Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is a study in asymmetry. You have a flagship 24-core processor designed for heavy throughput paired with a 6 GB graphics card from the previous decade. In a 2014 third-person shooter like Minimum, the data shows this combo lands at rank 2509 out of 2939 tested combinations. That places it in the bottom 15% of all tested pairings, a result driven almost entirely by the GPU’s inability to keep pace with the CPU’s raw capability at higher resolutions. The benchmark results indicate that while the processor has no trouble feeding frames, the graphics card becomes the limiting factor as pixel counts rise. This is a combination that will feel surprisingly capable at 1080p but quickly loses steam as you push toward 4K, where the measured averages fall below playable thresholds.

FAQ

Q: Is this combo better at 1080p or 4K?

A: The data shows a massive gap between resolutions. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo averages 131 FPS, while at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, it drops to 22 FPS. The 1080p results are generally playable, but 4K results are not.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score is 12986, which is 0.4% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and 0.4% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 580. It is 0.7% lower than the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 and 0.9% higher than the AMD Radeon 740M. These are all very close scores, indicating the 1660 SUPER sits in a tightly contested performance tier.

Q: What is the CPU’s standing relative to other processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. It is 0.2% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and 1.1% faster than the AMD EPYC 4584PX, but 1.3% slower than the AMD EPYC 7F72.

Q: Does the game use more than a few CPU cores?

A: The CPU has 24 cores and 24 threads, and its multi-threaded benchmark scores are very high (e.g., 21727 in Cinebench R20 multi-core). However, the game’s performance is heavily limited by the GPU, so the extra cores provide no benefit in the measured FPS results.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers an average of 65 FPS with a minimum of 55 FPS. This is the only 1440p setting that maintains an average above 60 FPS, making it the most viable option for smoother gameplay.

Q: Is the GPU’s 6 GB VRAM sufficient for this game?

A: The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 192-bit bus and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The measured data does not indicate any VRAM-related stutters, but the performance drop at 4K Ultra (22 FPS) suggests the card is overwhelmed by the rendering load, not necessarily the memory capacity alone.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s in-game rank of 2509 out of 2939 tested combinations is a clear signal that this pairing is not optimized for Minimum. The data shows that this rank is driven by the GPU, which sits at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU sits at the 96th percentile. This creates a massive bottleneck where the processor is waiting on the graphics card to render each frame.

The measured FPS data confirms this imbalance. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo hits 131 FPS, which is respectable, but this is not a result of the CPU’s power—any mid-range processor from the last several years could likely achieve similar numbers. The true test is at higher resolutions. At 3840x2160, even the Low preset only manages 46 FPS, and Ultra drops to 22 FPS. These numbers show that the GTX 1660 SUPER simply cannot handle the pixel throughput required at 4K.

In the context of all tested combos, this pairing is closer to the bottom than the top. The 2939-combo pool includes many pairings with more balanced components. The 290K Plus is a top-tier processor, but it is wasted here, as the GPU’s performance ceiling is reached long before the CPU’s potential is tapped. The rank reflects this waste, placing the combo in a position where the processor’s strengths are largely irrelevant to the final FPS output.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is an Arrow Lake Refresh part built on a 3 nm process with 24 cores and 24 threads. Its base clock is 3.70 GHz, and it boosts to 5.80 GHz. These specifications produce strong synthetic results: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303. In PassMark, the multi-thread score is 60860, and the single-thread score is 4823. These numbers place the CPU in the 96th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 84003.

For a third-person shooter from 2014, however, these numbers are overkill. The game’s engine is unlikely to scale across 24 cores, and the measured FPS data shows no scenario where the CPU becomes the limiting factor. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo achieves 131 FPS, which is likely near the game’s engine cap or the GPU’s limit at that setting. The CPU’s high single-core performance (736 in Cinebench R15 single-core) helps maintain high frame rates in less demanding scenes, but the GPU’s 5.027 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is the primary constraint.

The CPU’s memory support includes DDR5 with dual-channel bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, which is more than adequate for this workload. The 36 MB of shared L3 cache provides fast access to frequently used data, but again, the game’s low complexity means this is not a differentiator. In short, the CPU role is to provide a stable, high-frequency platform that never becomes a bottleneck. It succeeds in that role, but the GPU prevents that stability from translating into high FPS at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the combo’s capabilities across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the results are mostly playable. Low settings produce an average of 131 FPS, Medium averages 100 FPS with a minimum of 85 FPS, and High averages 84 FPS. Ultra drops to 64 FPS, which is still playable but shows a significant performance hit. The gap between Low and Ultra is 67 FPS, indicating that the GPU is sensitive to the settings presets.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance drops are noticeable. Low settings average 85 FPS, which is still smooth. Medium averages 65 FPS with a minimum of 55 FPS, which is acceptable for most players. High drops to 54 FPS, and Ultra falls to 41 FPS. The data here shows that Medium is the sweet spot for 1440p, as it is the only preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles. Low settings average 46 FPS, which is borderline playable. Medium averages 35 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS, indicating inconsistent frame times. High drops to 29 FPS, and Ultra averages just 22 FPS. None of these 4K results are suitable for a smooth experience, and the data suggests that 4K is not a viable resolution for this pairing.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: the GPU is the limiting factor. At 1080p, the combo can push high frame rates, but the GTX 1660 SUPER’s 6 GB VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for the pixel fill rate required at 4K. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (22 FPS) is nearly six times lower than at 1080p Low (131 FPS), highlighting the GPU’s steep performance curve as resolution increases.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is a Turing-architecture card built on a 12 nm process with 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Its base clock is 1530 MHz, and it boosts to 1785 MHz. The 6 GB of GDDR6 memory runs at 1750 MHz with a 192-bit bus, providing 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 12986, placing it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs.

In Minimum, the GPU’s role is straightforward: it is the primary determinant of frame rate. The measured FPS data shows that the GPU’s performance scales poorly with resolution. At 1080p, it can deliver 131 FPS on Low, but at 4K, it drops to 46 FPS on Low and 22 FPS on Ultra. This is a classic example of a mid-range GPU being overwhelmed by pixel count.

The GPU’s nearest rivals include the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.4% higher score), the RX 580 (0.4% higher score), and the Tesla M2090 (0.7% higher score). These are all similarly performing cards, which means the 1660 SUPER is not an outlier in its class. However, its 6 GB VRAM and 192-bit bus are modest by modern standards, and the data suggests that the card’s 85.68 GPixel/s pixel rate is insufficient for 4K gaming.

The GPU’s integrated features, such as DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4 support, are adequate for this game, which was released in 2014. The card’s 5.027 TFLOPS FP32 performance is the key metric here, and it is simply not enough to maintain playable frame rates at higher resolutions. The GPU’s role in this combo is to cap the system’s performance, and the measured FPS data reflects that cap clearly.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience is achieved at 1920x1080 with the Medium preset. This yields an average of 100 FPS with a minimum of 85 FPS, providing a smooth and stable experience without the performance overhead of High or Ultra settings. The gap between Medium and High is 16 FPS, which is noticeable, but the visual difference in a third-person shooter may not justify the drop.

For players with 1440p monitors, the Medium preset is the only viable option, as it averages 65 FPS with a minimum of 55 FPS. This is playable, but it is close to the threshold where frame drops become noticeable. The Low preset at 1440p averages 85 FPS, which is smoother but at a significant visual cost. For a game like Minimum, the Medium preset at 1440p offers the best balance of visual quality and performance.

At 4K, the data suggests that the combo is not suitable for a good experience. Even the Low preset averages only 46 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target most players prefer. The Ultra preset at 4K averages 22 FPS, which is unplayable. The recommendation is to avoid 4K entirely with this pairing, as no settings preset can bring the FPS into a comfortable range.

The Ultra preset is the worst choice at any resolution. At 1080p, it drops to 64 FPS, which is still playable but 36 FPS lower than Medium. At 1440p, it falls to 41 FPS, and at 4K, it drops to 22 FPS. The performance cost of Ultra is not worth the visual gains, given the GPU’s limitations. The data clearly shows that Medium is the optimal preset for this combo, offering the highest FPS while maintaining a reasonable visual quality. For the best experience, stick to 1080p Medium or 1440p Medium, depending on your monitor’s native resolution.