Minimum

# Minimum — Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT

This combination of Intel's 24-core Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD's Radeon RX 6650 XT delivers a decidedly GPU-limited experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. The measured frame rates across three resolutions and four settings presets reveal a system where the graphics card is the primary constraint, while the processor's substantial headroom goes largely unused in this title. The data shows a classic pairing of an overpowered CPU with a mid-range GPU, producing playable results at 1080p and 1440p, but struggling to maintain smooth performance at 4K.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, which is a clear indicator that the Radeon RX 6650 XT is the limiting component. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 177 FPS at 1920x1080 to 114 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 63 FPS, and then further to 61 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a 65.5% decline in performance from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is even more pronounced at High settings: 114 FPS at 1080p drops to 73 FPS at 1440p and then to 39 FPS at 4K, a total loss of 75 FPS or roughly 66% of the original frame rate.

The pattern across Medium settings mirrors this behavior. At 1080p Medium, the average is 135 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it falls to 87 FPS; and at 4K Medium, it reaches 47 FPS. The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic scaling, starting at 87 FPS at 1080p, dropping to 56 FPS at 1440p, and collapsing to 30 FPS at 4K. The consistent proportionality of these drops—roughly a 35-40% reduction when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and another 40-50% reduction from 1440p to 4K—indicates that pixel throughput is the bottleneck, not any CPU-side limitation.

The fact that the 4K Low preset (61 FPS) performs worse than the 1080p Ultra preset (87 FPS) is particularly telling. If the CPU were the constraint, we would expect to see smaller differences between resolutions at the same settings. Instead, the data shows that halving the resolution from 4K to 1080p nearly triples the frame rate at Low settings, from 61 to 177 FPS. This is the signature of a GPU-bound workload, where the Radeon RX 6650 XT's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 128-bit bus are being saturated by the higher pixel counts, particularly at 4K where even the Low preset cannot exceed 61 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. It features a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 and a single-core score of 7,303, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 84,003 is essentially neck-and-neck with the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which scores 83,807 (a mere 0.2% delta), and it slightly edges out the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83,090, 1.1% delta) and the AMD EPYC 9135 (82,980, 1.2% delta).

However, these CPU strengths are largely irrelevant for Minimum. The measured FPS data shows no scenario where the processor becomes the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system produces 177 FPS, which is well within the capability of this CPU's single-thread performance, but the fact that dropping to 4K Low yields only 61 FPS—a 65% reduction—proves that the GPU is the sole constraint. The CPU's 24 cores and high boost clock provide massive headroom, but Minimum, being a 2014 title, is unlikely to leverage more than a few threads effectively. The PassMark multi-thread score of 60,860 and physics score of 3,315 indicate strong computational throughput, but these resources sit idle while the GPU struggles with pixel fill rates.

The CPU's memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s (dual-channel DDR5) is more than sufficient for this workload, and its PCIe Gen 5, 20-lane interface ensures the GPU is not starved for data transport. Yet, the benchmark results suggest that even a significantly weaker processor would produce nearly identical frame rates in this game, as the Radeon RX 6650 XT's 10.79 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is the hard ceiling. The nearest CPU rivals—the Core Ultra 9 285K and the EPYC server parts—all post nearly identical average scores, confirming that this processor's performance class is far above what Minimum demands.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the RDNA 2.0-based Navi 23 chip, built on a 7 nm process with 11,060 million transistors. It operates at a base clock of 2055 MHz, a game clock of 2410 MHz, and a boost clock of 2635 MHz. The card features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth. With 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, it posts a PassMark G3D score of 17,166, placing it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the benchmark database are the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19,885, -0.6% delta), the AMD FirePro D300 (19,637, 0.7% delta), and the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602, 0.8% delta)—all professional workstation cards that are not designed for gaming.

In Minimum, the GPU's limitations are exposed at every resolution above 1080p. The card's 8 GB VRAM is not the issue at these settings, as even 4K Ultra only requires a fraction of that capacity. Instead, the bottleneck is raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth. At 4K, the pixel rate of 168.6 GPixel/s is insufficient to maintain high frame rates, as evidenced by the 30 FPS average at Ultra settings. The texture rate of 337.3 GTexel/s also appears to be a limiting factor, given that the High preset at 1440p (73 FPS) is only 64% of the 1080p High result (114 FPS).

The GPU's boost clock of 2635 MHz is respectable, but it cannot compensate for the narrow 128-bit memory interface. The 280.3 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1080p, where the card achieves 177 FPS at Low and 114 FPS at High, but it becomes a severe constraint at 4K, where even Low settings yield only 61 FPS. The card's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility are modern, but Minimum, being a 2014 release, likely relies on older APIs where this card's compute-oriented design does not excel. The PassMark DirectX 11 score of 169 and DirectX 12 score of 62 highlight that the card's performance is uneven across API generations, which may explain the sub-optimal results in this older title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT ranks 1,895 out of 2,939 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the 35.5th percentile of all systems. This is a surprisingly low ranking given the CPU's 96th percentile standing, but it is entirely consistent with the GPU's 65th percentile performance. The ranking reflects the fact that Minimum is heavily GPU-bound, and the RX 6650 XT is simply not a high-end card by contemporary standards.

The combo's position in the lower half of all tested configurations is driven by the GPU's inability to deliver playable frame rates at 4K. While the system performs admirably at 1080p—with the Low preset hitting 177 FPS and High at 114 FPS—the 4K results are poor, with Ultra averaging just 30 FPS. The 1,044 combinations that rank above this pairing almost certainly feature more powerful GPUs, as the CPU is unlikely to be the differentiating factor given its top-tier synthetic scores.

The data shows that this combo is a poor match for 4K gaming in Minimum, but a capable one for 1080p and 1440p. At 2560x1440, the High preset achieves 73 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and the Medium preset reaches 87 FPS. The ranking of 1,895 out of 2,939 suggests that while the CPU is overkill, the GPU holds the system back from higher positions. Users with this pairing would be better served by either upgrading the GPU or accepting 1080p as the target resolution.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the optimal resolution, with all settings producing playable frame rates: 177 FPS at Low, 135 FPS at Medium, 114 FPS at High, and 87 FPS at Ultra. At 2560x1440, only Low (114 FPS), Medium (87 FPS), and High (73 FPS) exceed 60 FPS, while 4K only achieves playable rates at Low (61 FPS).

Q: Why does the 4K Ultra preset only produce 30 FPS?

A: The Radeon RX 6650 XT's 128-bit memory bus and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the pixel throughput required at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings. The GPU's 64 ROPs and 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 compute cannot sustain the load, resulting in an average of 30 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus holding back the GPU?

A: No. The benchmark data shows the CPU is not the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system produces 177 FPS, and the frame rate drops by 65% at 4K Low (61 FPS), indicating the GPU is the sole constraint. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 and 96th percentile ranking confirm it has ample headroom.

Q: How does this combo compare to the nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RX 6650 XT's average benchmark score of 19,765 is within 0.8% of the AMD FirePro W7000 (19,905) and the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 (19,602), but those are workstation cards. In gaming, the RX 6650 XT's 65th percentile ranking places it well below high-end gaming GPUs, which explains its struggles at 4K in Minimum.

Q: What is the minimum FPS at Medium settings?

A: The measured minimum FPS values are available for Medium settings only. At 1920x1080, the minimum is 115 FPS with a maximum of 156 FPS. At 2560x1440, the minimum is 74 FPS with a maximum of 100 FPS. At 3840x2160, the minimum is 40 FPS with a maximum of 54 FPS.

*Q: Does the CPU's 24-core configuration benefit Minimum?*

A: No. Minimum is a 2014 game that is unlikely to utilize more than a few cores. The CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 60,860 is impressive, but the measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions. The 24 cores provide no tangible benefit in this title.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its best performance. The Low preset averages 177 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate in the entire dataset. The Medium preset averages 135 FPS, with a minimum of 115 FPS and a maximum of 156 FPS. The High preset averages 114 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 87 FPS. All four settings exceed the 60 FPS threshold, making 1080p a fully playable experience regardless of preset.

At 2560x1440, performance drops but remains acceptable for most presets. The Low preset averages 114 FPS, the Medium preset averages 87 FPS (minimum 74 FPS, maximum 100 FPS), and the High preset averages 73 FPS. The Ultra preset falls to 56 FPS, which is below 60 FPS and may introduce noticeable stutter in fast-paced gameplay. The 1440p results show a 35-40% reduction from 1080p across all settings, consistent with the GPU's pixel throughput limitations.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. The Low preset averages 61 FPS, just barely above 60 FPS, while the Medium preset averages 47 FPS (minimum 40 FPS, maximum 54 FPS). The High preset drops to 39 FPS, and the Ultra preset bottoms out at 30 FPS. None of the 4K presets except Low provide a consistently smooth experience, and the Ultra preset's 30 FPS average is effectively unplayable for a third-person shooter requiring quick reactions.

Settings Recommendations

For this combination, the optimal experience is at 1920x1080 with the High preset. The High preset averages 114 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold and provides a significant visual improvement over Medium (135 FPS) without the 23% frame rate cost of Ultra (87 FPS). The High preset strikes the best balance between visual fidelity and performance, and the 114 FPS average ensures smooth gameplay even in demanding scenes.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the recommended choice. It averages 87 FPS with a minimum of 74 FPS, which keeps the experience above 60 FPS at all times. The High preset at 1440p (73 FPS) is also playable, but the Medium preset's higher minimum frame rate (74 FPS vs. unknown for High) provides a more consistent experience. The Ultra preset at 1440p (56 FPS) should be avoided, as it dips below the 60 FPS threshold.

At 3840x2160, only the Low preset is viable, averaging 61 FPS. However, the Low preset's minimal visual quality makes 4K a poor choice for this combo. The Medium preset at 4K averages 47 FPS, which is below the playability threshold, and the Ultra preset's 30 FPS average is not recommended. For users who prioritize visual quality over resolution, 1440p Medium offers a better compromise than 4K Low, providing a 26 FPS advantage (87 vs. 61) with superior image quality due to the higher settings.