Archeage

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates across resolutions reveal a system that scales predictably, but with a pronounced penalty at 4K. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo delivers 132.8 FPS, which drops to 87.3 FPS at 1440p and further to 49.9 FPS at 2160p. That represents a 34% reduction when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and another 43% drop when stepping up to 4K. The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings presets, indicating that the rendering load increases roughly in proportion to pixel count.

The High preset shows a similar trajectory: 82.3 FPS at 1080p, 53.5 FPS at 1440p, and 30.3 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, starting at 56.5 FPS at 1080p and collapsing to 22.2 FPS at 4K. The fact that even Low settings at 4K only reaches 49.9 FPS suggests that the GPU is becoming the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the CPU overhead per frame diminishes relative to the pixel fill rate required. At 1080p, the spread between Low and Ultra is 76.3 FPS (132.8 vs. 56.5), which is narrower than at 1440p where the spread is 51.6 FPS (87.3 vs. 35.7). This compression of the performance gap at higher resolutions is classic evidence of GPU-bound behavior.

How This Combo Ranks

In the broader context of tested hardware combinations, this pairing of an Intel Core i7-13700K with an AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT ranks 1134 out of 1727 combos for Archeage. That places it in the lower third of all tested configurations, which is notable given the individual component strengths. The CPU itself sits at the 93rd percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 47282, while the GPU ranks at the 63rd percentile with an average score of 20146. This discrepancy between CPU and GPU tiering helps explain why the combo ranking is not higher — the graphics card is holding back the overall result.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the Intel Core i7-13700KF scores 47334, a delta of -0.1% relative to the 13700K, meaning the two are essentially interchangeable in synthetic benchmarks. The AMD EPYC 4364P scores 47131, a 0.3% delta, and the Intel Core i9-12900F scores 47081, a 0.4% delta. On the GPU side, the RX 7600 XT's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 460 with a score of 20088, a 0.3% delta, while the RX 7600 scores 20258, a -0.6% delta, indicating the 7600 XT is slightly ahead of its non-XT sibling. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER trails by 1.9% with a score of 19774, and the RTX 3070 Mobile leads by -1.9% with 20534. These deltas are all within a narrow band, suggesting that the GPU's performance class is well-established, and the ranking position is largely a function of the GPU's mid-tier standing rather than any deficiency in the CPU.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT brings 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That memory capacity is substantial for a card in this segment, and it matters in an MMORPG like Archeage where large texture sets and player-populated zones can strain VRAM. The card's boost clock reaches 2755 MHz, with a game clock of 2470 MHz and a base clock of 1980 MHz. Its 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs are consistent with its 22.57 TFLOPS FP32 throughput. The pixel rate is 176.3 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 352.6 GTexel/s, figures that directly influence how quickly the card can fill and shade pixels in crowded scenes.

The GPU's 63rd percentile ranking among all graphics cards, combined with its average benchmark score of 20146, places it in the upper mid-range. Its nearest rival, the RX 7600, is only 0.6% faster on average, which means the XT variant's extra memory does not translate into a meaningful synthetic performance lead. In Archeage specifically, the measured results show that the GPU becomes the bottleneck at 4K, where even Low settings cannot reach 50 FPS. The card's 16 GB frame buffer is more than sufficient for this game at any resolution, so the limitation is compute and fill rate rather than capacity. The 2755 MHz boost clock is the highest of the three clock states, and sustained boost behavior is likely what drives the 1080p results where the card achieves 132.8 FPS at Low settings.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data points to Medium settings as the optimal balance for this combo across all three resolutions. At 1080p, Medium delivers 116.9 FPS, which is only 15.9 FPS below Low but 60.4 FPS above Ultra. At 1440p, Medium hits 82.3 FPS, keeping gameplay smooth while providing a meaningful visual upgrade over Low's 87.3 FPS — a difference of just 5 FPS that favors the higher fidelity preset. At 4K, Medium manages 47.1 FPS, which is close to playable, while High drops to 30.3 FPS and Ultra to 22.2 FPS.

For players targeting a solid 60 FPS baseline, High at 1440p is the sweet spot, delivering 53.5 FPS — slightly below 60 but with the visual quality of the High preset. Pushing to 4K requires compromising on settings, as even Medium only reaches 47.1 FPS, and Low tops out at 49.9 FPS. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution, as it dips to 56.5 FPS at 1080p and becomes unplayable at higher resolutions. Given that Low at 1440p (87.3 FPS) and Medium at 1440p (82.3 FPS) are separated by only 5 FPS, the Medium preset is clearly the better choice for those with 1440p displays. At 1080p, the gap between Medium and High is 34.6 FPS (116.9 vs. 82.3), so Medium offers a substantial headroom for maintaining high frame rates in busy multiplayer areas where performance can fluctuate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings produces the following average frame rates: Low runs at 132.8 FPS, Medium at 116.9 FPS, High at 82.3 FPS, and Ultra at 56.5 FPS. The step from Medium to High represents a 34.6 FPS loss, which is the largest single drop between adjacent presets at this resolution. Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers are 87.3 FPS for Low, 82.3 FPS for Medium, 53.5 FPS for High, and 35.7 FPS for Ultra. The Medium-to-High gap shrinks to 28.8 FPS here, reflecting the increased GPU load at higher pixel counts. At 3840x2160, the results are 49.9 FPS for Low, 47.1 FPS for Medium, 30.3 FPS for High, and 22.2 FPS for Ultra. The Low-to-Medium difference at 4K is only 2.8 FPS, suggesting that the GPU is so heavily loaded that the additional shading work in Medium is nearly free relative to Low.

The Ultra preset is consistently the weakest performer, with a 76.3 FPS deficit versus Low at 1080p, a 51.6 FPS deficit at 1440p, and a 27.7 FPS deficit at 4K. Interestingly, the absolute gap between Low and Ultra narrows as resolution increases, but the percentage gap remains large — at 4K, Low is more than double the frame rate of Ultra (49.9 vs. 22.2). The High preset at 4K (30.3 FPS) is barely above the threshold for smooth gameplay, while Medium at 4K (47.1 FPS) is the most viable option for 4K owners. Across all resolutions, the data indicates that the combo is best utilized at 1080p or 1440p, where Medium or High presets can deliver frame rates that fully exploit the CPU's single-thread performance and the GPU's 2755 MHz boost clock.