Archeage

# Archeage with AMD Ryzen 7 3700X + AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT

FAQ

Q: How does this CPU+GPU combo rank among tested configurations in Archeage?

A: This pairing ranks 804th out of 3,708 tested combos in Archeage, placing it in the top 21.7% of all recorded configurations. That percentile placement indicates a system that delivers solid performance but is not near the top of the leaderboard for this MMORPG.

Q: What is the best 4K performance this combo can deliver?

A: At 3840x2160, the highest average frame rate achieved is 87 FPS on Low settings. The Medium preset delivers 78 FPS, High drops to 53 FPS, and Ultra falls to 36 FPS. The 4K Ultra experience is the weakest result in the entire measured set.

Q: How does the GPU's average benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon RX 7900 XT has an average benchmark score of 13,745. Its closest competitor, the AMD Radeon 660M, scores 13,812 (0.5% higher), while the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT scores 13,543 (1.5% lower). The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile trails by 0.5% with a score of 13,821.

Q: What is the CPU's multi-threaded performance in Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X scores 2,092 points in Cinebench R15 multicore testing and 204 points in single-core. Its Geekbench results are 8,899 multicore and 1,593 single-core, with a Passmark multithread score of 22,458.

Q: Does this system maintain 60+ FPS at 1440p on all presets?

A: Yes. At 2560x1440, the Low preset hits 153 FPS, Medium achieves 136 FPS, High reaches 92 FPS, and even Ultra stays above 60 FPS at 63 FPS. The only sub-60 result in the entire 1440p set is none — every preset clears the threshold.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the GPU and how does it affect Archeage?

A: The RX 7900 XT has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus delivering 800.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That memory configuration is more than sufficient for Archeage's demands, given that the game scales from 36 FPS at 4K Ultra to 177 FPS at 1080p Low without any indication of VRAM capacity being a limiting factor.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 804 out of 3,708 tested configurations places this Ryzen 7 3700X + RX 7900 XT pairing in the 78th percentile of all recorded Archeage systems. That is a strong showing for a CPU released in mid-2019 paired with a GPU that has since been marked end-of-life. The data suggests the combination is well-balanced for this title, though the ranking also reveals that many other pairings achieve higher frame rates, likely due to newer CPU architectures with higher single-thread throughput.

The CPU's percentile versus all processors is 84, which is notably higher than the combo's in-game rank percentile. That discrepancy indicates the processor is capable relative to other CPUs, but the overall system placement in Archeage is dragged down by other factors — possibly the game's engine favoring different hardware characteristics or the GPU being underutilized at lower resolutions. The GPU's percentile versus all GPUs is only 55, which is surprisingly low for a flagship-class Radeon card; this suggests that in the broader benchmark database, many other GPUs outperform it in synthetic tests, even though its real-world Archeage results are respectable.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 7 3700X scores 34,260 on average. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 scores 34,222 (0.1% lower), the AMD EPYC 4244P scores 34,220 (0.1% lower), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H scores 34,083 (0.5% lower). The Intel Core i5-13450HX is the only rival that beats it, scoring 34,333 (0.2% higher). These deltas are all within half a percent, meaning the 3700X is essentially tied with four very different modern processors — proof of its sustained competitiveness.

For the GPU, the nearest rival list is more heterogeneous. The RX 7900 XT's average score of 13,745 sits between the Radeon RX 9070 XT at 13,543 (1.5% lower) and the Radeon 660M at 13,812 (0.5% higher). The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile and Radeon RX 570X are also within 0.9% of the 7900 XT's score. This clustering is unusual — an integrated GPU and a mobile workstation card within 1% of a desktop flagship — which reflects the synthetic benchmark's sensitivity to specific workloads rather than raw rasterization power.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is built on the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process with 57,700 million transistors. Its boost clock reaches 2,394 MHz with a game clock of 2,025 MHz, and it packs 5,376 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 192 raster operation units. The 20 GB GDDR6 memory pool is generous, and the 800.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures that memory throughput is rarely a bottleneck in Archeage.

In Archeage specifically, the GPU's role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases. At 1080p, the frame rates are high enough that the CPU likely governs performance, with the GPU having ample headroom. At 4K, however, the GPU's workload intensifies, and the data shows a clear progression: 87 FPS on Low, 78 FPS on Medium, 53 FPS on High, and 36 FPS on Ultra. That 51 FPS spread from Low to Ultra at 4K demonstrates how heavily the GPU is taxed by the game's higher-quality settings.

The GPU's pixel rate of 459.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 804.4 GTexel/s are substantial, but Archeage's Ultra preset at 4K still reduces the average frame rate to 36 FPS. The 192 ROPs are plentiful, yet the game's draw calls and shading complexity at Ultra clearly overwhelm the card at that resolution. The FP32 throughput of 51.48 TFLOPS is high, but the data shows that raw compute does not translate into smooth 4K Ultra performance in this MMORPG.

The GPU's DirectX 12 benchmark score of 110 in Passmark is notably low compared to its DirectX 11 score of 340, which may partially explain why Archeage — a 2014 title with older API paths — performs better than synthetic DX12 tests would suggest. The Vulkan score of 71,068 and OpenCL score of 12,756 indicate strong compute and modern API performance, but Archeage's engine likely relies on DX11-style rendering, where the card's Passmark score of 340 is more representative.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates across all presets. Low settings produce 177 FPS average, Medium reaches 170 FPS with a minimum of 144 FPS and maximum of 195 FPS, High hits 137 FPS, and Ultra drops to 94 FPS. The 1080p results show a clear hierarchy: each preset step costs a meaningful chunk of performance, from 177 to 170 (Medium), then to 137 (High), and finally to 94 (Ultra). That 83 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p indicates that even at this resolution, settings have a massive impact.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain strong. Low delivers 153 FPS, Medium averages 136 FPS with a range of 116 to 156 FPS, High achieves 92 FPS, and Ultra sits at 63 FPS. The transition from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly 13-14% on Low (177 to 153), 20% on Medium (170 to 136), 33% on High (137 to 92), and 33% on Ultra (94 to 63). The larger percentage drops at higher settings suggest that the GPU becomes more of a limiting factor as quality increases.

At 3840x2160, the results become more varied. Low presets deliver 87 FPS, Medium averages 78 FPS with a 66 to 90 FPS range, High drops to 53 FPS, and Ultra falls to 36 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is the only sub-40 FPS figure in the entire dataset. Moving from 1440p to 4K, the performance cost is steep: Low loses 43% (153 to 87), Medium loses 43% (136 to 78), High loses 42% (92 to 53), and Ultra loses 43% (63 to 36). This remarkably consistent 42-43% reduction across all presets indicates a uniform scaling penalty from the resolution increase.

The Medium preset at every resolution includes min/max FPS data, which provides insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the 144-195 FPS range shows a tight 51 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the 116-156 FPS range is a 40 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the 66-90 FPS range narrows to 24 FPS. This tightening of the frame rate range at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU becomes more consistently loaded, reducing the variance that CPU-bound scenes might introduce at lower resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

The data strongly suggests that Medium is the optimal preset for this combo across all resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 170 FPS average with a 144 FPS minimum — comfortably above any high-refresh display's needs. At 1440p, Medium produces 136 FPS average with a 116 FPS minimum, still excellent for smooth gameplay. Even at 4K, Medium achieves 78 FPS average with a 66 FPS minimum, which is playable on standard 60 Hz displays.

High settings offer diminishing returns. At 1080p, High drops to 137 FPS — still good, but 33 FPS below Medium. At 1440p, High hits 92 FPS, which is acceptable but 44 FPS below Medium. At 4K, High falls to 53 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for many players. The visual improvement from Medium to High is not quantified in the data, but the frame rate cost is substantial: 19% at 1080p, 32% at 1440p, and 32% at 4K.

Ultra is the least recommended preset. At every resolution, it delivers the lowest frame rates: 94 FPS at 1080p, 63 FPS at 1440p, and 36 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the only configuration in the entire measured set that falls below 40 FPS, making it the least viable option for any resolution. Low settings, while delivering the highest frame rates, sacrifice visual quality for performance that exceeds what most displays can show — 177 FPS at 1080p and 153 FPS at 1440p are beyond the refresh rate of typical monitors.

For 1080p and 1440p users, Medium represents the sweet spot: it maintains a minimum of 144 FPS at 1080p and 116 FPS at 1440p, which are high enough for competitive play while providing better visual quality than Low. For 4K users, Medium is the only preset that keeps average frame rates above 60 FPS, making it the clear choice. Players with 144 Hz 4K displays would need to accept Low settings at 87 FPS, but that is still below the 144 Hz target.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on Zen 2 architecture (Matisse), manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with 64 KB L1 cache per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and a 32 MB L3 cache. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and its 65 W TDP makes it a power-efficient choice.

In Archeage, the CPU's role is most evident at lower resolutions where the GPU has more headroom. At 1080p, the frame rate differences between Low (177 FPS) and Medium (170 FPS) are only 7 FPS, while the jump from Medium to High costs 33 FPS. This pattern suggests that at Low and Medium, the CPU is likely the primary limiter, preventing the GPU from pushing even higher frame rates. The 1080p Low result of 177 FPS may represent a CPU-bound ceiling for this processor in Archeage's engine.

The CPU's Passmark single-thread score is 2,656, and its Geekbench single-core score is 1,593. These figures are modest by modern standards, and Archeage — as an MMORPG from 2014 — is known to rely heavily on single-thread performance for game logic and network processing. The Cinebench R15 single-core score of 204 reinforces this picture: the 3700X's per-core performance is adequate but not exceptional, which likely explains why 1080p frame rates plateau around 177 FPS.

The CPU's multi-threaded capabilities are far stronger: 2,092 in Cinebench R15 multicore, 8,899 in Geekbench multicore, and 22,458 in Passmark multithread. However, Archeage's engine appears unable to leverage these additional threads effectively, as evidenced by the fact that frame rates at 1080p do not scale beyond what single-thread performance would predict. The CPU's boost clock of 4.40 GHz helps mitigate this, but it cannot overcome the architectural limits of Zen 2 in a single-thread-bound scenario.

The CPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks are all newer processors, yet the 3700X holds its own within 0.5% of each. This parity in average benchmark scores does not translate to parity in Archeage, where the combo rank of 804 out of 3,708 suggests that many systems with newer CPUs achieve better in-game results. The 84th percentile CPU ranking versus 78th percentile combo ranking implies that the processor's synthetic capabilities are slightly better than its real-world Archeage performance suggests.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a consistent pattern across all presets. At Low settings, the progression is 177 FPS (1080p) → 153 FPS (1440p) → 87 FPS (4K), representing a 51% drop from 1080p to 4K. Medium shows 170 → 136 → 78 FPS, a 54% drop. High shows 137 → 92 → 53 FPS, a 61% drop. Ultra shows 94 → 63 → 36 FPS, a 62% drop. The higher the preset, the larger the percentage loss from 1080p to 4K.

This scaling pattern indicates that at Low and Medium settings, the system is partially CPU-bound at 1080p and 1440p, which compresses the frame rate differences between those resolutions. For instance, Low drops only 24 FPS from 1080p to 1440p (177 to 153), while dropping 66 FPS from 1440p to 4K (153 to 87). The GPU becomes the clear bottleneck at 4K, as the pixel count quadruples and the GPU's workload dominates.

At High and Ultra, the scaling is more linear. High drops 45 FPS from 1080p to 1440p (137 to 92) and 39 FPS from 1440p to 4K (92 to 53). Ultra drops 31 FPS from 1080p to 1440p (94 to 63) and 27 FPS from 1440p to 4K (63 to 36). The relatively even distribution of frame rate losses across resolution steps at these presets suggests that the GPU is the limiting component throughout, with no single resolution step causing a disproportionate penalty.

The 4K scaling is particularly telling. From 1440p to 4K, every preset loses approximately 42-43% of its frame rate. This uniformity indicates that the GPU's rendering workload at 4K scales predictably with pixel count, and that the CPU is not introducing additional bottlenecks at higher resolutions. Conversely, from 1080p to 1440p, the percentage drops vary more widely (13% on Low, 20% on Medium, 33% on High, 33% on Ultra), which suggests that the CPU is still contributing to performance at 1080p but becomes less relevant as resolution increases.

The 4K Medium result of 78 FPS, with a minimum of 66 FPS, is the most balanced 4K configuration. It maintains playable frame rates while offering better visual quality than Low. The 4K Ultra result of 36 FPS is the outlier — a 62% drop from 1080p Ultra — and represents the only configuration in the entire dataset where the system falls below 40 FPS. This indicates that Ultra settings at 4K are beyond the practical capability of this combo, and players seeking 4K should stick to Medium or Low.