Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti delivers a playable but not exceptional experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. This combination ranks 1615th out of 2939 tested combos, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database. The CPU is a modern powerhouse, while the GPU is an older design, and the benchmark results clearly show where each component dominates and where the pairing falls short.

FAQ

*Q: What is the overall ranking of this CPU and GPU combo in Minimum?*

A: This combo ranks 1615th out of 2939 tested combinations in the game. That places it just above the 45th percentile of all tested pairings, meaning roughly 55% of other combos deliver higher average frame rates.

*Q: Can this system run Minimum at 4K resolution?*

A: Yes, but with compromises. At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are 43 FPS on High, 51 FPS on Medium, and 67 FPS on Low. The Ultra preset drops to 33 FPS, which is below smooth playability. For 4K, sticking to Low or Medium settings is the only practical path.

Q: How does the GTX 1080 Ti compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GTX 1080 Ti has an average benchmark score of 15548. Its closest rival, the AMD Radeon R9 M380, scores 15521, a delta of 0.2% in favor of the GTX 1080 Ti. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 scores 15290, which is 1.7% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 scores 15679, which is 0.8% higher.

Q: What is the CPU’s position relative to other processors in the database?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a percentile rank of 96 among all CPUs, meaning it outperforms 96% of processors in aggregate benchmark scores. Its average benchmark score is 93785. The nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6520P, scores 93786, a negligible 0% difference.

Q: What are the best settings for 1080p gameplay with this combo?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 192 FPS average, Medium delivers 147 FPS, High delivers 124 FPS, and Ultra delivers 94 FPS. All presets are playable at 1080p, but the data shows that Medium offers the best balance between visual quality and frame rate headroom.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at lower resolutions?

A: The data suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, which is far beyond what a 2014 title like Minimum can utilize. The GTX 1080 Ti’s 11 GB of VRAM and 484.4 GB/s bandwidth are the constraining elements, especially at higher resolutions and settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. Its base clock is 3.70 GHz, with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The CPU has a 36 MB shared L3 cache, plus 3 MB of L2 cache per core and 192 KB of L1 cache per core. It supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The processor also includes integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, though the discrete GPU handles all rendering in this test.

In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU scores 44253 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2439 in single-core. The PassMark multi-thread score is 68574, while single-thread is 5068. These numbers place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93785. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6520P at 93786 (0% delta), the AMD EPYC 4564P at 95183 (-1.5% delta), the AMD EPYC 9175F at 95615 (-1.9% delta), and the AMD EPYC 4565P at 95764 (-2.1% delta). The CPU is effectively at parity with the Xeon 6520P and only slightly behind the EPYC parts.

For Minimum, a game released in 2014, the CPU’s 24 cores are largely overkill. The game was designed for the 4-core and 8-thread era. The high boost clock of 5.50 GHz helps with single-threaded game logic, which is the primary CPU workload in this title. The data shows that frame rates scale more with resolution and GPU settings than with CPU capability. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo achieves 192 FPS, which is likely near the engine’s practical limit. At 3840x2160 Ultra, the frame rate drops to 33 FPS, indicating the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s is generous for a dual-channel platform, but the GTX 1080 Ti’s own 484.4 GB/s bandwidth is what feeds the framebuffer.

The CPU’s TDP is 125 W, and it uses an Intel Socket 1851. It has a launch MSRP of $299. The PassMark data compression score is 804322, data encryption is 59097, and extended instructions are 63506. These are strong numbers for productivity, but they do not translate into meaningful gains in Minimum beyond what a mid-range modern CPU would provide. The benchmark results indicate that the CPU is not the limiting factor in any of the measured rows; the GPU is.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is a Pascal-architecture GPU built on a 16 nm process, with 11.8 billion transistors on a 471 mm² die. It has 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 88 raster output units. The base clock is 1481 MHz, with a boost clock of 1582 MHz. The memory runs at 1376 MHz, effectively 11 Gbps, across an 11 GB GDDR5X bus that is 352 bits wide, providing 484.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s pixel rate is 139.2 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 354.4 GTexel/s. It delivers 11.34 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 177.2 GFLOPS of FP16 performance. The card has a TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W suggested PSU, using one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector.

In synthetic benchmarks, the GTX 1080 Ti scores 18600 in PassMark G3D and 9632 in GPU compute. Its DirectX 12 score is 66, DirectX 11 is 151, and DirectX 10 is 118. The Vulkan score is 40511 in Geekbench, OpenCL is 67929, and Metal is 30624. The average benchmark score is 15548, placing it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R9 M380 at 15521 (0.2% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 at 15679 (-0.8% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 at 15290 (1.7% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 at 15283 (1.7% delta). The GTX 1080 Ti is essentially tied with the R9 M380 and slightly behind the Pro W5500, but ahead of the RTX 2060 and GTX 580.

In Minimum, the GPU is the primary performance driver. The game’s third-person shooter perspective requires consistent frame pacing, and the GTX 1080 Ti’s 11 GB of VRAM is more than enough for a 2014 title, even at 4K. The measured FPS data shows a clear trend: as resolution increases, frame rates drop proportionally. At 1920x1080 Low, the GPU pushes 192 FPS. At 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 124 FPS. At 3840x2160 Low, it reaches 67 FPS. This scaling indicates that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors at higher resolutions.

The boost clock of 1582 MHz is modest by today’s standards, but the Pascal architecture’s raw throughput is still sufficient for older games. The 484.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is the key spec for 4K performance, as higher resolutions demand more texture data. The GTX 1080 Ti’s 352-bit bus and GDDR5X memory were top-tier in 2017, and they remain capable for a game from 2014. The GPU’s DirectX 12 score of 66 is low, but Minimum likely runs on DirectX 11, where the score of 151 is more relevant. The data shows that the GPU is the bottleneck at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS falls to 33.

How This Combo Ranks

This combo ranks 1615th out of 2939 tested combinations in Minimum. That position places it in the 55th percentile of all combos, meaning 1324 combinations perform worse and 1615 perform better. The rank is driven almost entirely by the GTX 1080 Ti’s age; the CPU is in the 96th percentile, but the GPU is only in the 58th percentile. In a game like Minimum, the GPU matters more, so the combo’s overall rank is dragged down by the graphics card.

Comparing to other combos, the data suggests that a pairing with a similarly ranked CPU but a more modern GPU would rank much higher. The CPU’s nearest rivals in the database, such as the Intel Xeon 6520P, are server-class parts with similar aggregate scores. If paired with a faster GPU, those combos would likely outperform this one in Minimum. Conversely, a combo with a weaker CPU but a top-tier GPU would also rank higher, because the GPU is the limiting factor in every measured row.

The rank of 1615 out of 2939 implies that this system is adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming but struggles at 4K. The measured FPS data supports this: at 1080p, the combo delivers 94 FPS on Ultra, which is smooth. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 61 FPS, which is still playable but borderline. At 4K Ultra, it falls to 33 FPS, which is not ideal for a fast-paced shooter. The combo’s rank reflects this middle-ground performance.

The percentileVsAllCpus of 96 for the CPU and percentileVsAllGpus of 58 for the GPU highlight the mismatch. The CPU is a top-tier part, while the GPU is mid-pack. In Minimum, the GPU's lower percentile is more impactful, resulting in a combo rank that is below the midpoint. The data shows that for this game, the GPU choice matters more than the CPU, and the GTX 1080 Ti, while historically strong, is now a limiting factor.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. The Low preset averages 192 FPS, which is excellent for a third-person shooter. The Medium preset drops to 147 FPS, with a minimum of 125 FPS and a maximum of 169 FPS. The High preset averages 124 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 94 FPS. All four presets are playable at 1080p, with even the lowest Ultra frame rate being smooth on most displays. The data shows a clear step-down from Low to Medium, a smaller drop to High, and another step to Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the performance is still strong but requires lower settings for high refresh rates. The Low preset averages 124 FPS, which is excellent for 1440p. The Medium preset averages 95 FPS, with a minimum of 81 FPS and a maximum of 109 FPS. The High preset drops to 80 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for competitive play. The Ultra preset averages 61 FPS, which is borderline for a shooter. The data indicates that Medium is the sweet spot at 1440p, offering a 95 FPS average with a minimum above 80 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the GTX 1080 Ti struggles to maintain high frame rates. The Low preset averages 67 FPS, which is playable but not smooth on a 60 Hz display. The Medium preset drops to 51 FPS, with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS. The High preset averages 43 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset averages 33 FPS, which is not suitable for a fast-paced game. The data shows that 4K requires the Low preset for a consistent experience, and even then, the frame rate is not high.

The measured rows show a consistent pattern: the gap between Low and Ultra widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (192 FPS) and Ultra (94 FPS) is 98 FPS. At 1440p, the difference is 63 FPS (124 vs 61). At 4K, the difference is 34 FPS (67 vs 33). This indicates that the GPU’s pixel fill rate is the bottleneck at higher resolutions, and the CPU has no trouble keeping up. The Medium preset at each resolution provides a middle ground, with the 1440p Medium row being the most balanced overall.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience with this combo, the data points to the Medium preset at 1440p as the optimal choice. The 2560x1440 Medium row shows an average of 95 FPS, with a minimum of 81 FPS and a maximum of 109 FPS. This frame rate is smooth enough for a third-person shooter, and the visual quality is a significant step up from Low. The minimum of 81 FPS ensures that there are no noticeable stutters during intense scenes. This is the row that offers the best balance between the GPU’s capabilities and the game’s visual demands.

At 1080p, the Medium preset is also a strong recommendation. The 1920x1080 Medium row averages 147 FPS, with a minimum of 125 FPS and a maximum of 169 FPS. This provides a high refresh rate experience on a 144 Hz monitor, and the minimum of 125 FPS means the frame rate never dips below playable levels. The High preset at 1080p, at 124 FPS, is also playable, but the extra visual fidelity does not justify the 23 FPS loss compared to Medium. The Ultra preset at 1080p, at 94 FPS, is acceptable but not ideal for competitive play.

For 4K, the Low preset is the only viable option. The 3840x2160 Low row averages 67 FPS, which is playable on a 60 Hz display. The Medium preset at 51 FPS is borderline, and the High preset at 43 FPS is not smooth. The Ultra preset at 33 FPS should be avoided. If 4K is the target, the data recommends Low settings, and even then, the experience is not as fluid as at lower resolutions.

The High preset is the least compelling option across all resolutions. At 1080p, it offers 124 FPS, which is 23 FPS lower than Medium. At 1440p, it offers 80 FPS, which is 15 FPS lower than Medium. At 4K, it offers 43 FPS, which is 8 FPS lower than Medium. The High preset does not provide a meaningful visual upgrade over Medium in this title, based on the measured frame rate differences. The data shows that Medium is the best default setting for this combo, with Low as a fallback for 4K or high-refresh 1440p play. The Ultra preset is only suitable for 1080p, where the 94 FPS average is still playable, but it offers no advantage over Medium in terms of frame rate consistency.