Archeage

Archeage is a 2014 MMORPG, and the combination of an Intel Core i5-14400F with a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 represents a pairing of a modern, high-end CPU with an older, entry-level GPU. The benchmark data reveals a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics card, yet the processor's capabilities still define the ceiling for performance in less demanding settings. This analysis examines the measured FPS data to explain how these two components interact across resolutions and presets.

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

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor from the Raptor Lake-R architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. It features 20 MB of shared L3 cache. In the broader context of all tested CPUs, this chip sits at the 88th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 32508. Its nearest rivals are clustered tightly, with the Intel Core i7-12800H scoring 32513 (a 0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 scoring 32446 (a 0.2% delta). This indicates the i5-14400F is a very capable processor, and its performance in synthetic tests like Cinebench R23 (21914 multi-core, 3093 single-core) supports its position in the top tier of desktop CPUs.

However, the measured FPS data in Archeage shows that this CPU power is largely untapped. At 4K resolution with High settings, the average FPS is only 16, while at 1080p with Low settings, it jumps to 63 FPS. This massive swing is not characteristic of a CPU bottleneck. In an MMORPG like Archeage, which often involves many players and complex scenes, a strong CPU is typically beneficial for maintaining consistent frame rates. The i5-14400F’s high single-core performance, evidenced by its 311 score in Cinebench R15 single-core and 3723 in Passmark single-thread, should prevent significant frame drops in less graphically intense scenarios. The data suggests that when the GPU is not the limiting factor, this processor is more than sufficient to push high frame rates, as seen by the 63 FPS average at 1080p Low. The CPU’s role here is to provide a stable foundation; it is not the component holding the system back in most tested configurations.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture GPU with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. Its boost clock is 1665 MHz. This GPU is placed at the 43rd percentile of all tested GPUs, with a Passmark G3D score of 7880. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile with a score of 8746 (a -0.4% delta) and the AMD Radeon 550X with a score of 8749 (a -0.4% delta). This places the GTX 1650 firmly in the entry-level segment, and its performance is directly reflected in the measured results.

The GPU is the dominant bottleneck in this configuration. The 4 GB VRAM is a significant limitation for a 2014 MMORPG that has likely received graphical updates. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 10.3, while at 4K Low, it is 22.5. This shows that the GPU struggles to fill the pixel count at higher resolutions, regardless of the visual complexity. The pattern is consistent: as resolution increases, the FPS drops sharply because the GPU must render more pixels. The GTX 1650’s 4 GB frame buffer is likely saturated at 1440p and beyond, leading to severe performance degradation. Even at 1080p, the difference between Low (63 FPS) and Ultra (27.8 FPS) demonstrates that the GPU’s compute and memory resources are quickly exhausted by higher graphical fidelity. The data clearly shows that this GPU is the primary limiter for achieving high frame rates in Archeage.

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

The resolution scaling data provides a clear picture of a GPU-bound system. Moving from 1080p to 1440p to 4K shows a consistent and dramatic drop in average FPS across all settings. For instance, with High settings, the FPS goes from 35 at 1080p, to 26.8 at 1440p, and finally to 16 at 4K. This is a steep decline. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is approximately 54%, which is substantial.

This scaling behavior is a classic indicator that the graphics card is the limiting factor. The CPU’s performance does not degrade with resolution; it is the GPU’s workload that increases. Since the i5-14400F is a high-end CPU, its frame delivery capability is far higher than what the GTX 1650 can produce. The data implies that at 1080p, the GPU is working hard but can still produce playable frames. At 1440p, the load becomes heavier, and at 4K, the GPU is overwhelmed. The difference between the Low preset at 4K (22.5 FPS) and the Low preset at 1080p (63 FPS) is a 64% reduction. This shows that the pixel count is the primary driver of the performance loss, confirming that the GTX 1650’s limited memory bandwidth and processing power are the bottlenecks. The CPU is not the cause of these drops; it is simply waiting for the GPU to finish its work.

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

Based on the measured data, the only configuration that consistently provides a smooth experience is 1080p with the Low preset, which achieves an average of 63 FPS. This is the only tested setting that approaches the 60 FPS threshold, which is often considered the minimum for a responsive experience in an MMORPG. The Medium preset at 1080p comes close at 58 FPS, but it is slightly below the 60 FPS mark. For users with a 60 Hz monitor, the Low preset provides the most headroom against frame drops, while Medium may be acceptable if minor dips are tolerable.

At 1440p, the results are less encouraging. The Low preset yields 42.1 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. The High preset at 1440p (26.8 FPS) and Ultra (16 FPS) are too low for a smooth experience. At 4K, all presets are effectively unplayable, with the best result being the Medium preset at 23.6 FPS and the worst being Ultra at 10.3 FPS. The data suggests that users should not attempt to play at 4K with this hardware. The "best experience" per the measured rows is unequivocally 1080p Low, with 1080p Medium as a secondary option for those who prioritize visual quality over a guaranteed 60 FPS. The High preset at 1080p (35 FPS) is a compromise, but it represents a significant performance hit for a modest visual gain. The evidence points to a simple conclusion: keep the resolution at 1080p and lower the settings to Low or Medium.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested hardware combinations for Archeage, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1620 out of 1727 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 6% of all configurations tested for this game. This low ranking is entirely consistent with the GPU’s low percentile (43rd) and the measured FPS data. The CPU is high-performing, but the overall ranking is dragged down by the GPU’s inability to deliver high frame rates in this specific title.

The ranking implies that the vast majority of other tested combinations, likely those with more balanced or GPU-heavy setups, produce better results in Archeage. While the i5-14400F is a strong processor, its performance advantage is neutralized by the GTX 1650. The combo rank is a holistic measure, and it shows that this specific pairing is not well-suited for this game. Users with this combination will experience performance that is significantly below the median of the test pool. The data suggests that if a user were to upgrade any component, the GPU should be the priority, as the CPU is not the limiting factor.

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

The following table details the exact average FPS measured for each resolution and settings preset.

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS |

| :--------- | :------- | :---------- |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 10.3 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 16 |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 23.6 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 22.5 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 16 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 26.8 |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 38.2 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 42.1 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 27.8 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 35 |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 58 |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 63 |

The data shows a clear hierarchy. At 4K, the frame rates are universally below 24 FPS, rendering the game unplayable. At 1440p, the Low and Medium presets are in the playable-but-not-smooth range (38-42 FPS), while High and Ultra are not. At 1080p, the Low preset is the only one to break the 60 FPS barrier, with Medium close behind at 58 FPS. The progression from Ultra to Low at each resolution shows a consistent increase in performance, but the gains are most pronounced at lower resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings for this hardware in Archeage?

A: According to the measured data, the best experience is at 1920x1080 with the Low preset, which achieves an average of 63 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p is a close second at 58 FPS.

Q: Can this combination run Archeage at 4K?

A: No. The highest average FPS at 3840x2160 is 23.6 FPS on the Medium preset, which is not a smooth experience. The Ultra preset at 4K only reaches 10.3 FPS.

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

A: The GPU is the clear limiting factor. The GTX 1650 sits at the 43rd percentile of GPUs, and the FPS drops dramatically with resolution, which is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. The i5-14400F is a high-end CPU at the 88th percentile.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: This combination ranks 1620 out of 1727 tested combos for Archeage. This places it in the bottom tier of tested systems, primarily due to the weak GPU.

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

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 63 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 27.8 FPS. This is a difference of 35.2 FPS, showing that Ultra settings cut the frame rate by more than half.

Q: What is a likely upgrade path for this system?

A: The data suggests the GPU should be upgraded first. The CPU is not the bottleneck, as evidenced by the resolution scaling. A more powerful GPU would yield significant FPS gains across all resolutions and settings.