Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 delivers a high-refresh-rate experience in Minimum, a third-person shooter from 2014. This mobile CPU and desktop-class GPU combination lands in the 69th percentile of all tested combos for this title, showing strong performance but with clear scaling patterns tied to settings and resolution. The data indicates a system that can dominate at 1080p, remain smooth at 1440p, and only dip below ideal playability at 4K Ultra settings.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Minimum with this CPU/GPU combo?*

A: For consistently high frame rates, 2560x1440 is the sweet spot. The data shows an average of 106 FPS on High settings and 165 FPS on Low settings at this resolution. At 1920x1080, the system pushes even higher, hitting 256 FPS on Low, but the jump from 1440p to 1080p is less critical for smoothness than the jump from 1440p to 4K.

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

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 3840x2160, the average frame rate is 57 FPS on High settings and 68 FPS on Medium. However, on Ultra settings, it drops to 43 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold many players prefer. The 16 GB of VRAM is sufficient, but the GPU workload at 4K Ultra pushes the frame rate down significantly.

Q: How does the CPU's core and thread count affect performance in this game?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. For Minimum, a third-person shooter, the high single-thread performance is crucial. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3984 indicates strong per-core capability, which helps maintain high frame rates, especially at lower resolutions where the CPU is more likely to be a factor.

Q: What are the average FPS differences between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the average frame rate on Low settings is 256 FPS, while on Ultra settings it drops to 125 FPS. This represents a 131 FPS difference, showing that the Ultra preset nearly halves the performance compared to Low, likely due to increased GPU load from effects and shadows.

*Q: Is the RTX 4080's VRAM capacity a limiting factor in Minimum?*

A: No. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory with a 256-bit bus and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth. The data does not suggest any VRAM-related bottlenecks, as frame rates scale consistently with resolution and settings without any signs of stuttering or memory-related crashes. The 16 GB capacity is far more than what this 2014 title requires.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to all other tested configurations for this game?

A: The combo ranks 918 out of 2939 tested combinations. This places it in the top 31% of all systems tested for Minimum, which is a strong result. It indicates that most other tested combos perform worse, but there is still a significant number of higher-performing configurations, likely with newer or more powerful components.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is the dominant component in this combo for Minimum. Its performance is characterized by the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6567 and a PassMark G3D score of 34457, which place it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. The GPU's architecture is Ada Lovelace on a 5 nm process from TSMC, with a boost clock of 2505 MHz. This clock speed is a key driver for the frame rates seen in the measured data.

The RTX 4080’s memory subsystem is substantial, featuring 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, providing 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth. For a game like Minimum, this bandwidth ensures that texture streaming and high-resolution assets do not create bottlenecks. The GPU also has 9728 shading units and 304 TMUs, which handle the pixel and texture processing required for modern graphical effects.

The data shows a clear relationship between GPU load and frame rate. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 256 FPS, but this is likely limited by the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU enough draw calls. As resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the primary limiting factor, with frame rates dropping to 165 FPS and 89 FPS on Low settings, respectively. This scaling confirms that the RTX 4080 is being fully utilized at higher resolutions, where its raw compute power is necessary to maintain playable frame rates.

At 4K Ultra, the average FPS falls to 43. This is a significant drop from the 57 FPS at 4K High, indicating that the Ultra preset adds a substantial amount of graphical work that the GPU cannot overcome. The 43 FPS result suggests that for a locked 60 FPS experience at 4K, players should use High settings or lower. The RTX 4080's 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is not enough to brute-force the highest settings at that resolution in this title.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable scaling pattern from 1080p to 4K. At 1920x1080 High, the average frame rate is 164 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 High, the average drops to 106 FPS, a 35% reduction. At 3840x2160 High, the average falls to 57 FPS, a 65% reduction from 1080p. This shows that the GPU is the primary scaling factor, as the workload increases significantly with each resolution step.

The scaling is even more pronounced on Ultra settings. At 1080p Ultra, the system achieves 125 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 81 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 43 FPS. This 82 FPS difference between 1080p and 4K Ultra highlights the GPU-intensive nature of the Ultra preset. The data suggests that the CPU is less of a bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the frame rate drop is directly proportional to the increase in pixel count.

Interestingly, the frame rate drop from 1080p to 1440p is generally larger than the drop from 1440p to 4K in percentage terms. For example, on Medium settings, 1080p yields 196 FPS, 1440p yields 126 FPS (a 36% drop), and 4K yields 68 FPS (a 46% drop from 1440p). This indicates that while the pixel count increases by 78% from 1080p to 1440p, the performance cost is not linear, suggesting that other factors like memory bandwidth or cache efficiency play a role.

The data also shows that at 1080p Low, the 256 FPS average is likely near the CPU's limit. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H's single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3984, is strong, but it cannot push frame rates much higher than 256 FPS in this scenario. This is a classic sign of a CPU bottleneck at low resolutions, where the GPU has spare capacity but the CPU cannot issue instructions fast enough.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 ranks 918 out of 2939 tested combos for Minimum. This ranking places it in the 69th percentile, meaning it outperforms roughly 69% of all other tested systems in this game. This is a solid result, but it is not top-tier, indicating that newer or higher-end components can achieve better performance.

The GPU's individual percentile is 86, which is higher than the combo's overall ranking. This discrepancy suggests that the CPU is holding the system back in some scenarios. The CPU's percentile is 87, which is also high, but the combination of the two does not quite reach the same level. This could be due to the CPU's mobile nature, with a TDP of 25 W, which may limit sustained performance compared to desktop parts.

The combo's rank of 918 implies that there are over 2000 other combinations that perform worse. This reflects the RTX 4080's strength, as it can carry the system to high frame rates in most situations. However, the fact that the combo is not in the top 500 suggests that some combinations with more powerful desktop CPUs or newer GPUs can achieve higher frame rates, especially at lower resolutions where CPU performance is more critical.

The nearest rivals for the CPU in synthetic benchmarks are the Intel Core 7 253PE and Intel Core 5 223PE, with an average score difference of -0.1% and -0.2%, respectively. The GPU's nearest rival is the RTX 4080 SUPER, which is only 0.1% faster on average. This indicates that the individual components are well-matched in terms of raw performance, but the combo ranking for this specific game shows there is room for improvement.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 3, based on the Panther Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. For Minimum, a game that relies on high single-thread performance, the boost clock is critical. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3984 is a strong indicator of the CPU's ability to handle game logic and physics calculations.

The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, with 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 cache helps reduce memory latency, which is beneficial for maintaining high frame rates. The memory support is LPDDR5X with dual-channel configuration, providing 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth. This is sufficient for feeding the GPU with data, but it is not as high as some desktop platforms.

In the measured FPS data, the CPU's influence is most visible at 1080p. At 1080p Low, the system hits 256 FPS, which is likely a CPU limit. The PassMark single-thread score of 4005 supports this, as strong single-thread performance is necessary to achieve such high frame rates. However, the CPU's 16 threads are not fully utilized in this game, as it does not scale well with multi-threading.

The CPU's multi-core performance is still impressive, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28221. This ensures that background tasks or streaming do not interfere with gameplay. The PassMark multithread score of 32956 further confirms its capability. For Minimum, the CPU is not a bottleneck at 1440p or 4K, where the GPU takes over as the primary performance limiter, but it is essential for maximizing frame rates at 1080p.

The CPU's TDP is 25 W, which is low for a processor with 16 cores. This suggests that it is a mobile part designed for efficiency, but it may throttle under sustained heavy loads. However, the benchmark data shows that it can sustain high clock speeds, as evidenced by the strong single-thread scores. The integrated graphics are Arc B390, but they are not used when the discrete RTX 4080 is present.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. On Low settings, the average FPS is 256. Medium settings yield an average of 196 FPS, with a minimum of 166 FPS and a maximum of 225 FPS. High settings produce an average of 164 FPS. Ultra settings drop the average to 125 FPS. This shows a clear trade-off between visual quality and performance, with Ultra being 51% slower than Low.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but scale down. On Low settings, the average is 165 FPS. Medium settings average 126 FPS, with a minimum of 107 FPS and a maximum of 145 FPS. High settings average 106 FPS. Ultra settings pull the average down to 81 FPS. This resolution is the best balance for a high-refresh-rate monitor, as even Ultra is above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the system begins to struggle with the highest settings. On Low settings, the average is 89 FPS. Medium settings average 68 FPS, with a minimum of 58 FPS and a maximum of 78 FPS. High settings average 57 FPS. Ultra settings drop to 43 FPS average. For a smooth 4K experience, players should stick to Medium or High, as the Ultra preset does not maintain a consistent 60 FPS.

The data shows that the Medium settings at each resolution provide a good middle ground, with frame rates that are significantly higher than High or Ultra but still visually superior to Low. The minimum FPS values for Medium settings at all resolutions are also respectable, with the lowest being 58 FPS at 4K, which is just below the 60 FPS target. This indicates that the system can maintain a playable experience even in demanding scenes at Medium settings across all tested resolutions.