Evolve

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Evolve with the Intel Core i3-12100F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 covers three resolutions and four quality presets. All figures are average FPS, as the database did not record minimum or maximum frame times for this combination.

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly below playable thresholds. The Low preset averages 29.2 FPS, Medium drops to 25.9 FPS, High falls further to 15.9 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 10.8 FPS. Even the least demanding preset at this resolution fails to reach half of the 60 FPS target.

Moving to 2560x1440, the picture improves but remains insufficient. Low settings produce 48.6 FPS, which is the strongest result at this resolution. Medium averages 40.9 FPS, High drops to 32.7 FPS, and Ultra lands at 23.8 FPS. None of these meet the 60 FPS threshold, though Low comes within roughly 19% of it.

At 1920x1080, the combination finally reaches playable territory. The Low preset delivers 77.5 FPS on average, clearing the 60 FPS bar with a comfortable margin. Medium sits at 59.7 FPS, just below the threshold, while High manages 45.5 FPS and Ultra falls to 35 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium costs 17.8 FPS, and from Medium to High another 14.2 FPS.

The data shows a clear pattern: each step up in quality reduces frame rate substantially, and each increase in resolution exacts a heavy toll. The gap between Low at 1080p and Low at 1440p is 28.9 FPS, while the gap between Low at 1440p and Low at 4K is 19.4 FPS.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the dominant constraint for Evolve at all three tested resolutions. The GTX 1650's 4 GB GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus, with bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s, appear to limit performance more than the i3-12100F's four cores and eight threads.

Evidence for GPU-bound behavior comes from the resolution scaling. At Low settings, dropping from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 reduces average FPS from 77.5 to 48.6, a 37% decrease. Dropping further to 3840x2160 reduces it to 29.2, another 40% decrease. This near-linear scaling with pixel count is typical of GPU-limited scenarios, where the CPU has headroom to feed the graphics pipeline but the renderer cannot keep up.

The CPU's role becomes more visible at lower resolutions and higher settings. At 1080p Ultra, the frame rate of 35 FPS is still well above the 4K Ultra result of 10.8 FPS, suggesting the GPU remains the bottleneck even at the least demanding pixel count. However, the i3-12100F's single-thread performance, as measured by a 3DMark single-thread score of 893, is sufficient to avoid major CPU stalls at these frame rates.

The preset scaling within a resolution further confirms GPU dominance. At 1080p, moving from Low to Medium costs 17.8 FPS, Medium to High costs 14.2 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 10.5 FPS. The diminishing returns at higher presets align with the GTX 1650's fixed shading units (896), texture units (56), and raster operations pipelines (32).

At 1440p and 4K, the GPU load grows to the point where even Low settings cannot reach 60 FPS. The recorded data shows no configuration where the CPU becomes the limiting factor, meaning the i3-12100F's compute resources, including its 12 MB shared L3 cache and 4.30 GHz boost clock, are not the primary constraint in any tested scenario.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 3840x2160, the database records no playable settings. The highest average FPS at this resolution is 29.2 on Low, which is less than half of the 60 FPS threshold. No preset reaches the playable threshold, so there is no "best" setting that meets the requirement.

At 2560x1440, the same conclusion applies. Low settings produce 48.6 FPS, which is the best recorded result, but it still falls short of 60 FPS by 11.4 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all perform worse, with averages of 40.9, 32.7, and 23.8 FPS respectively. None qualify as playable.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only configuration that clears the 60 FPS bar. It averages 77.5 FPS, which is 17.5 FPS above the threshold. Medium comes close at 59.7 FPS, missing by just 0.3 FPS, but the verdict data explicitly lists only Low as playable. High and Ultra, at 45.5 and 35 FPS, are substantially below the threshold.

The database's verdictByResolution field confirms this: at 1080p, the best playable setting is Low with an average of 77.5 FPS. No higher preset meets the requirement, and no preset at 1440p or 4K does either.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Evolve at 1920x1080?

A: Yes, but only on the Low preset. The average FPS at 1080p Low is 77.5, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium falls just short at 59.7 FPS.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 2560x1440?

A: There is no playable setting at 1440p. The best recorded result is 48.6 FPS on Low, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all perform worse.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 perform at 3840x2160?

A: Poorly. The highest average FPS at 4K is 29.2 on Low, with Medium at 25.9, High at 15.9, and Ultra at 10.8. No preset approaches 60 FPS.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: The difference is 42.5 FPS. Low averages 77.5 FPS, while Ultra averages 35 FPS. The gap between consecutive presets is 17.8 FPS from Low to Medium, 14.2 FPS from Medium to High, and 10.5 FPS from High to Ultra.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary constraint. Frame rates scale heavily with resolution, dropping by roughly 37-40% when moving from 1080p to 1440p on Low settings, which is characteristic of GPU-bound performance.

Q: Does this combination rank highly among tested systems for Evolve?

A: No. The combo ranks 3530 out of 3700 tested combinations, placing it in the lower portion of the database. The GPU's percentile among all tested GPUs is 40, and the CPU's percentile is 68.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 can run Evolve, but only under specific conditions. The verdict data is unambiguous: at 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only playable configuration, delivering 77.5 FPS on average. This clears the 60 FPS threshold with a 17.5 FPS margin.

At 2560x1440, the combination fails to achieve playable performance on any preset. The best result is 48.6 FPS on Low, which is 11.4 FPS short of the threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind, with averages of 40.9, 32.7, and 23.8 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the situation is worse. Low settings average 29.2 FPS, Medium 25.9, High 15.9, and Ultra 10.8. None of these are remotely close to playable.

The practical verdict: this system is suitable for 1080p gaming in Evolve, but only at the lowest quality preset. Anyone seeking higher visual fidelity at 1080p, or any playable experience at 1440p or 4K, would need a more powerful GPU. The 4 GB VRAM capacity and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth of the GTX 1650 are the most likely constraints preventing higher settings from reaching 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combinations for Evolve, this pairing ranks 3530 out of 3700. That places it in the bottom 5% of all tested systems, a position consistent with the measured frame rates.

The GPU's individual percentile against all tested GPUs is 40, meaning 60% of GPUs in the database outperform it. The CPU's percentile is 68, indicating it sits above most tested processors in general performance. The discrepancy between CPU and GPU percentiles reinforces the conclusion that the graphics card is the limiting component.

The combo rank of 3530 is lower than either component's individual percentile might suggest, which reflects how demanding Evolve is on GPU resources. A CPU that ranks in the 68th percentile cannot compensate for a GPU in the 40th percentile when the workload is heavily render-bound.

The average benchmark score for the GPU is 7472, with a passmark G3D score of 7880. These figures place it near the bottom of modern graphics hardware, and the in-game results align with that positioning.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the GTX 1650 in the database provide context for what similar GPU performance looks like. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M has an average score of 7447, a 0.3% difference from the GTX 1650's 7472. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441, a 0.4% difference. The AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425, a 0.6% difference. The Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, which is 1% higher than the GTX 1650.

For the CPU, the nearest rivals show a tight cluster. The Intel Core 3 N355 scores 13492, essentially identical to the i3-12100F's 13494. The Intel Core i5-9500 scores 13452, a 0.3% difference. The Intel Core 5 120UL scores 13594, 0.7% higher. The Intel Core i7-1250U scores 13351, 1.1% lower.

Systems built with any of these CPU or GPU alternatives would produce broadly similar results in Evolve. A system with the i3-12100F and an Intel Arc A310 might see slightly better frame rates, given the A310's 1% higher average score, but the difference would be marginal. Similarly, swapping the i3-12100F for an i5-9500 would change CPU-bound behavior by less than 1%, which would not alter the playable settings at any resolution.

The practical takeaway from the rival data: this is a tightly grouped performance tier. No nearby alternative would push the combination over the 60 FPS threshold at 1440p or enable higher settings at 1080p. The GTX 1650's 4 GB memory and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth represent the defining constraint, and none of its nearest rivals substantially change that picture.