Minimum

The AMD Radeon RX 7900M paired with the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H delivers a robust experience in Minimum, a 2014 Third-Person Shooter that remains demanding at high resolutions. The benchmark data shows a clear hierarchy where the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K, while the CPU’s 16 cores and high boost clock keep frame rates exceptionally high at 1080p. This combination ranks in the 58th percentile of all tested combos for this title, indicating solid, if not top-tier, performance relative to the broader database.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable yet steep performance drop as resolution increases, characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario at higher pixel counts. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo averages 147 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at High settings, the average falls to 95 FPS, a reduction of 35.4%. The jump to 3840x2160 at High settings yields an average of 51 FPS, which is 46.3% lower than the 1440p result and 65.3% lower than the 1080p figure. This scaling pattern strongly indicates that the Radeon RX 7900M’s rendering pipeline is the limiting factor as resolution increases.

The trend is consistent across all settings presets. With Low settings, the 1080p average is 229 FPS, dropping to 147 FPS at 1440p (a 35.8% decrease) and further to 79 FPS at 4K (a 46.3% decrease from 1440p). At Ultra settings, the numbers compress: 112 FPS at 1080p, 72 FPS at 1440p, and 39 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops between 1440p and 4K remain substantial (around 45-50%) across all presets, confirming that resolution scaling is the dominant factor. The fact that the 4K Ultra result (39 FPS) is less than half of the 1080p Ultra result (112 FPS) underscores how the GPU’s pixel throughput and memory bandwidth are saturated at higher resolutions, regardless of the graphics load.

Interestingly, the delta between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p is 117 FPS (229 vs. 112), while at 4K the delta is only 40 FPS (79 vs. 39). This narrowing gap at 4K suggests that the GPU is so heavily taxed by pixel count that the additional workload from higher settings has a proportionally smaller impact on frame rate, a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. The data indicates that for competitive play at high refresh rates, 1080p is the sweet spot, while 4K demands a compromise on settings to maintain playable frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of 2,939 tested combos for Minimum, this specific configuration of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and AMD Radeon RX 7900M achieves a rank of 1,224. This places it in the upper-middle tier of all tested systems, performing better than 58.4% of combinations. The rank reflects a balanced pairing where neither component is severely mismatched, but there is headroom for more powerful configurations.

The CPU’s standalone performance is strong, with the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H scoring 44,466 in the average benchmark, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (scoring 44,573, a 0.2% difference), the Intel Core i9-13950HX (44,342, 0.3% difference), and the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (44,309, 0.4% difference). These negligible deltas (all under 1%) suggest that the CPU is not a distinguishing factor in this combo’s ranking; any of these processors would likely yield similar results in Minimum.

On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 7900M scores 97,487 in the average benchmark, placing it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro VII (97,131, 0.4% faster), the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 (101,872, 4.3% faster), and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (92,466, 5.4% slower). The GPU’s high percentile ranking compared to the combo’s overall rank suggests that while the GPU is powerful, the 4K results are dragging the combo down, as the CPU is more than capable of feeding it at lower resolutions. The data shows a system that excels at 1080p and 1440p but falls short of elite 4K status.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900M is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture using the Navi 31 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is critical for Minimum, as the game’s textures and geometry at 4K Ultra can consume significant VRAM. The 16 GB capacity ensures that the game does not run out of memory at any tested setting, as evidenced by the consistent frame rates without stutter-related min FPS anomalies in most rows.

The GPU’s clock speeds are modest for a high-end part: a base clock of 1825 MHz and a boost clock of 2090 MHz. Memory runs at 2250 MHz, translating to 18 Gbps effective. These clocks, combined with 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 192 ROPs, yield a theoretical FP32 performance of 38.52 TFLOPS. In practice, the 4K results show that this raw compute power is sufficient for High settings (51 FPS) but struggles with Ultra (39 FPS). The pixel rate of 401.3 GPixel/s and texture rate of 601.9 GTexel/s are the key metrics that explain the frame rate drops at higher resolutions, as the GPU must process nearly four times the pixels at 4K compared to 1080p.

The 72 RT cores are present but irrelevant for this title, as Minimum does not utilize ray tracing. The GPU’s API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring full compatibility. The 180 W TDP indicates a power-hungry mobile part, but the benchmark data shows it delivers consistent performance without thermal throttling affecting the results. The GPU’s high percentile rank (94th) versus its nearest rivals confirms it is a top-tier mobile solution, but the measured FPS in Minimum at 4K shows that even this hardware is pushed to its limits by the game’s demanding visuals.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers exceptional performance across all presets. With Low settings, the average FPS is 229, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. Medium settings reduce the average to 175 FPS, with min and max readings of 149 and 201 FPS, respectively, indicating tight frame pacing. High settings yield 147 FPS, still far above the 144 Hz threshold. Ultra settings drop the average to 112 FPS, which remains smooth for most displays but shows a 51% reduction from Low.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but shows the GPU’s increasing workload. Low settings average 147 FPS, matching the 1080p High result, which demonstrates the scaling efficiency. Medium settings produce 113 FPS (min 96, max 130), a 35.4% drop from 1080p Medium. High settings average 95 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 72 FPS. These numbers indicate that 1440p High is the threshold for maintaining a 90+ FPS experience, while 1440p Ultra is playable but requires a variable refresh rate display to avoid tearing.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. Low settings average 79 FPS, which is playable but a far cry from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings drop to 61 FPS (min 52, max 70), High settings to 51 FPS, and Ultra settings to 39 FPS. The min FPS of 52 at 4K Medium suggests occasional dips below 60 FPS, which could be noticeable in fast-paced sequences. The data shows that 4K is only viable with Low or Medium settings for a consistent 60+ FPS experience, while High and Ultra are best reserved for slower-paced exploration or screenshot moments.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal balance of visual quality and frame rate depends heavily on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, the Ultra preset at 112 FPS is the best choice for most users, as it provides the highest visual fidelity while remaining comfortably above 100 FPS. Those with 144 Hz or higher refresh rate displays can step down to High at 147 FPS for a competitive edge, but the visual difference is minimal in this title.

At 2560x1440, the High preset at 95 FPS offers the best experience, delivering smooth gameplay with high detail. The Ultra preset at 72 FPS is acceptable for immersive play, but the 23 FPS drop from High is noticeable. The Medium preset at 113 FPS is the choice for competitive players who prioritize frame rate over fidelity, as it maintains a high refresh rate while sacrificing some shadows and textures.

For 3840x2160, the Medium preset at 61 FPS is the recommended setting, as it is the only preset that consistently stays above 60 FPS (min 52, max 70). The Low preset at 79 FPS provides a more comfortable margin, but the visual downgrade is significant. The High preset at 51 FPS and Ultra at 39 FPS are not recommended for action sequences, as the frame rate dips below the threshold for smooth motion. The data suggests that 4K owners should accept Medium settings to avoid the stutter that can occur near the 60 FPS line.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Minimum to achieve over 100 FPS?*

A: At 1920x1080, all settings presets except Ultra (112 FPS) exceed 100 FPS, with Low hitting 229 FPS and High hitting 147 FPS. At 2560x1440, only the Low (147 FPS) and Medium (113 FPS) presets break the 100 FPS barrier.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 39 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, making this preset unsuitable for fast-paced action in Minimum.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the primary bottleneck at 1440p High?

A: The data shows a 95 FPS average at 2560x1440 High, which is 35% lower than the 1080p High result (147 FPS). This large drop indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, as the CPU’s 16 cores and 5.10 GHz boost clock are more than sufficient for the game’s physics and AI at this resolution.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The lowest recorded min FPS is 52, which occurs at 3840x2160 with Medium settings. All other presets either have no min FPS data or show higher values, such as 149 at 1080p Medium and 96 at 1440p Medium.

Q: How does the GPU’s average benchmark score compare to its closest rival?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7900M has an average benchmark score of 97,487, which is 0.4% lower than the AMD Radeon Pro VII (97,131) and 4.3% lower than the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 (101,872). It is 5.4% higher than the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (92,466).

*Q: Does the combo’s rank in Minimum reflect its overall hardware strength?*

A: The combo ranks 1,224 out of 2,939 tested combinations, placing it in the 58th percentile. This is lower than the CPU’s 88th percentile and the GPU’s 94th percentile, suggesting that the game’s specific engine and resolution scaling characteristics penalize the combo more than synthetic benchmarks would indicate, particularly at 4K.