Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 delivers a wide spread of frame rates across Minimum, a Third-Person Shooter released in 2014. Benchmark data shows the combination is capable of high refresh rate play at 1080p, but struggles to maintain smooth performance at 4K with maximum settings. The measured FPS values reveal a system where the GPU becomes the primary constraint at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s strong single-thread performance supports very high frame rates at lower resolutions. This analysis walks through the VRAM, clocks, core counts, and measured results to explain where this combo excels and where it falls short.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using the AD104 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The GPU contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². It features 5888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. The RTX 4070 also includes 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores, though Minimum’s 2014 engine likely does not leverage these advanced features heavily. The GPU’s base clock is 1920 MHz with a boost clock of 2475 MHz, and memory runs at 1313 MHz, which translates to 21 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration is a key factor for Minimum. The card has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth. For a game from 2014, 12 GB is more than sufficient for texture data at any resolution, even 4K. The memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s is also ample for the game’s era, meaning the GPU is unlikely to be bandwidth-limited in most scenes. The pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s, which are strong numbers for rasterizing a third-person shooter. The FP32 performance is 29.15 TFLOPS, with FP16 also at 29.15 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio).

In the measured FPS data, the RTX 4070 shows clear scaling with settings. At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 34 on Ultra to 70 on Low. The jump from Low to Medium is 54 FPS, a 16 FPS drop, while going from Medium to High yields 45 FPS, another 9 FPS drop. The step from High to Ultra is the most punishing, dropping from 45 to 34 FPS, an 11 FPS decline. This pattern indicates that Ultra settings introduce effects that heavily tax the GPU, likely including higher shadow quality, post-processing, or draw distances. At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds: Low averages 130 FPS, Medium 100 FPS, High 84 FPS, and Ultra 64 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is 20 FPS, which is proportionally larger than at 4K, suggesting the GPU is less saturated at 1440p and the Ultra preset’s extra work is more noticeable.

The GPU’s percentile vs all GPUs is 81, meaning it outperforms 81% of tested graphics cards. Its average benchmark score is 37648, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (avg score 37628, deltaPct 0.1), AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (avg score 37507, deltaPct 0.4), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (avg score 38135, deltaPct -1.3), and AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (avg score 37157, deltaPct 1.3). The RTX 4070 sits within 1.3% of these rivals, indicating similar raw performance. However, in Minimum specifically, the measured FPS shows the RTX 4070 is not able to hold 60 FPS at 4K Ultra (34 FPS) or 4K High (45 FPS), which reflects the game’s demanding nature at high resolutions despite its age. The 12 GB VRAM is never a limiting factor here, as even at 4K Ultra the FPS drops are due to compute or fill-rate limits, not memory capacity.

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

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a mobile processor from the Core Ultra Series 3, built on the Panther Lake architecture using a 3 nm process at Intel. It has 16 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The TDP is 25 W, which is low for a 16-core chip, but the boost clock of 5.10 GHz is high for a mobile part. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports LPDDR5X memory on a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. It uses a PCIe Gen 5 interface with 4 lanes for the CPU, and it has an integrated Arc B390 GPU, though the discrete RTX 4070 handles rendering.

For Minimum, single-thread performance is critical, as most game logic and draw call submission happens on one or a few threads. The CPU’s boost clock of 5.10 GHz is exceptionally high, and this shows in benchmark scores. In Cinebench R23, the single-core score is 2200.5, while the multi-core score is 18911. The single-core performance places it well above average for gaming workloads. The Passmark single-thread score is 4280, and the multithread score is 36811. These numbers indicate the CPU can feed the GPU with high frame rates without becoming a bottleneck, especially at lower resolutions where FPS is high.

The CPU’s percentile vs all CPUs is 88, and its average benchmark score is 44466. Nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (avg score 44573, deltaPct -0.2), Intel Core i9-13950HX (avg score 44342, deltaPct 0.3), AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (avg score 44309, deltaPct 0.4), and Intel Core i5-13600 (avg score 44240, deltaPct 0.5). The Core Ultra X9 388H is within 0.5% of these rivals, meaning it is essentially tied with them in overall benchmark performance. In Minimum, the CPU’s role is to maintain high frame rates at 1080p. The measured FPS at 1920x1080 on Low is 202 FPS, which is well above what most displays can show, but it demonstrates that the CPU is not limiting at that settings level. At 1080p High, the FPS drops to 130, which is still high, and at Medium it is 154 FPS. The fact that 1080p Low reaches 202 FPS while 1440p Low only reaches 130 FPS suggests the GPU is the limiting factor as resolution increases, not the CPU.

The CPU’s 16 cores and 16 threads mean it has no hyper-threading, but for a game like Minimum, which likely uses fewer than 8 threads, this is not a concern. The 18 MB of L3 cache is adequate for game data, and the 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is sufficient for feeding the CPU’s cores. The integrated Arc B390 GPU is present but not used in this configuration. Overall, the Core Ultra X9 388H provides enough single-thread performance to push very high frame rates at 1080p, but the RTX 4070 becomes the bottleneck as resolution and settings increase.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo in Minimum?

A: The highest average FPS is 202, recorded at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H compare to the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D has an average score of 44573, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has an average score of 44466, making the AMD part 0.2% faster.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS measured for this combo, and at what settings?

A: The lowest average FPS is 34, recorded at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: Does the RTX 4070 have more or less raw performance than the RTX 4080 Mobile based on average benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 4070 has an average benchmark score of 37648, while the RTX 4080 Mobile has a score of 38135, meaning the RTX 4080 Mobile is 1.3% faster.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested combinations in Minimum?

A: The combo ranks 1562 out of 2939 tested combinations.

Q: What is the boost clock of the CPU, and how does it relate to single-thread performance?

A: The boost clock is 5.10 GHz, and the Cinebench R23 single-core score is 2200.5, indicating strong single-thread capability for gaming.

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

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of scaling across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 202 on Low to 99 on Ultra. At 2560x1440, the range is 130 on Low to 64 on Ultra. At 3840x2160, the range is 70 on Low to 34 on Ultra. Comparing the Low settings across resolutions, the FPS drops from 202 at 1080p to 130 at 1440p, a 35.6% decrease, and then to 70 at 4K, a 46.2% decrease from 1440p. This steep drop indicates that the GPU is heavily loaded by the pixel count increase. The CPU’s performance is sufficient to maintain high FPS at 1080p, as evidenced by the 202 FPS result, but as resolution rises, the GPU’s fill rate and shading capacity become the limiting factor.

For Ultra settings, the drop is from 99 FPS at 1080p to 64 FPS at 1440p (35.4% decrease), and then to 34 FPS at 4K (46.9% decrease from 1440p). The consistent percentage drops across settings suggest that resolution scaling is uniform, with the GPU being the primary constraint. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain flat or drop less at higher resolutions, but the data shows proportional decreases with pixel count. The 4K Ultra result of 34 FPS is particularly telling, as it is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play, indicating that the RTX 4070 is not sufficient for max settings at 4K in this game.

The Medium settings provide a useful middle ground. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 154, with min FPS of 131 and max of 178. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 100 FPS, with min 85 and max 115. At 4K Medium, the average is 54 FPS, with min 46 and max 62. The min FPS at 4K Medium (46) is below 60, meaning there are noticeable frame drops even at this settings level. This pattern confirms that the GPU’s performance scales almost linearly with resolution, and the CPU is not holding back the system until very high frame rates are achieved, which only happens at 1080p Low.

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

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 202 FPS, with no min or max recorded. Medium settings yield an average of 154 FPS, with a min of 131 and max of 178. High settings average 130 FPS, with no min or max. Ultra settings average 99 FPS, with no min or max. The gap between Low and Ultra is 103 FPS, which is a 51% reduction. This shows that Ultra settings nearly halve the frame rate compared to Low, but even Ultra remains above 60 FPS, making 1080p playable at all settings.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops significantly. Low settings average 130 FPS, which is still high enough for a 144Hz display. Medium settings average 100 FPS, with a min of 85 and max of 115, keeping the experience smooth. High settings average 84 FPS, which is above 60 but may show dips in demanding scenes. Ultra settings average 64 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS threshold but with no recorded min, meaning occasional drops below 60 are possible. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 66 FPS, or a 50.8% reduction.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly strained. Low settings average 70 FPS, which is playable but not high refresh. Medium settings average 54 FPS, with a min of 46 and max of 62, meaning the frame rate dips below 60 frequently. High settings average 45 FPS, which is below the smooth play threshold. Ultra settings average 34 FPS, which is barely playable and likely feels sluggish in fast-paced combat. The drop from Low to Ultra at 4K is 36 FPS, a 51.4% reduction, consistent with the other resolutions. The data shows that 4K is only viable with Low settings for this combo, and even then, the 70 FPS average may not be stable in all scenes.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the best settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset provides 99 FPS average, which is smooth for most players. If a higher refresh rate is preferred, the High preset at 130 FPS is a better choice, as it offers a 31 FPS improvement over Ultra while likely retaining most visual quality. The Medium preset at 154 FPS is also viable for competitive play, and Low at 202 FPS is the maximum possible, but the visual tradeoff may not be worth it for a game like Minimum. For 1080p, the recommendation is High for a balance of visuals and performance, or Medium if the player prioritizes frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 84 FPS, which is above 60 and provides good visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 64 FPS is still playable, but the 20 FPS drop from High to Ultra suggests that Ultra settings add significant GPU load without a proportional visual gain. The Medium preset at 100 FPS is the best option for a 144Hz monitor, as it maintains high frame rates while still offering improved textures and effects over Low. For 1440p, the recommendation is Medium for high refresh play, or High for a more visually rich experience while staying above 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the options are limited. The Low preset at 70 FPS is the only setting that provides a smooth experience, but it sacrifices most visual effects. The Medium preset at 54 FPS is borderline, with a min of 46 FPS, which will cause noticeable stutters. High and Ultra at 45 and 34 FPS respectively are not recommended for gameplay. For 4K, the best experience per the measured rows is Low settings, as it is the only preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS. Players who prefer visual quality over frame rate may accept Medium at 54 FPS, but the min FPS of 46 indicates that combat scenes will drop below acceptable levels.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo of Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 ranks 1562 out of 2939 tested combinations in Minimum. This places it in the middle of the pack, which is surprising given the hardware’s capabilities. The rank of 1562 means that 1377 other combos achieve higher average FPS or better performance metrics in this game. However, the rank is likely influenced by the fact that Minimum is an older title, and many modern high-end GPUs can achieve higher frame rates at 4K, while this combo’s RTX 4070 is a mid-range to upper-mid-range card. The CPU’s percentile of 88 and GPU’s percentile of 81 are both above average, but the combo’s rank in this specific game is lower, indicating that Minimum is particularly demanding on the GPU at high resolutions.

The nearest rivals for the CPU and GPU provide context. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (deltaPct -0.2), Intel Core i9-13950HX (0.3), AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (0.4), and Intel Core i5-13600 (0.5). The RTX 4070 is similarly close to the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (0.1), AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (0.4), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (-1.3), and AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (1.3). This means that swapping the CPU or GPU for a very similar part would likely result in a similar rank in Minimum. The combo’s rank of 1562 out of 2939 puts it in the 53rd percentile of tested combos, meaning it performs better than about 53% of all combinations. Given that the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions, a stronger GPU would improve the rank, while a weaker CPU would have less impact on this game’s performance. The data suggests that this combo is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but falls behind at 4K, which likely contributes to its mid-pack ranking.