Minimum

FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank of the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 in Minimum?

A: This combination ranks 3581 out of 3712 tested combos in the database, placing it in the bottom percentile of systems for this game.

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo achieves at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 81 at 1080p with Low settings. Dropping to Medium yields 62 FPS, High produces 52 FPS, and Ultra falls to 40 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785, which is essentially identical to the Intel Xeon 6520P (93786, 0% delta). It trails the AMD EPYC 4564P by 1.5% (95183), the AMD EPYC 9175F by 1.9% (95615), and the AMD EPYC 4565P by 2.1% (95764).

Q: What does the GPU's percentile ranking indicate about its performance class?

A: The GTX 1650 sits at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, meaning roughly 60% of GPUs in the database outperform it. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, which scores 0.3% higher, and the Intel Arc A310, which scores 1% higher.

Q: Is the 4 GB VRAM sufficient for 4K gaming in this title?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 14 (Ultra) to 28 (Low), indicating that the combination of 4 GB VRAM and the GPU's compute capacity is severely limiting at this resolution. Even the lowest settings fail to reach playable frame rates.

Q: What is the CPU's single-core performance relative to its multi-core strength?

A: The CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44253 and a single-core score of 2439. This represents a multi-core advantage of roughly 18x over single-core, which is typical for a 24-core part designed for heavily threaded workloads.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture with 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its base clock runs at 1485 MHz with a boost clock of 1665 MHz, while the 4 GB of GDDR5 memory operates at 2001 MHz on a 128-bit bus, delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. These specifications place the GPU at the 40th percentile among all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472.

In Minimum, the GPU's role is decisive across all measured configurations. The data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases, the frame rate collapses in a manner consistent with a GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 81 FPS, but at 4K Low, it drops to 28 FPS — a 65% reduction. The GPU's pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s are simply insufficient for 4K workloads in this game.

The memory subsystem further constrains performance. With only 4 GB of GDDR5 VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth, the GPU struggles to feed its 32 ROPs at high resolutions. The measured FPS data corroborates this: at 4K Ultra, the average drops to 14 FPS, which is unplayable. Even at 1440p, the best average is 52 FPS on Low settings, indicating that the GPU is the primary bottleneck when compared to the CPU's substantial headroom.

The GPU's DirectX 12 support (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility are present, but the raw compute throughput of 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 limits its ability to handle modern rendering techniques. The PassMark DirectX 12 score of 35 and DirectX 11 score of 58 further highlight its modest rasterization performance relative to contemporary parts.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal experience at each resolution prioritizes the Low preset for playability. At 1080p, Low delivers 81 FPS average, which is the only configuration exceeding 60 FPS. Medium provides 62 FPS, which remains acceptable, but High (52 FPS) and Ultra (40 FPS) fall below the 60 FPS threshold. For a smoother experience, Low is the clear choice, though Medium offers a reasonable balance for users willing to accept slightly lower frame rates.

At 1440p, the situation worsens. Low produces 52 FPS, Medium 40 FPS, High 34 FPS, and Ultra 26 FPS. None of these reach 60 FPS, but Low is the only setting that remains above 50 FPS. Users targeting 1440p should stick to Low to maintain any semblance of fluidity, as the step from Low to Medium costs 12 FPS (23% reduction), while the step from Medium to High costs another 6 FPS (15% reduction).

At 4K, no preset is playable. Low yields 28 FPS, Medium 22 FPS, High 18 FPS, and Ultra 14 FPS. These numbers are all below 30 FPS, making 4K impractical for this combo. The data suggests that 1080p Low or Medium is the best experience, with 1080p Medium providing 62 FPS and a 10 FPS improvement over High, likely due to reduced GPU load while maintaining acceptable visual fidelity. For users prioritizing frame rate, 1080p Low is the only configuration that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 3581 out of 3712 places this system in the bottom 3.5% of all tested combinations in Minimum. This rank is driven almost entirely by the GPU's limitations, as the CPU is a high-end part with a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs. The GPU's 40th percentile ranking, combined with its 4 GB VRAM, creates a massive imbalance that the benchmark results reflect.

To contextualize the CPU's contribution, the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44253, which is 18x its single-core score of 2439. This level of multi-threaded performance is far beyond what Minimum requires, as evidenced by the fact that the GPU bottlenecks at every resolution. The CPU's PassMark multithread score of 68574 and single-thread score of 5068 confirm that it is not the limiting factor.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the database — the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (0.3% higher score) and Intel UHD Graphics 750 (0.4% higher) — are similarly low-performing parts. The Intel Arc A310, which scores 1% higher, would likely deliver comparable results in Minimum. This positioning underscores that the GTX 1650 is at the entry level of the GPU hierarchy, and its pairing with a flagship CPU does not boost the gaming experience in this title.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep resolution scaling curve that highlights the GPU as the primary constraint. At 1080p Low, the average is 81 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 52 FPS (a 36% reduction), and 4K Low further reduces it to 28 FPS (a 65% reduction from 1080p). This pattern repeats across all settings presets, with the relative drops remaining consistent regardless of quality level.

For Medium settings, the progression is 62 FPS at 1080p, 40 FPS at 1440p, and 22 FPS at 4K. This represents a 35% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 65% drop from 1080p to 4K. The consistency of these percentages — approximately 35% for the first step and 65% for the full 4x resolution increase — indicates that the GPU's pixel throughput is the limiting factor, as the CPU's performance headroom is not exhausted at any resolution.

The 4K to 1080p ratio for Ultra settings is even more pronounced: 40 FPS at 1080p drops to 14 FPS at 4K, a 65% reduction. This suggests that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are saturated at 4K, with the 128.1 GB/s bandwidth unable to feed the render pipeline efficiently. The data implies that reducing resolution is the only effective lever for improving performance, as settings changes yield diminishing returns at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 81 FPS, Medium 62 FPS (with a min of 53 and max of 72), High 52 FPS, and Ultra 40 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 41 FPS, representing a 51% reduction in performance when maxing out settings. The Medium preset's min FPS of 53 indicates that even the average can dip below 60 FPS in demanding scenes.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 52 FPS, Medium 40 FPS (min 34, max 46), High 34 FPS, and Ultra 26 FPS. The Medium min of 34 FPS is concerning for smooth gameplay, as it approaches the threshold where frame pacing becomes noticeable. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across settings: approximately 35-36% for Low, Medium, and High, and 35% for Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 28 FPS, Medium 22 FPS (min 18, max 25), High 18 FPS, and Ultra 14 FPS. The Medium preset's min of 18 FPS suggests severe stuttering in heavy scenes. The 4K results are uniformly unplayable, with even the best setting (Low) failing to reach 30 FPS. The data shows that this combo is not viable for 4K gaming in Minimum, regardless of 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. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, providing 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

In Minimum, the CPU's role is minimal relative to the GPU bottleneck. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44253 and single-core score of 2439 demonstrate massive headroom. The PassMark physics score of 4064 and integer math score of 175986 further indicate that the CPU is not challenged by this game's workload. The fact that FPS scales almost linearly with resolution reductions — rather than remaining flat — confirms that the GPU is the sole limiter.

The CPU's 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93785, places it in the top tier of processors. Its nearest rivals are server-class parts like the Intel Xeon 6520P (0% delta) and AMD EPYC 4564P (-1.5% delta). This level of performance is far beyond what Minimum requires, meaning the CPU contributes negligible overhead to the measured frame rates. The 24 cores and 24 threads are effectively idle during gameplay, as the GPU's 896 shading units struggle to maintain even moderate frame rates.