Minimum

# Minimum — Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT

This combination pairs a 24-core, 24-thread Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with a 16 GB AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT, producing a system that ranks 1828th out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. The benchmark data shows a clear pattern: at 1080p the CPU has headroom, but as resolution climbs, the GPU becomes the dominant constraint, with frame rates dropping by roughly half from 1080p to 4K across most settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep resolution penalty that intensifies with higher quality settings. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 179 FPS at 1920x1080 to 115 FPS at 2560x1440, then to 62 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a 36% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 46% drop from 1440p to 4K. The scaling suggests that at 1080p Low, the system is not fully GPU-bound, as the RX 7600 XT has enough throughput to push well beyond 144 FPS.

Moving to Medium settings, the average FPS at 1080p is 137, dropping to 88 at 1440p and 48 at 4K. The percentage drops are 36% and 45% respectively, nearly identical to the Low preset scaling. High settings show 115 FPS at 1080p, 74 at 1440p, and 40 at 4K — a 36% drop and then a 46% drop. Ultra settings produce 88 FPS at 1080p, 56 at 1440p, and 30 at 4K, with drops of 36% and 46%.

These consistent scaling ratios across all four settings indicate that the limiting component shifts predictably. The fact that 1080p to 1440p always costs about 36% of performance, regardless of preset, points to a GPU that is being pushed harder by pixel count rather than by shading complexity. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the scaling from 1080p to 1440p would be much flatter at low settings, since the CPU workload would remain similar while the GPU load increases. Instead, the uniform drop suggests the RX 7600 XT is the primary constraint even at 1080p Low, where 179 FPS is already substantial but not CPU-limited.

The 4K step is particularly punishing. From 1440p to 4K, the pixel count increases by 2.25x, yet frame rates drop by only about 46% rather than the 56% that pure pixel scaling would predict. This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is not purely fill-rate limited; memory bandwidth and cache behavior also play a role. The RX 7600 XT's 288.0 GB/s bandwidth over a 128-bit bus is modest for 4K workloads, and the data suggests that the GPU's compute resources become the ceiling before bandwidth saturates.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 1980 MHz, a game clock of 2470 MHz, and a boost clock of 2755 MHz. The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a critical factor for Minimum at high resolutions.

In benchmark terms, the RX 7600 XT scores 17132 in Passmark G3D, placing it in the 60th percentile among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 17083, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (0.3% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (0.7% behind), and the NVIDIA Tesla M4 (0.9% ahead). These delta percentages are small, but the actual gaming performance in Minimum shows the GPU's real-world behavior.

The measured FPS at 4K Ultra is 30 FPS average, which is exactly at the threshold of playability for many users. At 4K High, the average rises to 40 FPS, and at 4K Medium it reaches 48 FPS with a minimum of 40 and maximum of 55. The 4K Low preset yields 62 FPS. These numbers indicate that the GPU's 22.57 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is sufficient for 4K only at lower settings. The 64 ROPs and 128 TMUs, combined with the 128-bit memory bus, create a configuration that struggles with the fill rate demands of 4K.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and 32 ray accelerators are present, but the benchmark data does not include ray tracing results for Minimum. The Passmark DirectX 12 score of 65 is notably lower than the DirectX 11 score of 167, which may reflect the GPU's architecture in compute-heavy workloads. For a game released in 2014, the DirectX 11 path likely matters more, and the RX 7600 XT's 167 score in that test suggests reasonable legacy performance.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2 (Arrow Lake Refresh) family, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It runs at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 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.

In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303. The Passmark multithread score is 60860, with a single-thread score of 4823. These results place the CPU in the 96th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84003. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (0.2% ahead), the AMD EPYC 4584PX (1.1% ahead), the AMD EPYC 9135 (1.2% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 7F72 (1.3% behind).

For Minimum, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 179 FPS, which is high but not necessarily CPU-limited. The fact that 1080p Medium drops to 137 FPS and 1080p High to 115 FPS suggests that the GPU is still the limiting factor, since the CPU workload does not change much with graphics settings. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect similar FPS across different settings at the same resolution. Instead, the 36% drop from Low to Medium at 1080p indicates GPU headroom is being consumed.

The CPU's 24 threads could theoretically handle more than 179 FPS in a 2014 title, but the game's engine may not scale perfectly with that many cores. The Passmark data compression score of 698346 and integer math score of 166194 suggest strong parallel throughput, but Minimum's actual thread utilization is unknown from the data. The single-core performance, however, is robust: a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7303 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4823 provide ample headroom for game logic that relies on a few fast cores.

The 115.2 GB/s dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth is more than sufficient for this workload, especially compared to the GPU's 288.0 GB/s. The CPU's PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes ensures the RX 7600 XT (which uses PCIe 4.0 x8) is not bandwidth-starved in the interconnect.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination ranks 1828th out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum, placing it in the 62nd percentile of all tested systems. This rank is notably lower than the CPU's 96th percentile and the GPU's 60th percentile individually. The reason is clear: the GPU is the weaker component, and the CPU's high-end performance is largely wasted in this game at higher resolutions.

The combo rank of 1828 suggests that many systems with lower-tier CPUs but faster GPUs outperform this pairing in Minimum. This is a classic case of CPU over-provisioning relative to GPU capability. The RX 7600 XT's 60th percentile GPU score is below the CPU's 96th percentile, creating an imbalance where the GPU limits frame rates well before the CPU's potential is reached.

Compared to other combos, the 1828th rank out of 2939 means that roughly 1111 tested combinations produce higher frame rates in Minimum. This places the system in the upper-middle tier, but not in the top quartile. The data indicates that a more balanced pairing, such as a mid-range CPU with a higher-end GPU, would likely achieve a better rank for this specific game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers an average of 179 FPS on Low settings, 137 FPS on Medium (with a minimum of 116 and maximum of 157), 115 FPS on High, and 88 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 91 FPS, or roughly 51% performance loss at the highest preset.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 115 FPS on Low, 88 FPS on Medium (minimum 75, maximum 101), 74 FPS on High, and 56 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 59 FPS, or about 51% loss, identical to the 1080p scaling.

At 3840x2160, the averages drop to 62 FPS on Low, 48 FPS on Medium (minimum 40, maximum 55), 40 FPS on High, and 30 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 32 FPS, again a 51% loss. This consistency across resolutions confirms that the settings scaling is uniform, with each step up (Low to Medium, Medium to High, High to Ultra) costing roughly 20-25% performance.

The minimum FPS data, available only for Medium presets, shows that at 1080p Medium the minimum is 116 FPS, at 1440p Medium it is 75 FPS, and at 4K Medium it is 40 FPS. The gap between average and minimum is 21 FPS at 1080p, 13 FPS at 1440p, and 8 FPS at 4K. This tightening of the minimum-to-average gap at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU's consistent load reduces frame time variance, whereas at 1080p there is more fluctuation.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset at 1440p offers the best balance. At 88 FPS average with a 75 FPS minimum, it provides smooth gameplay that exceeds the 60 FPS threshold while maintaining visual quality above the Low preset. The 1440p Medium configuration is the highest setting and resolution combination that maintains an average above 60 FPS.

For 4K users, the Low preset at 62 FPS is the only option that stays above 60 FPS on average. The Medium preset at 48 FPS may be acceptable for slower-paced gameplay, but the 40 FPS minimum could cause noticeable stutter in action sequences. The High preset at 40 FPS and Ultra at 30 FPS are below the threshold for smooth play and should be avoided unless visual fidelity is prioritized over frame rate.

At 1080p, the High preset at 115 FPS is the recommended choice, as it provides excellent frame rates while maintaining higher quality than Medium. The Ultra preset at 88 FPS is also viable for users with 144 Hz displays, but the 24% performance cost over High may not justify the visual gains. The Low preset at 179 FPS is only useful for competitive play where maximum frame rate is paramount.

For users with high-refresh 1080p displays (144 Hz or higher), the Medium preset at 137 FPS is the best option to approach the refresh rate ceiling without sacrificing too much quality. The 1440p Low preset at 115 FPS is also viable for those who prioritize resolution over settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system?

A: The 2560x1440 Medium preset delivers 88 FPS average with a 75 FPS minimum, making it the highest combination that maintains an average above 60 FPS. For 4K, the Low preset at 62 FPS is the only configuration above 60 FPS.

Q: How does this GPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 7600 XT scores 17132 in Passmark G3D, placing it 0.3% behind the GTX 690, 0.4% behind the HD 7970M, 0.7% ahead of the RTX 3070, and 0.9% ahead of the Tesla M4 in average benchmark score.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor across all resolutions. Evidence includes the uniform 36% performance drop from 1080p to 1440p across all settings, which would not occur if the CPU were the bottleneck.

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking and how does it compare to its closest rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus ranks in the 96th percentile among all CPUs. It is 0.2% behind the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K in average benchmark score, with a score of 84003 versus 83807.

*Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Minimum?*

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, where it achieves 62 FPS average. At Medium, the average drops to 48 FPS with a 40 FPS minimum, which may cause stutter. High and Ultra average 40 and 30 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the combo rank compare to the individual component rankings?

A: The combo ranks 1828th out of 2939 tested systems, which is in the 62nd percentile. This is significantly lower than the CPU's 96th percentile and the GPU's 60th percentile, reflecting the GPU-limited nature of the pairing.