Archeage

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 pairs with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 to deliver a capable, though not top-tier, experience in Archeage. The data shows a configuration that scales predictably with resolution and settings, with the CPU providing a strong foundation that allows the GPU to become the primary bottleneck at higher graphical loads. This analysis breaks down the measured frame rates, component roles, and performance rankings based strictly on the provided benchmark results.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. Its base clock runs at 3.50 GHz, with a boost capability of 5.10 GHz. The processor has a 24 MB shared L3 cache and supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. This configuration places the CPU in the 90th percentile when compared to all tested processors, indicating a strong general-purpose performer.

In the context of Archeage, an MMORPG that often relies on single-core performance for game logic and world simulation, the Ultra 5 245's boost clock of 5.10 GHz is a critical asset. Benchmark data shows a single-core score of 4648 in Cinebench R23, which is a strong result for handling the game's main thread. The multi-core score in the same test is 32924, showing substantial headroom for background tasks, add-ons, or streaming, which are common in the MMORPG genre.

When compared to its nearest rivals, the difference in average benchmark scores is minimal. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49196, which is 0.4% higher than the Ultra 5 245's average of 48995. Similarly, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is 0.5% ahead, while the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H and Intel Core i5-14600K are 0.6% and 0.8% behind, respectively. These sub-1% deltas mean that for a game like Archeage, the CPU choice among these models would produce no discernible difference in frame rates; the processor is not the limiting factor in most scenarios tested.

The 14-core count, while not fully utilized by Archeage's typical threading model, ensures that the system can handle the operating system, launcher, and any voice communication software without stealing cycles from the game's primary threads. The 3 nm process node and 65W TDP suggest an efficient part that should sustain its boost clocks under load, avoiding performance dips during extended play sessions. The data indicates this CPU provides a robust baseline, moving the performance bottleneck to the graphics subsystem in most settings.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture and features a Navi 48 chip fabricated on a 4 nm process. It comes equipped with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 1330 MHz, a game clock of 2070 MHz, and a boost clock of 2520 MHz. With 3584 shading units and 128 ROPs, the card is positioned as a high-end performer, though its percentile ranking against all GPUs sits at 69, which is lower than the CPU's 90th percentile ranking.

In Archeage, the GPU's role becomes more pronounced as resolution and settings increase. The 16 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for the game's needs at 4K Ultra, preventing any memory-related stutters. The memory bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s allows for high texture throughput, which is evident in the frame rate scaling from Low to Ultra settings. The GPU's boost clock of 2520 MHz ensures that the card can push high fill rates, but the data shows that the architecture is stressed at the highest settings.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 23877, with its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800S, scoring 24063, a 0.8% delta. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is 1.2% ahead with 24170, while the GTX TITAN Z and RTX 3080 Mobile are 0.6% and 1.1% behind, respectively. This places the RX 9070 in a competitive but not dominant position relative to older high-end models. For Archeage, this means the GPU is a strong performer at 1080p and 1440p, but it begins to show its limits at 4K Ultra, where frame rates dip below playable thresholds.

The GPU's architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is the highest API level tested. The PassMark DirectX 12 score is 74, which is lower than the DirectX 11 score of 281, indicating that the card's raw performance is better utilized in older API paths, a common trait in MMOs that may not fully leverage the latest rendering features. This suggests that while the hardware is capable, the game's engine may not extract maximum performance from the newest API features.

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

The measured frame rates show a clear pattern of scaling from 1080p to 4K, which reveals the shifting bottleneck between CPU and GPU. At 1080p, the CPU is the primary limiter, as the GPU has ample headroom to render frames quickly. For instance, at High settings, the average FPS at 1080p is 120, dropping to 81 at 1440p, and then to 46 at 4K. This progression shows a 32.5% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 43.2% drop from 1440p to 4K.

These deltas indicate that the GPU is becoming increasingly stressed at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the CPU's strong single-core performance allows the GPU to work at lower utilization, resulting in high frame rates. As resolution increases to 1440p, the pixel count grows, and the GPU must work harder, but the CPU is still capable of feeding it data. The drop to 4K, however, shows a significant reduction, with the GPU clearly becoming the limiting component.

The scaling from Low to Ultra settings at each resolution further emphasizes this. At 1080p Low, the average is 198 FPS, while at 4K Low it is 76 FPS, a 61.6% reduction. At Ultra settings, the drop is from 82 FPS at 1080p to 32 FPS at 4K, a 61% reduction. This consistency in relative drops across settings suggests that the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth are the binding constraints at 4K, while at 1080p, the CPU's ability to issue draw calls limits the maximum frame rate.

The data also shows that the CPU is not a bottleneck at 4K, as frame rates scale with settings in a way that aligns with GPU load. For example, the difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 44 FPS (76 vs 32), which is a substantial gap that reflects the GPU's workload increase. This indicates that to improve 4K performance, a more powerful GPU would be necessary, while the current CPU would likely remain sufficient for any future GPU upgrade.

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

The benchmark results provide a comprehensive set of average frame rates across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the configuration delivers high performance across the board. Low settings achieve an average of 198 FPS, which is the highest measured value in the entire dataset. Medium settings reduce this to 177 FPS, with a minimum of 150 FPS and a maximum of 203 FPS, indicating a smooth experience. High settings average 120 FPS, while Ultra drops to 82 FPS. These numbers suggest that 1080p is well within the capabilities of this combo, even at the highest settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains strong but shows the expected decline. Low settings average 134 FPS, which is a 32.3% drop from 1080p. Medium settings average 119 FPS, with a minimum of 101 FPS and a maximum of 137 FPS, providing a consistent frame time experience. High settings average 81 FPS, while Ultra falls to 55 FPS. The 55 FPS at 1440p Ultra is playable for an MMORPG, though it is notably lower than the 82 FPS seen at 1080p Ultra, highlighting the GPU's increased workload.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. Low settings average 76 FPS, which is a 43.2% drop from the 1440p Low result. Medium settings average 68 FPS, with a minimum of 58 FPS and a maximum of 78 FPS, showing that the game is still playable but with more variance. High settings drop to 46 FPS, and Ultra falls to just 32 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is below the threshold for smooth gameplay in most scenarios, indicating that users should avoid this preset at this resolution if they prioritize frame rate.

The data shows a linear progression of performance loss as settings increase at each resolution. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 116 FPS, at 1440p it is 79 FPS, and at 4K it is 44 FPS. This narrowing gap at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU is saturated, and the CPU has less impact on the final frame rate. The Medium preset consistently offers a good balance, with the 1440p Medium average of 119 FPS being particularly impressive for a modern GPU.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Archeage with this CPU and GPU combo?

A: Based on the measured data, 2560x1440 provides the best balance of visual quality and performance. At Medium settings, the average FPS is 119, with a minimum of 101, ensuring a smooth experience. High settings at this resolution still average 81 FPS, which is acceptable for an MMORPG.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Archeage?

A: Yes, but with limitations. At 4K Low settings, the average FPS is 76, which is playable. However, at High settings, the average drops to 46 FPS, and at Ultra, it falls to 32 FPS. The data suggests that 4K is only viable at Low or Medium settings for a consistent frame rate.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 compare to its rivals in CPU performance?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 48995. The closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, scores 49196, which is 0.4% higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 is 0.5% higher, while the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H is 0.6% lower and the Intel Core i5-14600K is 0.8% lower. These differences are negligible for gaming.

Q: What settings preset offers the most stable frame rate at 1080p?

A: The Medium preset at 1080p offers the most stable frame rate, with an average of 177 FPS, a minimum of 150 FPS, and a maximum of 203 FPS. This shows a tight frame time distribution, indicating a consistent experience without major dips.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the bottleneck at 1440p High settings?

A: The data indicates that the GPU is becoming the primary bottleneck at 1440p High. The average FPS is 81, which is a significant drop from the 120 FPS at 1080p High. The CPU has the headroom to push more frames, but the GPU cannot render them fast enough at this resolution and settings.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations in Archeage?

A: The combo ranks 1107 out of 3708 tested combinations, placing it in the top 29.8% of all tested systems. This is a solid mid-to-upper tier ranking, indicating that while it is not a top-tier setup, it outperforms the majority of other configurations tested.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user's resolution and frame rate priorities. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is viable, with an average of 82 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. However, the Medium preset at 177 FPS offers a much higher refresh rate experience, which is beneficial for fast-paced combat in MMOs. The High preset at 120 FPS is also a strong choice, providing a balance between visual fidelity and performance.

For 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the clear recommendation. The average of 119 FPS with a minimum of 101 FPS ensures that the frame rate never drops below 100, providing a fluid experience. The High preset at 81 FPS is also acceptable, but the lower minimum frame rates could cause perceptible stutters in crowded areas. The Ultra preset at 55 FPS is not recommended, as it falls below the 60 FPS threshold and may feel less responsive.

At 3840x2160, the options are more constrained. The Low preset at 76 FPS is the only setting that provides a comfortable frame rate above 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 68 FPS is playable, but the minimum of 58 FPS indicates occasional dips. The High and Ultra presets at 46 FPS and 32 FPS, respectively, are not recommended for anything other than screenshots or very slow-paced activities. For the best experience at 4K, users should stick to Low or Medium settings.

Overall, the data suggests that the Medium preset offers the best performance-per-visual-quality trade-off across all resolutions. It provides a significant frame rate boost over High and Ultra while still looking substantially better than Low. For users with high refresh rate monitors at 1080p, the High preset at 120 FPS is an excellent choice, while at 1440p, Medium is the sweet spot. At 4K, users must accept lower settings to maintain playable frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 9070 combination ranks 1107 out of 3708 tested combos in Archeage. This places the system in the 70th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning it outperforms approximately 70% of other systems. This is a respectable ranking for a mid-range to upper-mid-range setup, and it aligns with the individual component rankings: the CPU is in the 90th percentile, while the GPU is in the 69th percentile.

The disparity between the CPU and GPU percentile rankings is a key insight. The CPU's high ranking suggests that it is not holding back the system, and there is headroom for a more powerful GPU in future upgrades. The GPU's lower percentile ranking, relative to the CPU, indicates that the graphics card is the more limiting factor in this combo, particularly at higher resolutions. This is confirmed by the frame rate data, which shows a significant drop at 4K Ultra.

When comparing to other combos in the database, a rank of 1107 out of 3708 suggests that this setup is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming but falls behind in 4K scenarios. The measured frame rates show that the combo can achieve high FPS at 1080p, with the 198 FPS Low result being a standout. However, the 32 FPS at 4K Ultra is a weak point, pulling the overall ranking down.

The data indicates that this combo is a strong choice for gamers who prioritize high frame rates at 1440p. The 119 FPS average at Medium settings is a high-performance result. For those who want to play at 4K, the combo is serviceable but not exceptional, requiring significant settings reductions to maintain playability. Overall, the ranking reflects a system that is greater than the sum of its parts in lower resolutions but struggles to maintain that advantage at the highest graphical demands.