Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K paired with the Intel Arc B580 delivers a playable, though not flawless, experience in Minimum, a Third-Person Shooter released in 2014. The dataset, measured across four resolutions and four quality presets, reveals a configuration that is consistently GPU-limited at higher settings, while the processor’s substantial headroom becomes apparent only at lower graphical loads. The following analysis breaks down the measured performance, contextualizes the combo’s standing among 1,733 tested combinations, and provides actionable recommendations based strictly on the observed data.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 clearly identifies the Intel Arc B580 as the primary bottleneck in this pairing. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 161 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 103 FPS, a reduction of 58 FPS (approximately 36%). At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls further to 57.3 FPS, which is roughly 35.6% of the 1080p result. This steep decline indicates that even at the lowest graphical preset, the GPU cannot maintain the frame rates the CPU is capable of feeding.

The scaling pattern intensifies with higher settings. At High settings, the averages are 106.3 FPS (1080p), 67.9 FPS (1440p), and 37.6 FPS (4K). The drop from 1080p to 4K at High is 68.7 FPS, a 64.6% reduction. For Ultra, the figures are 77.9 FPS, 51 FPS, and 28.8 FPS respectively. The 4K Ultra result is only 37% of the 1080p Ultra figure, demonstrating that the Arc B580’s 12 GB of memory and 456.0 GB/s bandwidth are overwhelmed as pixel count quadruples and texture detail increases.

Notably, the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens with resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low (161 FPS) and Ultra (77.9 FPS) is 83.1 FPS. At 4K, the same comparison yields a difference of only 28.5 FPS (57.3 vs 28.8). This compression suggests that at 4K, the GPU is so saturated that even reducing settings from Ultra to Low cannot recover sufficient performance to approach CPU-bound territory. The data indicates that the Core Ultra 7 265K, with its 20 cores and 20 threads, is never the limiting factor in this game; even at 1080p Low, the 161 FPS ceiling is likely imposed by the GPU’s rendering throughput rather than processor capacity.

How This Combo Ranks

In the global ranking for Minimum, this specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and Intel Arc B580 holds the 1349th position out of 1,733 tested combos. This places the pairing in the lower half of the database, which is consistent with the measured frame rates: while the CPU sits in the 97th percentile among all processors, the GPU’s 66th percentile standing drags the overall combo ranking down.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks underscore its strength. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF scores 79,240, a delta of -0.2% relative to the 265K’s average benchmark score of 79,102. The Intel Core i9-14900KF is similarly close at 79,245 (-0.2%), while the Intel Core i9-14900K is -0.9% behind. The AMD EPYC 7413 trails by -1.2%. These margins are within measurement noise, indicating the 265K is a top-tier CPU. However, in Minimum, this computational power translates to little advantage because the Arc B580’s 13.67 TFLOPS and 80 ROPs cap the output.

Comparatively, the GPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the AMD Radeon 760M (+0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA P106-100 (+0.3%), while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is -0.7% behind. The RTX 4060 Mobile is +1.3% ahead. This clustering around the Arc B580’s average score of 23,021 suggests it performs at a mid-range level, which aligns with its 66th percentile rank. In Minimum, this means the combo will deliver smooth 1080p gameplay but falls short of high-refresh-rate 4K targets.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Minimum?*

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where all settings exceed 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low (103 FPS) and Medium (81.8 FPS) clear 60 FPS, while High (67.9 FPS) barely achieves it. 3840x2160 never exceeds 60 FPS under any tested setting.

Q: How does the Ultra preset perform at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440 with Ultra settings, the average frame rate is 51 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS threshold commonly desired for smooth gameplay, but it is playable if the user tolerates lower frame pacing.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The data points to the GPU. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 161 FPS, but at 4K Ultra it drops to 28.8 FPS. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K’s 20 cores and 20 threads, paired with a 5.50 GHz boost clock, are more than sufficient; the Arc B580’s rendering limits dominate across all tested configurations.

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

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 161 FPS and Ultra averages 77.9 FPS. This represents a 83.1 FPS drop when moving from the lowest to the highest preset, a 51.6% reduction in average frame rate.

Q: Does the combo rank higher or lower than average in the database?

A: The combo ranks 1349th out of 1,733 tested combos, placing it in the 22nd percentile. This is below the median, reflecting the GPU’s mid-range position despite the CPU’s top-tier standing.

Q: Can the combo handle 4K at any setting?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, where it averages 57.3 FPS. Medium drops to 44 FPS, High to 37.6 FPS, and Ultra to 28.8 FPS. None of these 4K results reach 60 FPS, making 4K a compromise-heavy choice.

Settings Recommendations

For a balance of visual fidelity and frame rate, the data supports 1920x1080 with High settings as the best overall experience. The measured 106.3 FPS average at this configuration is well above the 60 FPS threshold, and it offers a significant improvement over Medium (123.5 FPS) and Low (161 FPS) in terms of image quality, while still maintaining headroom above refresh rates on standard 1080p displays. The jump to Ultra at 1080p (77.9 FPS) is playable but costs 28.4 FPS compared to High, a 26.7% reduction that may not justify the marginal visual gains.

At 2560x1440, the recommendation shifts to Medium settings, which averages 81.8 FPS. This is the highest preset at 1440p that stays comfortably above 60 FPS. High at 1440p (67.9 FPS) is acceptable for users prioritizing detail, but it sacrifices 13.9 FPS relative to Medium. Low at 1440p (103 FPS) is unnecessary unless the user has a high-refresh-rate monitor (144 Hz or above) and wants to maximize frame pacing.

For 3840x2160, only Low settings (57.3 FPS) are viable for anything approaching smooth play. Medium (44 FPS) and High (37.6 FPS) are borderline stutter-prone, and Ultra (28.8 FPS) is effectively unplayable for a third-person shooter requiring responsive aiming. Given that the game is from 2014, the visual difference between Low and High at 4K may be less pronounced than in modern titles, but the frame rate cost is steep.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full dataset reveals a consistent pattern across all settings tiers. At 1920x1080, the averages are: Low 161 FPS, Medium 123.5 FPS, High 106.3 FPS, and Ultra 77.9 FPS. The difference between consecutive settings is 37.5 FPS (Low to Medium), 17.2 FPS (Medium to High), and 28.4 FPS (High to Ultra). The largest absolute drop occurs between Low and Medium, suggesting that the Medium preset introduces significant rendering load (likely textures and shadows) that the Arc B580 struggles to offset.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 103 FPS, Medium 81.8 FPS, High 67.9 FPS, and Ultra 51 FPS. The deltas are 21.2 FPS (Low to Medium), 13.9 FPS (Medium to High), and 16.9 FPS (High to Ultra). The proportional drop from Low to Ultra is 50.5%, which is less severe than at 1080p (51.6%) but still substantial.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 57.3 FPS, Medium 44 FPS, High 37.6 FPS, and Ultra 28.8 FPS. The deltas are 13.3 FPS (Low to Medium), 6.4 FPS (Medium to High), and 8.8 FPS (High to Ultra). The absolute drops shrink as resolution increases, confirming that the GPU’s fill-rate limits dominate at 4K. Notably, the 4K Low result (57.3 FPS) is lower than the 1440p Ultra result (51 FPS) by only 6.3 FPS, indicating that resolution scaling has a larger impact than settings scaling at these higher pixel counts.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 on the Arrow Lake architecture, brings 20 cores and 20 threads to this pairing. Its base clock is 3.90 GHz with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, and it features 30 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 50,009 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 7,060 in single-core, placing it in the 97th percentile of all CPUs. The Passmark multithread score of 58,838 further illustrates its capacity for parallel workloads.

In Minimum, this CPU’s role is largely passive. The game’s measured frame rates never approach a level where the processor’s threading capability would be challenged. Even at 1080p Low, the 161 FPS average is unlikely to strain a CPU that can push over 50,000 points in Cinebench R23 multicore. The CPU’s 20 threads handle the game’s logic, physics, and draw calls without issue, leaving the GPU as the sole performance limiter.

The architecture’s efficiency also matters. Fabricated on a 3 nm process (TSMC), the 265K has a TDP of 125 W, and its memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s (dual-channel DDR5) is ample for feeding the Arc B580. The PCIe Gen 5 interface (20 lanes) provides headroom for data transfer, though the B580 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, which does not bottleneck in this title. Overall, the data confirms that the CPU is overqualified for Minimum, and any performance shortfalls in this combo are directly attributable to the GPU’s measured output.