Dave The Diver

Dave The Diver presents an interesting case study for the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X and Intel Arc B390 combination. The measured data shows a system where the graphics solution is the clear bottleneck, with the processor's substantial multi-threading capabilities proving largely irrelevant to the game's frame rate output. This analysis breaks down the measured performance across resolutions and settings, examining what the numbers reveal about the hardware's roles and limitations.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a significant and predictable decline as resolution increases, which strongly indicates that the Intel Arc B390 is the limiting component in this configuration. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the system produces an average of 81 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings drops the average to 61 FPS, a reduction of approximately 24.7%. The jump to 3840x2160 at High settings yields just 41 FPS on average, which represents a 49.4% drop from the 1080p figure.

This scaling pattern is classic GPU-bound behavior. The percentage losses between resolutions are substantial, and the frame rate curve flattens as resolution increases, which is typical when the graphics processor is saturated. The data reveals that at 1080p High, the system achieves 81 FPS, but at 4K High, it falls to 41 FPS. The performance reduction from 1440p to 4K is a 32.8% loss (from 61 to 41 FPS), which is larger than the loss from 1080p to 1440p. This non-linear scaling is characteristic of a GPU that is increasingly overwhelmed by pixel count.

The gap between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution further confirms this bottleneck. At 1080p, the spread from Low (108 FPS) to Ultra (72 FPS) is 36 FPS. At 1440p, the spread from Low (82 FPS) to Ultra (54 FPS) is 28 FPS. At 4K, the spread from Low (55 FPS) to Ultra (36 FPS) is 19 FPS. As resolution increases, the difference between settings narrows because the GPU is already working at its maximum capacity; the additional load from higher settings has diminishing impact when the pixel throughput is already the limiting factor.

The data suggests that users targeting 4K will find the experience marginal, with even Low settings only managing 55 FPS average. The 4K Medium result of 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS indicates potential for noticeable stutter in busy scenes. The resolution scaling behavior confirms that the Intel Arc B390, which ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, is the primary constraint, and the powerful Ryzen 9 5950X is not the factor limiting frame rates.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. Its benchmark scores are impressive, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 26017 and a single-core score of 1614. In the broader CPU landscape, it holds the 91st percentile, with an average benchmark score of 51947. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX, which scores 52073 (-0.2% delta), and the Intel Core i9-13900F, which scores 51730 (0.4% delta). This places the 5950X in elite company for processor performance.

However, the measured FPS data in Dave The Diver suggests that this CPU power is going largely unused. The game's frame rates are consistently low across all resolutions, and the scaling pattern points squarely at the GPU. With a processor of this caliber, the expectation would be that the CPU can easily feed the graphics card in most scenarios. The data shows that the system is not CPU-limited at any measured point; if it were, the FPS would be similar across different resolutions. Instead, we see a clear and consistent drop in performance as resolution rises, which is the signature of a GPU bottleneck.

The 5950X's single-thread performance, evidenced by its 3DMark single-thread score of 944 and PassMark single-thread score of 3470, is more than adequate for gaming. The 16 cores and 32 threads provide immense multi-threaded throughput, with a PassMark multi-thread score of 45424. In a game like Dave The Diver, which is an adventure title and not typically known for heavy multi-threaded workloads, the CPU likely spends most of its time waiting on the GPU. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 1856 and 4-thread score of 3595 indicate that even when the game utilizes a few cores, the processor has ample headroom.

The data indicates that the Ryzen 9 5950X is not the limiting factor in this combination. Its role is to provide a stable and fast platform, which it does, but the overall system performance is entirely dictated by the Intel Arc B390's capabilities. The CPU's high percentile ranking and benchmark scores are irrelevant to the final FPS numbers in this specific pairing, as the GPU's 9th percentile ranking and low average benchmark score of 1482 create an insurmountable bottleneck.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: At 1920x1080 High, the system averages 81 FPS. At 3840x2160 High, the average drops to 41 FPS. This represents a significant 49.4% reduction in frame rate when moving from 1080p to 4K.

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 5950X's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 5950X has an average benchmark score of 51947. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 52073 (0.2% higher), the AMD EPYC 8124P scores 52121 (0.3% higher), and the Intel Core i7-14700 scores 52301 (0.7% higher). The Intel Core i9-13900F scores 51730, which is 0.4% lower.

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

A: The data clearly shows the Intel Arc B390 is the limiting factor. The FPS drops significantly as resolution increases (from 81 FPS at 1080p High to 41 FPS at 4K High), which is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU is not the constraint, as its performance is far superior to what the game requires.

Q: What are the frame rate differences between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low setting averages 82 FPS, while the Ultra setting averages 54 FPS. The Medium setting achieves 68 FPS, and High achieves 61 FPS. The difference between the lowest and highest settings is 28 FPS.

Q: What is the system's ranking among all tested combos for this game?

A: The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2538 out of 2867 tested combos in Dave The Diver. This places it in the lower percentile of tested systems, which is consistent with the GPU's low performance metrics.

Q: Does the Ryzen 9 5950X's multi-threaded performance help in this game?

A: The benchmark results indicate it does not translate to higher frame rates here. The CPU has a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 26017 and a PassMark multi-thread score of 45424, but the measured FPS is consistently low across all settings and resolutions, showing the game is not CPU-bound.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X and Intel Arc B390 combination ranks 2538 out of 2867 tested combos in Dave The Diver. This places it in the bottom 11.5% of all tested systems, which is a poor result. This ranking is directly attributable to the GPU's performance, which sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 1482. The GPU's nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463, 1.3% lower) and the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (score 1460, 1.5% lower), are entry-level parts from previous generations, highlighting the Arc B390's limited capability.

The CPU, in contrast, is a top-tier part. The Ryzen 9 5950X ranks in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 51947. Its performance is nearly identical to the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX (delta of -0.2%) and the Intel Core i9-13900F (delta of 0.4%). This creates a stark imbalance in the system, where a high-end CPU is paired with a very low-end GPU, leading to a combo ranking that is dragged down almost entirely by the graphics component.

The measured FPS data confirms this imbalance. No configuration in the measured data achieves a 4K average above 55 FPS (Low settings), and the Ultra setting at 4K only manages 36 FPS. Even at 1080p, the highest average is 108 FPS on Low settings, but this drops to 72 FPS on Ultra. The 1440p results are similarly constrained, with a maximum average of 82 FPS on Low. These numbers are consistent with a combo rank near the bottom of the pack, as the system cannot deliver smooth performance at higher resolutions or settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset provides 12 measured configurations, covering three resolutions and four quality settings.

At 1920x1080, the system's performance is as follows:

• Low: Average 108 FPS
• Medium: Average 91 FPS, with a minimum of 77 FPS and a maximum of 104 FPS
• High: Average 81 FPS
• Ultra: Average 72 FPS

At 2560x1440, the frame rates drop considerably:

• Low: Average 82 FPS
• Medium: Average 68 FPS, with a minimum of 58 FPS and a maximum of 78 FPS
• High: Average 61 FPS
• Ultra: Average 54 FPS

At 3840x2160, the performance is the weakest:

• Low: Average 55 FPS
• Medium: Average 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS
• High: Average 41 FPS
• Ultra: Average 36 FPS

The data shows a clear hierarchy. The 1080p Low setting is the only configuration that exceeds 100 FPS on average. For a smooth 60 FPS experience, users must stay at 1080p with High settings or lower, or 1440p with Low settings. The 4K resolution is playable only at Low settings (55 FPS), and even then, it is close to the 60 FPS threshold. The Medium settings at 4K provide a minimum FPS of 39, which may result in noticeable frame drops during gameplay. The Ultra setting at any resolution is the most demanding, with the 4K Ultra configuration averaging only 36 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the optimal experience for this hardware combination depends heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For a smooth 60 FPS experience, the data suggests that 1920x1080 with High settings is the sweet spot. This configuration averages 81 FPS, providing a comfortable margin above 60 FPS and allowing for some headroom in demanding scenes. The 1080p Ultra setting averages 72 FPS, which is also playable, but the 1080p Medium setting at 91 FPS is a better option for those who prefer higher frame rates.

At 2560x1440, achieving 60 FPS requires a compromise. The Low setting averages 82 FPS, which is smooth. The Medium setting averages 68 FPS, which is also above 60 FPS but includes a minimum of 58 FPS, indicating it may occasionally dip below the target. The High setting at 1440p averages 61 FPS, which is right at the threshold, but with no minimum FPS data, it is a riskier choice. For a consistent 1440p experience, the Low setting is the safest recommendation.

The 3840x2160 resolution is not ideal for this GPU. Only the Low setting achieves an average above 50 FPS (55 FPS). The Medium setting averages 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS, which is likely to feel stuttery. The High and Ultra settings, at 41 FPS and 36 FPS respectively, are below the 60 FPS target and are not recommended for a fluid experience. If 4K is a requirement, the Low setting is the only viable option, and even then, the experience will be sub-optimal.

The best overall experience per the measured rows is 1920x1080 with High settings. It offers a high average frame rate of 81 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS standard, and it avoids the lowest frame rates seen in the Ultra preset. The 1080p Medium setting is also an excellent choice, providing a faster 91 FPS average with a documented minimum of 77 FPS, ensuring a consistently smooth experience. For users prioritizing visual fidelity over frame rate, 1080p Ultra at 72 FPS remains acceptable.