Minimum

# Minimum Performance Analysis: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile

The measured frame rates for Minimum across three resolutions and four quality presets reveal a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-limited at higher settings, with the RTX 5070 Ti Mobile delivering playable performance at 1440p but struggling to maintain smooth 4K at maximum detail. The data shows a consistent pattern: as resolution increases and settings climb, frame rates drop at a rate that points squarely at the graphics card as the primary bottleneck. At 1080p, even the Ultra preset achieves 115 FPS, which suggests the CPU has ample headroom. The 16-core Intel Core Ultra X9 388H with a 5.10 GHz boost clock appears more than sufficient for this 2014-era shooter, so the discussion centers on how the GPU's 12 GB of GDDR7 memory and 672.0 GB/s bandwidth interact with the game's demands across different quality levels.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy of performance across presets, and the optimal choice depends heavily on the target resolution. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 234 FPS, Medium hits 179 FPS, High reaches 150 FPS, and Ultra drops to 115 FPS. For competitive play or high-refresh monitors, the Low preset's 234 FPS is arguably the best experience, offering nearly double the frame rate of Ultra while sacrificing visual fidelity. However, for most players seeking a balance, the High preset at 150 FPS is the sweet spot—it provides a substantial improvement over Medium's 179 FPS only if one values the extra visual effects, but the gap between Medium (179 FPS) and High (150 FPS) is smaller than the jump to Ultra (115 FPS). The data suggests that Medium at 1080p is a strong recommendation because it maintains 179 FPS, which is well above the 144 Hz threshold for many displays, while likely retaining most of the game's visual polish.

Moving to 1440p, the measured results show a similar pattern with lower absolute numbers. Low delivers 151 FPS, Medium offers 116 FPS, High achieves 97 FPS, and Ultra falls to 74 FPS. Here, the Medium preset at 116 FPS is the recommended choice for a smooth experience on 1440p displays, as it stays above the 100 FPS mark while High drops below that psychologically important threshold. The 74 FPS at Ultra is still playable for a slower-paced third-person shooter, but the 42 FPS gap between Medium and Ultra is steep, suggesting that the visual gains from Ultra are not worth the performance cost at this resolution.

At 4K, the situation becomes more constrained. Low produces 81 FPS, Medium 62 FPS, High 52 FPS, and Ultra 40 FPS. For 4K gaming, the Medium preset at 62 FPS is the best experience per the measured rows—it is the only preset that maintains a frame rate above 60 FPS, which is the common target for smooth gameplay on 4K displays. High at 52 FPS is borderline, and Ultra at 40 FPS is likely too choppy for most players. The Low preset at 81 FPS would be preferred by those who prioritize frame rate over visuals, but the 19 FPS difference between Low and Medium suggests that Medium offers a better visual-to-performance trade-off without dipping below the 60 FPS mark. Across all resolutions, the data consistently shows Medium as the balanced choice, with High being a compromise at 1440p and above, and Ultra reserved for those who accept lower frame rates for maximum fidelity.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile is the dominant component in this system's gaming performance, and the benchmark data underscores its role. The GPU's 12 GB of GDDR7 memory is a key factor; for a game released in 2014, this is more than sufficient capacity, but the memory bandwidth of 672.0 GB/s and the 192-bit bus width are more relevant to how the card handles higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 40 suggests the GPU is heavily taxed, likely due to the combination of high-resolution rendering and the game's Ultra effects pushing the card's shading units (5888) and ROPs (80) to their limits. The boost clock of 1447 MHz is modest compared to desktop counterparts, but the card's Blackwell 2.0 architecture with 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores suggests it should handle modern workloads; for Minimum, the data indicates that the rasterization pipeline is the primary constraint.

The measured frame rates across presets show a consistent GPU-bound pattern. At 1080p, the difference between Low (234 FPS) and Ultra (115 FPS) is 119 FPS, a 51% reduction that likely reflects the increased pixel shading and texture work at higher settings. At 4K, the drop from Low (81 FPS) to Ultra (40 FPS) is 41 FPS, a similar percentage reduction, but the absolute numbers are much lower due to the 4x increase in pixel count from 1080p. This scaling suggests the GPU's pixel rate of 115.8 GPixel/s is a limiting factor at 4K, as the card must fill four times as many pixels. The 17.04 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is respectable for a mobile part, but the data shows it is insufficient for 4K Ultra at 60 FPS, with the measured 40 FPS indicating the card is working near its ceiling. The GPU's percentile rank of 80 versus all GPUs places it in the upper tier, but the nearest rivals—such as the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 with a deltaPct of -0.2—are workstation cards that likely behave differently in gaming workloads.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS progression from 1080p to 4K reveals a clear scaling pattern that identifies the GPU as the bottleneck. At Medium settings, the average FPS moves from 179 at 1080p to 116 at 1440p to 62 at 4K. This represents a 35% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 47% drop from 1440p to 4K. The fact that the percentage drop increases with resolution is a textbook sign of GPU limitation, as the pixel count scales geometrically (1080p has 2.07 million pixels, 1440p has 3.69 million, and 4K has 8.29 million). If the CPU were the limiting factor, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions, but the data shows a steep decline that tracks almost perfectly with pixel count. For instance, the pixel count increases by 78% from 1080p to 1440p, and the FPS drops by 35%, which is less than the pixel increase, suggesting some headroom in the GPU. However, from 1440p to 4K, the pixel count increases by 125%, and the FPS drops by 47%, which is a closer match to a purely GPU-bound scenario.

Looking at High settings, the scaling is even more pronounced: 150 FPS at 1080p, 97 FPS at 1440p, and 52 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 35%, and from 1440p to 4K is 46%, which is remarkably consistent with the Medium preset's scaling. This consistency across settings indicates that the resolution scaling is independent of the quality level, reinforcing the conclusion that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the primary constraints. The Low preset shows a similar pattern: 234 FPS at 1080p, 151 FPS at 1440p, and 81 FPS at 4K, with drops of 35% and 46% respectively. This uniformity suggests that the game's rendering workload scales predictably with resolution, and the RTX 5070 Ti Mobile's performance is limited by its 672.0 GB/s bandwidth when moving to higher pixel counts. The measured data implies that for a smooth 4K experience, one must significantly reduce settings, as even Medium only achieves 62 FPS, which is barely above the 60 FPS target.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest performance across all presets. The Low preset achieves an average of 234 FPS, the Medium preset reaches 179 FPS with a minimum of 152 FPS and a maximum of 206 FPS, the High preset produces 150 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 115 FPS. The Medium preset's measured range of 152-206 FPS indicates some frame time variance, but the average of 179 FPS is well above any display refresh rate below 165 Hz. The 115 FPS at Ultra is still smooth for most players, but the 64 FPS gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is significant, suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional effects (likely shadows, reflections, and post-processing) impose a heavy cost on the GPU. The data shows that at 1080p, even the most demanding preset does not push the system below 115 FPS, which means the CPU-GPU combination has plenty of headroom for future titles or higher refresh rate displays.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops predictably but remains playable across all presets. Low produces 151 FPS, Medium averages 116 FPS with a range of 98-133 FPS, High achieves 97 FPS, and Ultra falls to 74 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 98 FPS is noteworthy because it stays above the 90 FPS threshold, which is often considered the minimum for a smooth experience on high-refresh 1440p monitors. The High preset at 97 FPS is just below that threshold, and the Ultra preset at 74 FPS is still acceptable for a third-person shooter, but the frame rate drops below what many players would consider ideal. The 77 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is proportionally similar to the 1080p gap, confirming the GPU-bound nature of the workload.

At 3840x2160, the system's limitations become apparent. Low achieves 81 FPS, Medium averages 62 FPS with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS, High produces 52 FPS, and Ultra drops to 40 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 53 FPS is below the 60 FPS target, which means even the recommended setting will experience occasional dips that could be noticeable in fast-paced scenes. The Ultra preset at 40 FPS is likely too low for comfortable gameplay, and the High preset at 52 FPS is borderline. The data shows that 4K requires a significant compromise: players must choose between the Low preset's 81 FPS, which sacrifices visual quality, or the Medium preset's 62 FPS average, which is playable but not consistently smooth. The 41 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is the largest absolute gap across all resolutions, indicating that the Ultra preset's effects are particularly demanding at high pixel counts.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset to use at 1440p for this system?

A: Based on the measured data, the Medium preset at 1440p delivers 116 FPS average with a minimum of 98 FPS, making it the only preset that stays above 90 FPS at this resolution. High drops to 97 FPS, and Ultra falls to 74 FPS, so Medium offers the best balance of visual quality and smoothness.

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS at 4K Ultra settings?

A: No. The measured average FPS at 4K Ultra is 40, which is 20 FPS below the 60 FPS target. Even at 4K High, the system only averages 52 FPS, so 4K gaming requires Medium (62 FPS) or Low (81 FPS) for a playable experience.

Q: How does the GPU's memory bandwidth affect performance at higher resolutions?

A: The RTX 5070 Ti Mobile has a memory bandwidth of 672.0 GB/s, which is substantial, but the data shows that performance drops by roughly 35-47% when moving from 1440p to 4K. This suggests that the 12 GB of GDDR7 memory is sufficient, but the bandwidth is a limiting factor at 4K, where the GPU must access more texture data per frame.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The data strongly indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. At 1080p, the FPS ranges from 115 to 234 depending on settings, while at 4K, it drops to 40-81 FPS. This scaling with resolution is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, and the CPU's 16 cores with a 5.10 GHz boost clock are more than capable of feeding the GPU at these frame rates.

Q: What is the frame rate range for the Medium preset at 1080p?

A: The measured range is 152 FPS minimum to 206 FPS maximum, with an average of 179 FPS. This variance of 54 FPS suggests some scenes are more demanding than others, but the minimum is still well above typical display refresh rates.

Q: How does this system's performance compare to other tested combos?

A: This combination ranks 1420 out of 3712 tested combos for Minimum, placing it in the top 38% of all configurations. This is a respectable ranking, but it indicates that many other systems deliver higher frame rates, likely due to more powerful GPUs or desktop-class components.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. Its base clock of 2.10 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz provide a wide dynamic range, and its benchmark scores reflect strong performance: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18911 and a single-core score of 2200.5 place it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. In the context of Minimum, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic, and the measured frame rates suggest it does so without becoming a bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 234 FPS, which is a very high frame rate that would challenge many CPUs, yet the data shows no signs of CPU limitation, such as frame rate plateaus across resolutions. The fact that the FPS scales consistently with resolution—dropping from 234 at 1080p to 81 at 4K on Low settings—indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, not the CPU.

The CPU's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per core L2 cache provide ample storage for game data, and its dual-channel LPDDR5X memory support with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for a 2014-era title. Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D is 0.2% faster, the Intel Core i9-13950HX is 0.3% slower, and the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is 0.4% slower, with the Intel Core i5-13600 being 0.5% slower. These deltas are negligible, meaning the Core Ultra X9 388H performs on par with a range of desktop and mobile chips, further confirming that the CPU is not a limiting factor in this game. The Cinebench R20 single-core score of 1849 and PassMark single-thread score of 4280 indicate strong per-core performance, which is important for older games like Minimum that may not utilize all 16 cores efficiently. The data implies that the CPU has significant headroom, and if the GPU were upgraded, the system could potentially achieve even higher frame rates at 1080p without CPU constraints.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile ranks 1420 out of 3712 tested combinations for Minimum, placing it in the 61.7th percentile of all systems. This ranking indicates that while the system is capable, it is not at the top of the performance chart. The GPU's percentile rank of 80 against all GPUs is higher than the combo's overall rank, which suggests that other factors—such as the CPU or system configuration—may be holding back the GPU's potential in this specific game. Alternatively, the rank could reflect that many other tested combos use desktop GPUs that outperform mobile parts like the RTX 5070 Ti Mobile. The GPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 (0.2% faster), AMD Radeon Pro Duo (1.2% faster), and NVIDIA T1000 (2.4% faster), while the NVIDIA A2 is 2.1% slower. These are all professional or older cards, which is interesting because it suggests the RTX 5070 Ti Mobile's gaming performance is comparable to workstation-class GPUs in this title.

The combo's rank in the top 38% of all tested systems is a solid result, but the data reveals that there is room for improvement. For context, if the GPU were paired with a faster CPU, the rank might improve if the game is sensitive to CPU performance, but the measured FPS scaling suggests otherwise. The fact that the system achieves 234 FPS at 1080p Low but only 40 FPS at 4K Ultra indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint, and the rank likely reflects the GPU's limitations at higher resolutions. The 12 GB of VRAM is not a limiting factor for Minimum, as the game likely uses less than 4 GB even at 4K Ultra, but the GPU's raw rasterization throughput is what determines the measured frame rates. Overall, this combo is a capable performer for Minimum, delivering smooth 1080p and 1440p experiences, with 4K requiring settings compromises. The rank of 1420 out of 3712 is a fair representation of its performance, placing it above average but not among the elite configurations, which would likely feature desktop-class GPUs with higher power budgets and clock speeds.