Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 combination delivers a highly capable experience in Minimum, a 2014 third-person shooter. The measured data shows this pairing is well-suited for high-refresh-rate gaming at 1080p and 1440p, while still providing playable performance at 4K. This analysis breaks down the CPU and GPU roles, frame rate scaling, and settings recommendations based strictly on the measured results.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture. It operates with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The processor features 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core, alongside 192 KB of L1 cache per core. This configuration is built on a 3 nm process node from TSMC, a detail that underscores its modern design.

For a game released in 2014, the CPU's high core count and impressive boost clock are more than sufficient. The data suggests that at 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 267 FPS average, a figure that is likely limited by the game engine's frame rate or the GPU's raw throughput rather than the CPU. The processor's single-thread performance, as indicated by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7303, is robust enough to handle the game's logic without creating a bottleneck.

In the context of this specific game, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and process game physics. With 24 cores, the Ultra 9 290K Plus far exceeds the requirements of a 2014 title, which was likely designed for quad-core or hexa-core processors. The benchmark results show that the CPU's capabilities are not the limiting factor in this system. For instance, the PassMark multithread score of 60860 and the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 51731 indicate massive headroom for any background tasks or future workloads, but for Minimum, the processor's performance is effectively in reserve.

The processor's memory support for DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth also plays a part. While the game itself does not likely stress memory bandwidth heavily, the platform's modern architecture ensures consistent frame pacing. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking among all tested CPUs confirms its elite status, but the measured frame rates in Minimum show that the game's performance is more closely tied to the GPU, particularly at higher resolutions and settings.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 achieves a combo rank of 776 out of 2939 tested combinations in Minimum. This places the pairing in the top 26.4% of all systems tested—a solid result, though not the absolute top tier for this game.

The ranking suggests that while this hardware is powerful, there are 775 other combinations that achieve higher average frame rates in this specific title. The RTX 3080, while a capable card, is not the newest or fastest GPU available. Its percentile rank among all GPUs is 68, indicating that a significant portion of the graphics cards tested outperform it. The CPU, however, is in the 96th percentile, meaning the processor is far more powerful relative to its peers than the GPU.

This mismatch explains the combo's position. The CPU has ample power to drive the RTX 3080 to its limits, but the GPU's performance ceiling defines the final frame rates. Comparing the CPU to its nearest rivals, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K scores 0.2% higher on average, while the AMD EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9135 score 1.1% and 1.2% higher respectively. The AMD EPYC 7F72 scores 1.3% lower. These differences are minor and unlikely to cause a meaningful shift in game performance. The GPU's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA P106-100, AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, and AMD Radeon RX 6600M, all of which score within 0.4% of the RTX 3080, showing that the graphics card's performance is tightly clustered with these other options.

For Minimum, the combo's rank is a function of the GPU's mid-range standing. The data shows that this system is well above average for the game, but it does not reach the top ranks that would require a more powerful graphics card.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 provides the highest frame rates, with an average of 267 FPS at Low settings and 171 FPS at High settings. This makes it the best resolution for maximizing refresh rate.

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

A: Yes, the measured results show 4K is playable. At 4K with High settings, the average FPS is 60, and at Medium settings, it averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 FPS. Ultra settings drop to 45 FPS average.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2% lower than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K's score of 83807. This difference is negligible in terms of real-world gaming performance.

Q: What is the GPU's memory bandwidth and size?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 features 10 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 320-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s. This is sufficient for the textures and effects used in Minimum.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: No. The CPU's high single-thread performance and 24-core design far exceed the game's requirements. The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K indicates that the GPU becomes the limiting factor at higher resolutions, not the CPU.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the GPU?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 had a launch MSRP of 699 USD.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets.

At 1920x1080, the system is exceptionally fast. With Low settings, the average frame rate is 267 FPS. Moving to Medium settings, the average drops to 204 FPS, with a minimum of 174 FPS and a maximum of 235 FPS. High settings produce an average of 171 FPS. The most demanding preset, Ultra, still delivers a strong 131 FPS average. This data indicates that at 1080p, the system is well-suited for high-refresh-rate monitors, with even the Ultra preset remaining comfortably above 120 FPS.

At 2560x1440, performance remains high but shows a predictable decrease. Low settings average 172 FPS, which is a 35.6% drop from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings average 132 FPS, with a minimum of 112 FPS and a maximum of 151 FPS. High settings average 110 FPS. The Ultra preset falls to an average of 84 FPS. These numbers confirm that 1440p is a sweet spot for this combo, delivering high frame rates across all settings while still offering a visual upgrade over 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the system begins to show its limits. Low settings average 93 FPS, which is a 65.2% drop from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings average 71 FPS, with a minimum of 60 FPS and a maximum of 82 FPS. High settings average exactly 60 FPS, making it playable but right at the edge of what is considered smooth. Ultra settings average only 45 FPS, which is below the typical 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. This data suggests that 4K is viable but requires a compromise on settings to maintain a stable frame rate.

The data shows a clear trend: the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 136 FPS. At 1440p, the difference is 88 FPS. At 4K, the difference is only 48 FPS. This is classic behavior for a GPU-limited scenario, where the graphics card's workload increases with resolution, compressing the performance range across settings.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is the primary driver of frame rates in Minimum. This GPU is built on the Ampere architecture with the GA102 chip, manufactured on an 8 nm process from Samsung. It features 8704 shading units, 272 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. The card has 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, though these are not heavily utilized in a 2014 title that likely does not support ray tracing or DLSS.

The GPU's clocks are set at 1440 MHz base and 1710 MHz boost. Memory runs at 1188 MHz, with an effective speed of 19 Gbps. The 10 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 320-bit bus provides 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is more than adequate for Minimum, which was released before the era of massive texture packs and high-resolution assets.

The RTX 3080's performance is rated at 29.77 TFLOPS for FP32 operations, with a texture fill rate of 465.1 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s. These figures are exceptionally high for a game from 2014. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 25086 places it in the 68th percentile of all GPUs, indicating that it is a solid mid-to-high-range performer, but not the top-tier card available.

The measured FPS data shows that the GPU is the bottleneck at higher resolutions. For example, at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 45, which is a significant drop from the 1080p Ultra result of 131 FPS. This is a 65.6% reduction, directly attributable to the GPU's rendering workload. At 1080p, the GPU can easily keep up with the CPU, but as resolution increases, the GPU's throughput becomes the limiting factor. The card's 10 GB of VRAM is not a concern here, as the game's memory footprint is likely well below this limit. The data indicates that the RTX 3080 is a capable card for this game, providing excellent performance at 1080p and 1440p, and acceptable performance at 4K with settings adjustments.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user's resolution and performance target.

For 1920x1080, the Ultra preset provides an average of 131 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold and suitable for high-refresh-rate gaming. This preset offers the best visual quality without compromising performance. The High preset at 171 FPS is also excellent, but Ultra provides a better visual experience for only a 40 FPS cost. The Medium preset at 204 FPS is unnecessary unless the user has a 240 Hz monitor and wants to maximize frame rate.

For 2560x1440, the High preset is the recommended choice. It delivers an average of 110 FPS, which is smooth and responsive. The Ultra preset averages 84 FPS, which is still playable but may feel less fluid on a 120 Hz or 144 Hz monitor. The Medium preset at 132 FPS is a good alternative for users who prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity. The Low preset at 172 FPS is excessive and would diminish the visual experience without a significant practical benefit.

For 3840x2160, the Medium preset is the best option. It averages 71 FPS with a minimum of 60 FPS, ensuring a stable and playable experience. The High preset at 60 FPS is playable but lacks the headroom to prevent occasional drops below 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 45 FPS is not recommended for smooth gameplay. The Low preset at 93 FPS is an option, but the visual quality loss is substantial, making Medium the better balance of quality and performance.

In summary, the data suggests using Ultra at 1080p, High at 1440p, and Medium at 4K to achieve the best balance of visual quality and frame rate for this combo.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data reveals a clear resolution scaling pattern. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 171 FPS at 1080p to 110 FPS at 1440p, a 35.7% decrease. From 1440p to 4K, the frame rate drops from 110 FPS to 60 FPS, a 45.5% decrease. The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 64.9%.

This scaling behavior is a strong indicator of a GPU-bound workload. The number of pixels increases significantly with each resolution step—from about 2.1 million at 1080p to 3.7 million at 1440p and 8.3 million at 4K. The GPU must process more fragments and fill more pixels, leading to a near-linear increase in workload. The CPU's performance remains constant across resolutions, so the drop in FPS is almost entirely due to the GPU's rendering capacity.

At Low settings, the scaling is similar. The frame rate drops from 267 FPS at 1080p to 172 FPS at 1440p (a 35.6% drop) and then to 93 FPS at 4K (a 45.9% drop). The proportional drops are consistent across settings, which confirms that the GPU is the limiting component in all cases. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a smaller performance gap between resolutions, as the CPU's workload would remain constant while the GPU's workload increases.

The data also shows that the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K shrinks as settings increase. At Low settings, the difference is 174 FPS. At Ultra settings, the difference is 86 FPS. This is because at higher settings, the GPU is already more heavily loaded at 1080p, so the relative impact of resolution scaling is smaller. This pattern further supports the conclusion that the RTX 3080 is the performance limiter in this system, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus provides more than enough headroom to avoid any CPU-induced bottlenecks.