Evolve

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Evolve at 1080p with playable performance?

A: Yes. At 1920x1080, the Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination achieves 76 FPS on Low settings and 61.1 FPS on Medium settings, both clearing the 60 FPS playable threshold. High settings drop to 48.5 FPS, and Ultra falls to 35 FPS.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1080p for this combo?

A: The best settings preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, which delivers an average of 61.1 FPS. This is the highest quality preset at 1080p that maintains playable framerates.

Q: Is 1440p playable with this hardware?

A: No. At 2560x1440, the highest average FPS recorded is 53.7 on Low settings, which falls short of the 60 FPS threshold. Medium produces 41.3 FPS, High produces 32.6 FPS, and Ultra produces 25 FPS. None of the 1440p presets reach playable performance.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The GTX 1650 holds an average benchmark score of 7472, sitting in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Arc A310, scores 7550, which is 1% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447 (0.3% lower), and the Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441 (0.4% lower).

Q: What CPU performance tier does the i5-12400F occupy?

A: The i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19039, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, scores 19047, a negligible 0% difference. The Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982 (0.3% higher), and the AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18979 (0.3% higher).

Q: What is the overall ranking of this CPU and GPU combination in Evolve?

A: This combo ranks 3502 out of 3700 tested combinations in the database, placing it in the lower portion of tested hardware pairings for this title.

Best Settings per Resolution

The measured data provides clear guidance for each resolution tier. At 3840x2160, no settings preset achieves playable performance. The Low preset delivers 27.1 FPS, Medium delivers 22.5 FPS, High delivers 19.1 FPS, and Ultra drops to 9.7 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is substantial, with the difference representing a 64% reduction in average framerate, but even the most favorable preset remains far below the 60 FPS playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the situation improves but remains below the playable standard. Low settings produce 53.7 FPS, which is the closest any preset comes to the 60 FPS target. Medium yields 41.3 FPS, High yields 32.6 FPS, and Ultra yields 25 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline of roughly 9 to 10 FPS per preset step, indicating consistent GPU-bound behavior at this resolution. However, no preset clears the playable threshold.

At 1920x1080, two presets clear the 60 FPS mark. Low settings deliver 76 FPS, providing substantial headroom above the threshold. Medium settings deliver 61.1 FPS, just barely clearing the playable bar. High settings produce 48.5 FPS, and Ultra drops to 35 FPS. The best playable setting at 1080p is Medium at 61.1 FPS, as it offers the highest visual quality while maintaining playable performance. The data indicates that 1080p is the only resolution where this hardware combination can sustain 60 FPS, and only at Low or Medium quality levels.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark measurements reveal how the CPU and GPU allocate workload differently across resolutions and presets. At 3840x2160, the framerate scales primarily with preset quality, moving from 27.1 FPS at Low to 9.7 FPS at Ultra. This represents a 64% drop in performance when transitioning from the lowest to the highest quality settings. The GPU is the dominant constraint at 4K, as the rendering load at this pixel count overwhelms the GTX 1650's capabilities regardless of CPU headroom.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts slightly. Low settings reach 53.7 FPS, while Ultra produces 25 FPS, a 53% reduction. The difference between Low and Medium at 1440p is 12.4 FPS, while the difference between High and Ultra is 7.6 FPS. This non-linear scaling suggests that the GPU is still the primary bottleneck, but the CPU begins to contribute more meaningfully at lower preset levels where the GPU has less work to do per frame.

At 1920x1080, the dynamic between CPU and GPU becomes most apparent. Low settings achieve 76 FPS, Medium achieves 61.1 FPS, High achieves 48.5 FPS, and Ultra achieves 35 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium costs 14.9 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra costs 13.5 FPS. At this resolution, the GTX 1650's 4 GB GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus become limiting factors as texture quality increases. The i5-12400F, with its 6 cores, 12 threads, and 73rd percentile CPU ranking, provides ample processing power for the game's logic and physics at 1080p, but the GPU's 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 53.28 GPixel/s pixel rate cap the final output.

The scaling between resolutions reinforces this interpretation. At Low settings, moving from 1080p to 1440p reduces framerate from 76 to 53.7 FPS, a 29% drop. Moving from 1440p to 4K reduces it from 53.7 to 27.1 FPS, a 50% drop. This increasing penalty at higher resolutions is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's role is more pronounced at 1080p Low, where the 76 FPS result indicates that the i5-12400F can feed the GPU faster than the GPU can render at higher quality settings. At 4K, even the lowest preset leaves the CPU underutilized, as the GPU cannot keep up with pixel throughput demands.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-12400F provide context for CPU performance. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS matches the i5-12400F almost exactly, with an average score of 19047 versus 19039, a 0% difference. This makes the Ryzen 5 7535HS a direct performance equivalent for CPU-bound scenarios. The Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056, which is 0.1% lower than the i5-12400F, placing it within the same performance band. The Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982, 0.3% higher, while the AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18979, also 0.3% higher. These four rivals bracket the i5-12400F within a narrow 0.4% performance window, meaning any of them would produce nearly identical framerates in Evolve when paired with the same GPU.

For the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, the nearest rivals show a similar clustering. The Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, which is 1% higher than the GTX 1650's 7472. This indicates the Arc A310 would deliver marginally better framerates, perhaps 1 to 2 FPS higher in most Evolve scenarios. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447, 0.3% lower, and the Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441, 0.4% lower. The AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425, 0.6% lower. These differences are small enough that all four alternatives would produce visually indistinguishable performance in practice. A user swapping the GTX 1650 for any of these GPUs would see framerate changes within the margin of measurement error.

When considering alternative pairings, the data suggests that swapping either component for its nearest rival would yield nearly identical results in Evolve. The i5-12400F's performance band is so tightly clustered that CPU choice among these alternatives is effectively irrelevant for this game. The GPU alternatives show slightly more variance, with the Intel Arc A310 offering a 1% advantage, but this would translate to less than 1 FPS at 1080p Medium settings.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination can run Evolve, but only under specific conditions. At 1920x1080, the system clears the 60 FPS playable threshold on both Low and Medium settings. The best playable configuration is Medium at 61.1 FPS average, which provides playable performance with moderate visual quality. Low settings deliver 76 FPS, offering additional headroom for demanding scenes.

At 2560x1440, the system cannot maintain playable framerates at any preset. The closest result is Low at 53.7 FPS, which falls 6.3 FPS short of the threshold. Medium produces 41.3 FPS, and High produces 32.6 FPS. These results indicate that 1440p is not viable for this hardware in Evolve, regardless of quality settings.

At 3840x2160, performance is severely limited. Even Low settings only reach 27.1 FPS, and Ultra drops to 9.7 FPS. This resolution is entirely unsuitable for gameplay with this combination.

The verdict is straightforward: this PC runs Evolve at 1080p with playable performance up to Medium settings, but it cannot handle 1440p or 4K. For a game released in 2015, this represents adequate performance for entry-level 1080p gaming, but users seeking higher resolutions would need a more capable GPU. The GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are the primary limiting factors at higher resolutions and quality presets.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database's tested combinations, this CPU and GPU pairing ranks 3502 out of 3700 combinations for Evolve. This places the combo in the bottom 5.4% of all tested hardware pairings for this game. The low ranking reflects the GTX 1650's position in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, which constrains overall performance despite the i5-12400F's stronger 73rd percentile CPU standing.

The rank of 3502 indicates that the vast majority of tested combinations outperform this setup in Evolve. The combination's 1080p Medium result of 61.1 FPS is functionally playable, but most other tested hardware pairs achieve either higher framerates at the same settings or maintain playable performance at higher resolutions. The data shows that the GPU is the limiting factor in this pairing, as the CPU provides sufficient compute headroom for 1080p gameplay but the graphics card cannot extend that performance to higher resolutions.

For context, the combo's rank suggests that users with this hardware should target 1080p with Medium settings as the practical ceiling for Evolve. The measured framerate at this configuration sits just above the playable threshold, leaving minimal margin for demanding in-game scenarios. Lowering to Low settings would provide a more comfortable performance buffer at 76 FPS, which may be preferable for competitive play where framerate consistency matters more than visual fidelity.