Barony

# Barony with AMD Ryzen 5 8400F + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650

This combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 3589 out of 3717 tested combos in Barony, placing it in the bottom 3.5% of all configurations. The data reveals a pairing where the CPU is far more capable than the GPU, and the measured frame rates across resolutions reflect that imbalance clearly. The GTX 1650, with its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus, becomes the primary constraint in nearly every scenario tested, while the Ryzen 5 8400F's six Zen 4 cores remain largely underutilized in this roguelike title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 3589 out of 3717 tested configurations places this system firmly in the lower percentile of all combinations measured. This does not necessarily indicate a broken experience, but rather a severely GPU-limited one at higher settings and resolutions. The GTX 1650 sits at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (deltaPct 0.3), the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (deltaPct 0.4), and the AMD Radeon R7 350 (deltaPct 0.6). The only rival with a higher score is the Intel Arc A310, which beats it by 1 percent. This cluster of GPUs all perform within a narrow band, meaning the GTX 1650 is not dramatically better than these alternatives, despite being a dedicated discrete card.

On the CPU side, the Ryzen 5 8400F is a much stronger component, ranking at the 77th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 25005. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (deltaPct 0.2), Intel Core i7-11850H (deltaPct 0.3), Intel Core i7-13620H (deltaPct 0.4), and AMD EPYC 9474F (deltaPct -0.4). The 8400F essentially trades blows with these processors, all within a fraction of a percent of each other. This creates a stark contrast: a top-quartile CPU paired with a bottom-half GPU, and the benchmark results in Barony reflect that the GPU is the bottleneck almost everywhere.

What the combo rank implies is that for Barony specifically, this pairing does not unlock the CPU's potential. The rank is driven by the GPU's limitations, and the data shows that even at 1080p Low, the system achieves 137 FPS average, which is respectable but far from the highest possible. The gap between this combo and higher-ranked ones likely stems from the GTX 1650's modest compute capabilities (2.984 TFLOPS FP32) rather than any CPU deficiency.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a six-core, twelve-thread processor based on Zen 4 architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm process. It has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with 16 MB of shared L3 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, providing 83.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and it connects via PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The processor's benchmark scores are strong: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851 and single-core score of 2943, plus a 3DMark single-thread score of 951 and max-threads score of 6165.

In Barony, a roguelike game that is not known for heavy multi-threaded workloads, the CPU's role is primarily to maintain minimum frame rates and handle game logic. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system reaches 137 FPS average, which suggests the CPU can easily push beyond that if the GPU allowed. The 8400F's single-thread performance, as indicated by the 3DMark single-thread score of 951 and PassMark single-thread score of 3685, is more than adequate for this genre. The PassMark physics score of 1332 and integer math score of 74021 further indicate that CPU-bound tasks are not the limiting factor.

The interesting question is whether the CPU is ever the bottleneck in this configuration. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 21, which is clearly GPU-bound. At 1080p Low, the 137 FPS average could hint at the CPU's ceiling, but given the 8400F's strong single-core scores, it is more likely that the GTX 1650 is still the constraint, just less severely. The CPU's 65 W TDP and active production status indicate it is a modern, efficient part, and its 12 threads provide headroom for background tasks. The data does not show any scenario where the CPU appears to limit performance below what the GPU can deliver.

FAQ

Q: Does this combo achieve playable frame rates at 1080p?

A: Yes, at 1080p the system delivers 88 FPS average on High settings and 102 FPS average on Medium settings. The Low preset reaches 137 FPS average, while Ultra drops to 63 FPS average, so most settings at 1080p are playable.

Q: What is the best resolution for this hardware in Barony?

A: The data shows 1080p is the only resolution where all settings presets stay above 60 FPS average. At 1440p, only the Low preset (87 FPS average) and High preset (55 FPS average) are near or above 60 FPS, while 4K never reaches 60 FPS on any preset.

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

A: The GTX 1650's average benchmark score is 7472, which is within 1 percent of the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, deltaPct 0.3), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441, deltaPct 0.4), and AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425, deltaPct 0.6). Only the Intel Arc A310 (7550) scores higher, by 1 percent.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 8400F strong enough for this game?

A: Yes, the CPU is far more capable than needed. It ranks at the 77th percentile among all CPUs with an average score of 25005, and its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, scores nearly identically (24964, deltaPct 0.2). The CPU is not the limiting factor in any measured scenario.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, the Low preset averages 87 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 40 FPS. This represents a 47 FPS drop from Low to Ultra, indicating significant GPU load from higher settings.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Barony?

A: At 4K, the average FPS ranges from 45 on Low to 21 on Ultra. Only the Low preset approaches a playable 45 FPS, while Medium averages 34 FPS and High averages 29 FPS, so 4K is only viable on the lowest settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) across four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). At 1080p, the Low preset delivers the highest average FPS at 137, followed by Medium at 102 FPS (with a minimum of 87 and maximum of 117), High at 88 FPS, and Ultra at 63 FPS. These numbers show a clear progression of decreasing performance as settings increase, with the gap between Low and Ultra being 74 FPS.

Moving to 1440p, the Low preset averages 87 FPS, which is a 50 FPS drop from the 1080p Low result. Medium at 1440p averages 64 FPS with a range of 55 to 74 FPS, High averages 55 FPS, and Ultra averages 40 FPS. The trend continues, but the relative drop from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 47 FPS, slightly less than at 1080p where the drop is 74 FPS. This suggests that at higher resolutions, the GPU is already saturated at Low settings, so the incremental cost of higher settings is somewhat compressed.

At 4K, the numbers become marginal. The Low preset still manages 45 FPS average, which is the only 4K result above 40 FPS. Medium averages 34 FPS with a minimum of 29 and maximum of 39, High averages 29 FPS, and Ultra drops to 21 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 4K is 24 FPS, which is the smallest absolute difference among the three resolutions. This indicates that at 4K, even Low settings push the GTX 1650 to its limits, and the additional load from higher settings has diminishing returns in terms of FPS loss.

The minimum FPS data is only provided for the Medium preset at each resolution: 87 at 1080p, 55 at 1440p, and 29 at 4K. These minimums suggest that frame pacing is relatively stable, with the minimum being close to the average in most cases. The maximum FPS at Medium ranges from 117 at 1080p to 39 at 4K, showing that the GPU's peak output scales predictably with resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings presets. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 137 at 1080p to 87 at 1440p (a 36.5% drop) and then to 45 at 4K (a 48.3% drop from 1440p). At Medium settings, the progression is 102 to 64 to 34, representing drops of 37.3% and 46.9% respectively. High settings go from 88 to 55 to 29, with drops of 37.5% and 47.3%. Ultra settings drop from 63 to 40 to 21, with decreases of 36.5% and 47.5%.

The pattern is remarkably uniform: the transition from 1080p to 1440p consistently costs roughly 37% of the average FPS, regardless of settings preset, and the transition from 1440p to 4K costs about 47-48%. This uniformity is a classic sign of a GPU-bound system where the limiting factor is pixel throughput and fill rate. The GTX 1650's pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s become the determining factors, and the quadratic increase in pixel count from 1080p (2.07 million pixels) to 4K (8.29 million pixels) directly impacts performance.

The data implies that the CPU is not a factor in resolution scaling. If the Ryzen 5 8400F were the bottleneck, we would expect to see less FPS drop at higher resolutions, because the CPU load would remain constant while GPU load increases. Instead, the near-linear relationship between resolution and FPS drop indicates the GPU is fully saturated. Even at 1080p Low, where the CPU has the least work to do relative to the GPU, the 137 FPS average likely represents the GTX 1650's maximum output in this game, not a CPU limitation.

The uniform scaling also suggests that Barony does not have a particularly heavy CPU workload that would manifest at lower resolutions. The game's roguelike nature likely involves procedural generation and simulation, but the 8400F's strong multi-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851) means it handles these tasks without becoming a constraint. The bottleneck is unequivocally the GPU, and the resolution scaling data confirms this.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows provide a clear picture of which settings preset offers the best experience. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers 102 FPS average with a minimum of 87 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The High preset at 88 FPS average is also very playable, and even Ultra at 63 FPS average stays above 60. However, the Medium preset offers the best balance: it maintains a high average FPS while providing better visual quality than Low, which at 137 FPS is likely overkill for this game's pacing.

At 1440p, the Low preset is the only option that consistently averages above 60 FPS at 87 FPS. The Medium preset at 64 FPS average with a minimum of 55 FPS is borderline, as the minimum dips below 60. The High preset at 55 FPS and Ultra at 40 FPS are below the 60 FPS target. For a smooth experience at 1440p, the Low preset is the safe choice, while Medium could be acceptable for players who prioritize visual fidelity over absolute smoothness.

At 4K, no preset achieves a 60 FPS average. The Low preset at 45 FPS is the most playable, but even this is below the standard threshold. The Medium preset at 34 FPS and High at 29 FPS are marginal, and Ultra at 21 FPS is likely too choppy for most players. Given the data, 4K gaming with this combo is not recommended unless the player is willing to accept significant compromises in frame rate.

The best experience per the measured rows is the Medium preset at 1080p. It provides 102 FPS average with a minimum of 87 FPS, ensuring consistent performance without the visual downgrades of Low. The High preset at 1080p is also a strong candidate at 88 FPS average, especially if the player prefers better shadows and effects. The data does not indicate that Ultra at 1080p (63 FPS average) offers a meaningfully better experience than High, given the 25 FPS cost.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the clear limiting factor in this combination. Based on the Turing architecture and manufactured on TSMC's 12 nm process, this GPU has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. Its base clock is 1485 MHz with a boost clock of 1665 MHz, and it operates with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU's compute capability is rated at 2.984 TFLOPS FP32, and its pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s with a texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s.

The GTX 1650's average benchmark score of 7472 places it at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all within a 1 percent range. The PassMark G3D score of 7880 and DirectX 11 score of 58 indicate modest DirectX performance, while the DirectX 12 score of 35 is notably lower. This is consistent with the GPU's age and position in the market, as it was released in 2019 and is now end-of-life. The GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so it can run modern APIs, but with limited headroom.

In Barony, the GPU's role is to handle rendering, and the data shows it struggles at higher resolutions. The 4 GB VRAM might become a factor at 4K Ultra, where texture memory demands increase, but the more pressing issue is the GPU's raw compute throughput. The 128-bit memory bus and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are modest by modern standards, and the 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 performance limits the GPU's ability to maintain high frame rates as pixel count increases.

The GPU's TDP of 75 W and lack of power connectors make it an efficient card that draws minimal power, but this efficiency comes at the cost of performance. The suggested PSU of 250 W indicates the card is designed for low-power systems, which aligns with its role as an entry-level discrete GPU. The GTX 1650's transistor count of 4,700 million on a 200 mm² die shows it is a relatively simple chip, and its performance in Barony reflects that simplicity: it can handle 1080p gaming at medium to high settings, but higher resolutions quickly overwhelm it.

The data suggests that the GTX 1650 is the bottleneck in nearly all measured scenarios, and upgrading this GPU would yield significant FPS improvements, especially at 1440p and 4K. The CPU, by contrast, has substantial headroom and would not need an upgrade for this game. The only scenario where the GPU's role might be less dominant is at 1080p Low, where the 137 FPS average could approach the limits of what this GPU can output, but even there, the CPU's single-thread performance (3DMark single-thread score of 951) suggests it could handle higher frame rates if the GPU allowed.