contention. The data shows that the CPU's percentile ranking of 93 is in stark contrast to the GPU's percentile ranking of 43, illustrating a significant capability mismatch that manifests in the game's frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data for this combo in Minimum provides clear guidance on which settings presets are viable. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 79 FPS, which is the only configuration that provides a smooth experience suitable for fast-paced gameplay. The Medium preset at 1080p yields an average of 61 FPS, with a minimum of 52 FPS, which remains playable but introduces more variance. High settings at 1080p drop to an average of 51 FPS, while Ultra falls to 39 FPS.

For a balanced experience, the Medium preset at 1080p appears to be the best option. It offers a 61 FPS average while providing improved visual quality over Low, and the minimum FPS of 52 suggests that frame pacing remains acceptable. The Low preset at 1080p is the only way to achieve frame rates near 80 FPS, which would be preferable for competitive play. The Ultra preset at any resolution is not recommended, as even at 1080p it only manages an average of 39 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay in a shooter.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset produces an average of 51 FPS, which is borderline playable, but the Medium preset drops to 39 FPS. At 3840x2160, all presets fail to reach 30 FPS, with Low averaging only 28 FPS. The data suggests that players should stay at 1080p for a reliable experience, with Medium being the sweet spot for visual fidelity and Low being the choice for maximum frame rate. The frame rate drops are steep when moving from Low to Medium at any resolution, indicating that the integrated GPU struggles with the additional rendering load.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX and AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2866 out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the bottom 2.5% of all configurations tested for this game, which is a surprisingly low position given the CPU's high performance tier. The ranking reflects the reality that the integrated GPU is the dominant factor in determining gaming performance, and the CPU's capabilities are largely irrelevant when the graphics processor is unable to keep up.

This low ranking is consistent with the GPU's performance metrics. The AMD Radeon 880M has a Passmark G3D score of 7615 and a percentile rank of 43 among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, which it edges by 0.1%, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330, which edges it by 0.3%. These are all older or entry-level discrete graphics solutions, and the 880M's performance level is clearly insufficient for demanding gaming workloads beyond low resolutions.

The contrast between the CPU and GPU rankings is stark. The CPU is in the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is in the 43rd percentile. This imbalance is a classic example of a system where the processor is far more powerful than the graphics solution, resulting in a bottleneck that severely limits gaming performance. The combo rank of 2866 out of 2939 suggests that most other tested configurations, likely including those with older discrete GPUs, outperform this integrated solution in Minimum.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4nm process by TSMC. It features 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 12 ray tracing cores. The GPU has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, with a TDP of 15 W. Its memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the CPU's DDR5 memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent."

The GPU's raw compute capabilities are modest, with an FP32 throughput of 4.454 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate is 46.40 GPixel/s and texture rate is 139.2 GTexel/s. In synthetic benchmarks, the GPU scores 535 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 7615 in Passmark G3D. These scores align with its 43rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, confirming that it is a mid-to-low tier graphics solution.

In Minimum, the GPU's limitations are evident from the measured FPS data. At 1080p Low, the GPU manages 79 FPS, but this drops significantly as resolution or settings increase. The 4K results are particularly telling, with even Low settings failing to reach 30 FPS. The GPU's "System Shared" memory architecture means it competes with the CPU for memory bandwidth, which can further impact performance in memory-intensive scenarios. The data suggests that the GPU is the primary bottleneck in this system, as the CPU's performance is far above the level required to drive these frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for Minimum covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra). At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 79 FPS, which is the highest recorded for this combo. The Medium preset at this resolution averages 61 FPS, with a range of 52 to 70 FPS. High settings average 51 FPS, while Ultra drops to 39 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 51 FPS, which is identical to the High preset at 1080p, highlighting the resolution's impact. Medium at 1440p averages 39 FPS, with a range of 33 to 45 FPS. High and Ultra at 1440p average 33 FPS and 25 FPS, respectively. The progression shows a consistent decline as settings increase, with a 26 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p.

At 3840x2160, all presets produce low frame rates. Low averages 28 FPS, Medium averages 21 FPS with a range of 18 to 24 FPS, High averages 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 14 FPS. The 4K results are uniformly unplayable for a third-person shooter, with even the highest-performing preset falling below 30 FPS. The data shows a clear pattern: the combo is only capable of providing playable frame rates at 1080p with Low or Medium settings.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the performance bottleneck. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at Low settings, the average FPS drops from 79 to 51, a reduction of 28 FPS or roughly 35%. Continuing to 3840x2160 at Low, the average drops further to 28 FPS, another 23 FPS reduction. This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, where the rendering load increases with pixel count.

At Medium settings, the scaling is similar but with lower absolute values. The average FPS goes from 61 at 1080p to 39 at 1440p, a 22 FPS drop, and then to 21 at 4K, an 18 FPS drop. The percentage decreases are steep, indicating that the integrated GPU's fill rate and shading capabilities are quickly overwhelmed by higher resolutions. The 4K Medium result of 21 FPS represents a 66% reduction from the 1080p Medium result.

These scaling patterns suggest that the limiting component is definitively the GPU. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the frame rates to remain relatively constant across resolutions, as the CPU's workload would not change significantly with resolution. Instead, the substantial FPS drops with each resolution increase point directly to the AMD Radeon 880M's inability to handle the pixel throughput required by higher resolutions. The CPU's high performance, evidenced by its 93rd percentile ranking, is not the constraint; rather, the integrated GPU's 43rd percentile ranking and 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are the decisive factors in Minimum's performance.