Minimum

Resolution Scaling

The benchmark data for Minimum with the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and AMD Radeon 880M reveals a classic GPU-bound scaling pattern, where frame rates drop dramatically as resolution increases. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo delivers 79 FPS, but moving to 1440p Low drops the average to 51 FPS, and 4K Low further reduces it to 28 FPS. This represents a 35% performance loss from 1080p to 1440p and a 45% loss from 1440p to 4K, indicating that the integrated GPU's rendering throughput is the primary constraint.

The scaling pattern becomes even more pronounced at higher settings. At Medium settings, the frame rate falls from 61 FPS at 1080p to 39 FPS at 1440p (a 36% drop) and then to 21 FPS at 4K (a 46% drop from 1440p). The High preset shows similar behavior: 51 FPS at 1080p, 33 FPS at 1440p (35% reduction), and 18 FPS at 4K (45% reduction). This consistent ~35-46% reduction per resolution step strongly suggests that pixel count, not geometry or physics complexity, is the dominant factor limiting performance.

Ultra settings exacerbate the scaling issue further. At 1080p Ultra, the combo manages 39 FPS, which drops to 25 FPS at 1440p (36% loss) and bottoms out at 14 FPS at 4K (44% loss from 1440p). The 4K Ultra result of 14 FPS is effectively unplayable, and even the 18 FPS at 4K High falls well below acceptable thresholds. The data indicates that this system is only viable at 1080p or 1440p with lower presets, and 4K gaming is not a realistic option for this hardware combination.

The limiting component is clearly the AMD Radeon 880M, given that the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H provides substantial processing headroom. The CPU's multi-core performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 17984.5 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 11657, far exceeds what a game like Minimum would require for typical scene complexity. The GPU's modest specifications — 768 shading units, 16 ROPs, and a 43rd percentile ranking among all GPUs — align with the observed resolution sensitivity. When resolution increases, the GPU's pixel fill rate and shading capacity become exhausted, while the CPU remains underutilized.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon 880M is the decisive component in this combo's gaming performance. Built on the Strix Point chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture and a 4 nm process from TSMC, this integrated GPU operates with a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning the GPU draws from the same DDR5 pool as the CPU, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." This shared memory arrangement explains why the GPU's performance can vary significantly depending on the host system's memory configuration.

The GPU's raw compute capabilities are modest: 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, a pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s. These figures translate directly to the frame rates observed in Minimum. At 1080p Low, the GPU achieves 79 FPS, which suggests that the pixel throughput and shading units are sufficient for the game's relatively simple visuals at that resolution. However, the 16 ROPs become a bottleneck at higher resolutions, as evidenced by the steep drop to 28 FPS at 4K Low.

The GPU's benchmark scores corroborate its mid-to-low tier positioning. Its PassMark G3D score of 7615 places it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (scoring 8427, a 0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (scoring 8458, a -0.3% delta). The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 535 further confirms its limited DirectX 12 capability, which is relevant for a game like Minimum that supports modern API features.

In terms of VRAM, the "System Shared" memory means there is no dedicated video memory allocation. This is a critical limitation for higher resolutions and settings, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth. The measured results show that Ultra settings at any resolution produce low frame rates — 39 FPS at 1080p, 25 FPS at 1440p, and 14 FPS at 4K — which likely reflects both shader complexity and memory bandwidth pressure. The GPU's clock behavior, boosting from 400 MHz to 2900 MHz, allows some headroom for short bursts, but sustained loads at high resolutions quickly exhaust its capabilities.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and AMD Radeon 880M ranks 2866 out of 2939 tested combos for Minimum, placing it in the bottom 2.5% of all configurations. This rank is primarily driven by the GPU's limitations, as the CPU is a high-performing mobile processor. The CPU alone ranks in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35670, while the GPU's 43rd percentile ranking drags the overall combo down significantly.

Comparing the CPU to its nearest rivals provides context: the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 scores 35719 (a -0.1% delta from our CPU), the Intel Core 7 250H scores 35728 (-0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 scores 35802 (-0.4%). These tiny deltas indicate that the Ultra 9 185H is competitive with other modern mobile processors, but this CPU strength does little to improve gaming performance when the GPU is the bottleneck.

The GPU's nearest rivals in benchmark scores — the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8427, +0.1%), NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8458, -0.3%), and AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462, -0.3%) — are all older discrete GPUs that still outperform or match the 880M in raw compute. This context is telling: the 880M is an integrated solution competing with decade-old discrete parts. For Minimum, a game from 2014, this GPU class is at the edge of playability, which explains the low combo rank.

The rank of 2866 out of 2939 combos indicates that 97.5% of tested configurations deliver better performance in this game. This is not surprising given the game's release date and the GPU's integrated nature. However, the data does show that the combo can achieve playable frame rates at lower settings, which we will explore in the following sections.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for Minimum with this combo is as follows:

1080p (1920x1080):

• Low: 79 FPS average
• Medium: 61 FPS average (min 52, max 70)
• High: 51 FPS average
• Ultra: 39 FPS average

1440p (2560x1440):

• Low: 51 FPS average
• Medium: 39 FPS average (min 33, max 45)
• High: 33 FPS average
• Ultra: 25 FPS average

4K (3840x2160):

• Low: 28 FPS average
• Medium: 21 FPS average (min 18, max 24)
• High: 18 FPS average
• Ultra: 14 FPS average

The 1080p results show a clear hierarchy: Low settings achieve 79 FPS, which is smooth for most gaming scenarios. Medium settings at 61 FPS remain playable, with a minimum of 52 FPS ensuring no major stutters. High settings at 51 FPS are borderline but acceptable for a third-person shooter, while Ultra at 39 FPS starts to feel sluggish.

At 1440p, the situation degrades. Low settings at 51 FPS are still acceptable, but Medium drops to 39 FPS, which many players would find marginal. High at 33 FPS and Ultra at 25 FPS fall below smooth gameplay thresholds. The minimum frame rates for Medium (33 FPS) indicate that even the playable presets have occasional dips.

4K results are uniformly poor. The best case is Low at 28 FPS, which is below playable thresholds for a shooter. Medium at 21 FPS (min 18, max 24), High at 18 FPS, and Ultra at 14 FPS are all effectively unplayable for responsive gameplay. The data suggests that 4K should be avoided entirely with this combo.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and the player's tolerance for frame rate variability. For 1080p, the Low preset at 79 FPS provides the smoothest experience and is the clear recommendation for competitive play. Medium at 61 FPS is a solid alternative if visual fidelity is preferred, with the minimum of 52 FPS still keeping the experience fluid. High at 51 FPS is a compromise, but the lack of minimum FPS data makes it riskier. Ultra at 39 FPS is not recommended, as it sacrifices too much responsiveness for marginal visual gains.

For 1440p, Low at 51 FPS is the only preset that delivers consistently playable performance. Medium at 39 FPS is borderline, and the minimum of 33 FPS could cause noticeable hitches during intense action sequences. High at 33 FPS and Ultra at 25 FPS should be avoided. Players who prioritize visual quality over frame rate might accept Medium, but the data favors Low for a stable experience.

At 4K, no preset is truly playable. Low at 28 FPS is the best option, but it remains below the 30 FPS threshold that many consider the absolute minimum for playability. Medium at 21 FPS, High at 18 FPS, and Ultra at 14 FPS are all too slow. The recommendation is to avoid 4K entirely with this hardware and instead use 1080p or 1440p.

Overall, the best experience per the measured rows is 1080p Low at 79 FPS, which offers smooth, responsive gameplay. For players who want better visuals, 1080p Medium at 61 FPS is the next best option, providing a good balance of frame rate and image quality. The data suggests that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming with modest settings, and any attempt to push higher resolutions or presets will result in degraded performance.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is a high-end mobile processor that provides substantial compute resources, though its role in Minimum is secondary to the GPU. This CPU features 16 cores and 22 threads, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Its architecture is Meteor Lake, built on Intel's 7 nm process, and it includes 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU's integrated graphics are the Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 128EU, which is separate from the discrete AMD Radeon 880M used in this combo.

The CPU's benchmark scores indicate strong multi-threaded performance: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 17984.5 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 11657. Single-core performance is also respectable, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1810.5 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1794. These numbers place the CPU in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35670.

In Minimum, the CPU's role is to handle game logic, physics, and AI, which are unlikely to stress this processor given its capabilities. The game's release date of 2014-06-25 suggests it was designed for much older hardware, so the Ultra 9 185H has ample headroom. The measured frame rates are consistently limited by the GPU, as shown by the resolution scaling analysis. At 1080p Low, the 79 FPS result is likely near the GPU's maximum, not the CPU's.

The CPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (avg score 35719, -0.1% delta), Intel Core 7 250H (35728, -0.2%), and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (35802, -0.4%). These tiny deltas mean that swapping the CPU for any of these would have negligible impact on Minimum performance, since the GPU bottleneck dominates. The CPU's 45 W TDP, dual-channel memory support with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity are all more than sufficient for this game.

The data indicates that the CPU is not a limiting factor in this combo. Its high multi-core and single-core scores, combined with the game's age, mean that the CPU can easily maintain frame times even when the GPU is struggling. Players would see no benefit from a faster CPU in Minimum; the only way to improve performance would be a faster GPU. This is a clear case of a CPU outclassing its GPU counterpart in a gaming workload, resulting in a system where the integrated graphics are the bottleneck.