Minimum

Minimum is a 2014 third-person shooter whose performance profile on the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile combination reveals a system that scales predictably with resolution and settings, but with notable bottlenecks that shift depending on the workload. The measured data covers three resolutions and four quality presets, providing a complete picture of how this high-end mobile pairing handles a title that is now over a decade old. The results show a GPU that is overwhelmingly capable, a CPU that keeps pace at lower resolutions, and a clear hierarchy of settings that players can use to prioritize frame rate or visual fidelity.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, indicating that the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor as pixel count rises. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 293 FPS at 1920x1080 to 189 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 104 FPS, and then further to 102 FPS at 3840x2160, another 87 FPS drop. This represents a total decline of 65.2% from 1080p to 4K, which is substantial but expected for a game that is being pushed to extreme resolutions. The scaling is not linear—the percentage drop from 1440p to 4K (46.0%) is slightly larger than from 1080p to 1440p (35.5%)—suggesting that the GPU’s rendering overhead grows disproportionately at higher pixel counts.

At Medium settings, the same pattern emerges with a slightly different magnitude. The average FPS goes from 224 at 1080p to 144 at 1440p, a 35.7% drop, and then to 78 at 4K, a 45.8% drop from 1440p. The total decline from 1080p to 4K is 65.2%, matching the Low preset almost exactly. This consistency suggests that the resolution scaling is primarily driven by pixel throughput rather than the complexity of the scene or the settings applied. The High preset shows a similar trend: 188 FPS at 1080p, 121 FPS at 1440p (35.6% drop), and 65 FPS at 4K (46.3% drop from 1440p), for a total decline of 65.4%. The Ultra preset, which is the most demanding, shows the smallest absolute numbers but the same proportional pattern: 143 FPS at 1080p, 92 FPS at 1440p (35.7% drop), and 50 FPS at 4K (45.7% drop from 1440p), yielding a 65.0% total drop.

What this tells us is that the RTX 5090 Mobile is the limiting component at 4K across all settings, but the CPU is increasingly involved as resolution drops. At 1080p Low, the 293 FPS average is so high that the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU becomes the constraining factor. The data shows that the gap between 1080p and 1440p at Low settings is 104 FPS, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is 87 FPS; this smaller absolute difference at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is being saturated, while at 1080p the CPU is struggling to keep up with the GPU’s output. This is typical for a fast, older game on modern hardware, where the GPU has more than enough raw power to render frames but the CPU cannot issue draw calls quickly enough to fully exploit it.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Its 30 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provide a solid foundation for gaming, though the benchmark data for this game shows that the CPU is rarely the primary bottleneck except at the lowest resolution and settings. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 40642 and single-core score of 5737 place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong overall performance. However, this game, being a 2014 title, likely does not utilize all 20 cores effectively, and the single-threaded performance becomes more relevant.

At 1080p Low, the system hits 293 FPS, which is a very high number but not as high as one might expect from a flagship GPU. This suggests that the CPU’s single-thread performance is limiting the frame rate, as the game’s render thread cannot be fully parallelized. The CPU’s PassMark single-thread score of 4500 is respectable, but the boost clock of 5.30 GHz is not always achievable in sustained workloads, especially in a mobile form factor with a 55 W TDP. The nearest CPU rivals, such as the Intel Core i7-13790F (0.1% higher average score) and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G (0.2% lower), are all within a narrow performance band, so the 265HX is not uniquely positioned to push beyond these frame rates.

The data shows that as resolution increases, the CPU’s role diminishes. At 1440p Low, the average FPS drops to 189, and at 4K Low it falls to 102. This indicates that the GPU is now the bottleneck, and the CPU has ample headroom to feed it. The fact that the CPU’s Cinebench R15 multi-core score is 4096 and its PassMark multi-thread score is 47985 shows that it has plenty of compute capacity for non-graphics tasks, but this game does not appear to be heavily multi-threaded. The cores and clocks are therefore sufficient, but not decisive, in determining the final frame rates; the GPU is the dominant factor in this combination.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate measured for this combo?

A: The highest average frame rate is 293 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is followed by 224 FPS at 1080p Medium and 188 FPS at 1080p High, showing that the Low preset unlocks the most headroom for frame rate.

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

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 188 at 1920x1080 to 121 at 2560x1440, and then to 65 at 3840x2160. This represents a 35.6% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 46.3% drop from 1440p to 4K, for a total decline of 65.4%.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low, the 293 FPS average suggests the CPU is the limiting factor, as the GPU has enough power to render frames faster but the CPU cannot issue commands quickly enough. At higher resolutions like 4K, the GPU becomes the bottleneck, as indicated by the larger FPS drops.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The only settings with recorded minimum FPS values are Medium presets. At 1920x1080 Medium, the minimum is 190 FPS; at 2560x1440 Medium, it is 123 FPS; and at 3840x2160 Medium, it is 66 FPS. These represent the lowest frames observed during testing for those specific settings.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested combinations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 814th out of 3712 tested combinations, placing it in the top 21.9% of all tested systems. This is a strong result, though not the absolute top, reflecting the balance between the CPU and GPU.

Q: What is the difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings yield an average of 189 FPS, while Ultra settings yield 92 FPS. This is a difference of 97 FPS, or a 51.3% reduction in frame rate when moving to the highest quality preset.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete matrix of performance across three resolutions and four settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset produces an average of 293 FPS, which is the highest number in the entire dataset. The Medium preset at the same resolution yields 224 FPS with a minimum of 190 FPS and a maximum of 258 FPS, indicating some variance but generally smooth performance. High settings at 1080p drop to 188 FPS, and Ultra falls to 143 FPS, showing that each step up in quality costs roughly 40-50 FPS at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the pattern remains consistent but with lower absolute numbers. Low settings average 189 FPS, which is still very high and suitable for competitive play. Medium settings average 144 FPS, with a minimum of 123 FPS and a maximum of 166 FPS, providing a solid balance between visual quality and frame rate. High settings drop to 121 FPS, and Ultra averages 92 FPS, which is playable but begins to show the strain of higher pixel counts. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 97 FPS, a significant margin that gives players a clear choice between speed and fidelity.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates become more moderate. Low settings average 102 FPS, which is still above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. Medium settings average 78 FPS, with a minimum of 66 FPS and a maximum of 89 FPS, ensuring that even the lowest frames stay comfortably playable. High settings drop to 65 FPS, which is right at the edge of the 60 FPS target, and Ultra averages 50 FPS, which may feel less fluid on high-refresh-rate displays. The progression from Low to Ultra at 4K is a drop of 52 FPS, from 102 to 50, showing that the Ultra preset is best reserved for players who prioritize visual detail over frame rate.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU with 10496 shading units, 328 texture mapping units, and 112 raster operation units. Its 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for this game’s texture and geometry needs. The GPU’s base clock is 990 MHz with a boost clock of 1515 MHz, and its 31.80 TFLOPS of FP32 performance places it in the 84th percentile of all GPUs. The PassMark G3D score of 30034 confirms its strong overall performance, though its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT (0.5% lower score) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (0.8% higher), show that it is not without competition.

In this game, the GPU’s role is to render frames at increasing resolutions, and the data shows that it performs admirably up to 1440p but begins to struggle at 4K Ultra. The 4K Ultra average of 50 FPS is the lowest recorded number, indicating that the GPU is being pushed to its limits with this preset. The high memory bandwidth and 24 GB VRAM are likely not fully utilized, as a 2014 game would not require such resources, but the raw compute power is what drives the frame rates. The GPU’s 82 ray tracing cores and 328 tensor cores are irrelevant for this title, as it does not support these features, but they do not hinder performance either.

The scaling between settings at each resolution shows the GPU’s efficiency. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra costs 150 FPS (from 293 to 143), which is a 51.2% reduction. At 1440p, the same settings transition costs 97 FPS (from 189 to 92), a 51.3% reduction. At 4K, the cost is 52 FPS (from 102 to 50), also a 51.0% reduction. This consistent percentage drop across resolutions indicates that the GPU is handling the additional workload uniformly, with no unexpected bottlenecks or thermal throttling. The GPU’s 95 W TDP is modest for a flagship mobile part, but it still delivers the high frame rates seen in the data.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the best balance between visual quality and performance for most players. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 224 with a minimum of 190, ensuring no noticeable stutters. At 1440p Medium, the average is 144 FPS with a minimum of 123, which is well above the 60 FPS target and smooth on most displays. Even at 4K Medium, the average of 78 FPS with a minimum of 66 keeps gameplay fluid, making this the only preset that maintains playable frame rates at all three resolutions. The Medium preset provides a middle ground that avoids the visual downgrades of Low while not incurring the heavy performance penalties of High or Ultra.

For players with high-refresh-rate monitors (144Hz or higher) at 1080p or 1440p, the Low preset is the best choice. At 1080p Low, the 293 FPS average exceeds the refresh rate of most displays, and at 1440p Low, the 189 FPS average still provides a significant margin over 144Hz. This preset sacrifices visual fidelity for maximum frame rate, which is ideal for competitive play or for users who prioritize smoothness above all else. The High preset is a reasonable alternative at 1440p, where it yields 121 FPS, but at 4K it drops to 65 FPS, which is marginal for a 60Hz display and insufficient for higher refresh rates.

The Ultra preset is not recommended for this game on this hardware. At 1080p Ultra, the 143 FPS average is acceptable, but at 1440p it drops to 92 FPS, and at 4K it falls to 50 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and may cause noticeable frame pacing issues. The visual improvements from High to Ultra are unlikely to justify the 30-40% performance hit, especially in a game from 2014 where the graphical differences are subtle. The data clearly shows that Medium is the sweet spot, delivering at least 78 FPS at 4K and over 144 FPS at 1440p, making it the recommended preset for a balanced experience.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile combination ranks 814th out of 3712 tested combinations for Minimum, placing it in the top 21.9% of all systems. This is a strong showing, but it is not at the very top, which suggests that other combinations with more powerful CPUs or GPUs achieve higher frame rates. The rank is determined by the overall performance across all settings and resolutions, and this combo’s high scores at 1080p and 1440p are tempered by the lower 4K Ultra results.

The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs and the GPU’s 84th percentile ranking among all GPUs do not directly translate to a top-tier combo rank, because the game’s performance is limited by the interaction between the two components. The CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i7-13790F and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G, have nearly identical average benchmark scores, so the CPU is not providing a unique advantage. Similarly, the GPU’s nearest rivals, including the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti and the Intel Arc A730M, are within 1.8% of its average score, meaning that the 5090 Mobile is not head-and-shoulders above the competition in this specific game.

The rank of 814 out of 3712 indicates that there are 813 combinations that perform better, likely featuring even more powerful CPUs or GPUs, or better-optimized pairings. However, for a mobile system, this combo delivers excellent performance, with playable frame rates at 4K Medium and very high frame rates at 1080p and 1440p. The data suggests that the bottleneck is not the hardware itself but the game’s age and its limited ability to scale with modern multi-core processors and high-end GPUs. In practical terms, this combo is more than sufficient for Minimum, and the rank reflects its position among a wide range of tested systems, from budget laptops to desktop workstations.