Dave The Diver

Dave The Diver presents an intriguing benchmark scenario for the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 pairing. The data reveals a combination where a high-end, modern GPU is paired with a previous-generation, mid-range CPU, creating a fascinating dynamic that shifts depending on resolution and settings. This analysis examines the measured FPS data to understand which component is the primary driver of performance in this specific adventure title.

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

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Comet Lake architecture, built on a 14 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and can boost up to 4.30 GHz. The processor has a 12 MB shared L3 cache and supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration. Its benchmark scores place it in the 68th percentile of all CPUs, indicating a solid, mid-range standing for a 10th-generation part. In synthetic tests, it achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10283 and a single-core score of 1451, showing a reasonable balance between multi-threaded and single-threaded work.

In the context of Dave The Diver, the CPU's role appears to be substantial. The game's genre is Adventure, which often involves complex world simulations and logic that can stress the processor. The data shows that at 1080p with Low settings, the system produces an average of 268 FPS. This high frame rate suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough data to maintain very high performance. However, the difference between the CPU's multi-threaded and single-threaded performance might be a factor. The 3DMark single-thread score is 688, while the 16-thread score is 4748. This indicates that while the CPU has decent multi-threading capabilities, its per-core performance is not its strongest attribute.

The nearest rivals to the i5-10400F, based on average benchmark score, include the Intel Xeon 6756E with a delta of 0.2%, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C with a delta of -0.6%. These comparisons show that the i5-10400F sits squarely in a competitive performance band. For a game like Dave The Diver, which may not be heavily multi-threaded, the single-thread performance might be more critical. The data implies that the CPU is not a bottleneck at lower resolutions, as evidenced by the high FPS numbers, but its architecture is dated compared to the GPU. The processor’s performance in the PassMark Physics test (score of 696) and other compute tasks provides a baseline, but the game's specific engine will dictate how much these scores translate to real-world FPS. The results suggest the CPU is capable of high frame rates, but its ceiling might be reached more quickly than the GPU's, especially when settings are lowered to reduce GPU load.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is a powerhouse from the GeForce 40-series, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC. It features 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a massive 716.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The GPU's base clock is 2205 MHz with a boost clock of 2505 MHz. It is a massive chip with 9728 shading units and 76 RT cores. Its benchmark scores are equally impressive, placing it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. In the PassMark G3D test, it scores 34457, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it achieves 263779.

The GPU's role in Dave The Diver is to render the game's visuals, and with such a high-end card, the data shows it is rarely the limiting factor. At 4K Ultra settings, the system still manages an average of 136 FPS, which is exceptionally high for a 4K resolution. This indicates that the RTX 4080 has ample headroom to handle the game's most demanding graphical presets. The 16 GB of VRAM is more than sufficient for a game of this scope, ensuring no memory-related stutters or texture pop-ins at any resolution tested. The GPU's memory bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s ensures that data can be fed to the cores quickly, which is crucial for maintaining high frame rates.

The nearest rivals to the RTX 4080 include the RTX 4080 SUPER with a delta of 0.1% and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X with a delta of -1.1%. This shows that the RTX 4080 is at the very top of its performance tier, just below the SUPER variant. The data suggests that the GPU is so powerful that it is likely to be bottlenecked by the CPU in many scenarios. The high FPS numbers across all settings, even at 4K, point to a GPU that is not being pushed to its limit. The GPU's performance is so high that the primary constraint on the system's FPS will be the CPU's ability to issue draw calls and process game logic. The RTX 4080's score in PassMark DirectX 12 (132) and DirectX 11 (314) show its API versatility, but the actual game performance is what matters here.

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

Analyzing the FPS drops from 1080p to 4K reveals a clear picture of the system's bottleneck. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 242 at 1080p to 220 at 1440p, and then to 154 at 4K. This is a 36% drop from 1080p to 4K (from 242 to 154 FPS). In contrast, at Low settings, the FPS drops from 268 at 1080p to 244 at 1440p, and then to 206 at 4K. This is a 23% drop from 1080p to 4K (from 268 to 206 FPS).

The key observation is that the FPS drop is less severe at Low settings than at High settings. This is a classic sign of a CPU bottleneck. At Low settings, the GPU has less work to do, so it can render frames faster. However, the CPU still has a fixed amount of work to do to prepare each frame. When the GPU is very fast, the CPU cannot keep up, and the FPS is capped by the CPU's limit. This explains why the FPS difference between 1080p Low (268 FPS) and 4K Low (206 FPS) is only 62 FPS, which is a smaller absolute drop than the 88 FPS drop at High settings (from 242 to 154 FPS).

This data strongly suggests that the Intel Core i5-10400F is the limiting component. The RTX 4080 is so powerful that it can easily render the frames at 1080p, but the CPU cannot process the game logic fast enough to push the FPS higher. As resolution increases, the GPU takes on more work, and the FPS drops, but the drop is not proportional to the number of pixels, indicating that the CPU is still holding the system back. The data implies that at all settings, the system is likely CPU-bound, and the GPU is not being fully utilized. This is a crucial insight for understanding the system's performance profile.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system's performance across different resolutions and settings.

At 1920x1080, the system delivers high frame rates across all settings. With Low settings, the average FPS is 268. Moving to Medium settings, the average FPS is 252, with a minimum of 214 and a maximum of 290. High settings yield an average of 242 FPS, while Ultra settings produce an average of 232 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 36 FPS, showing that the game is not very demanding on the GPU at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, we see a slight decrease in performance. Low settings average 244 FPS. Medium settings average 229 FPS, with a minimum of 195 and a maximum of 264. High settings average 220 FPS, and Ultra settings average 203 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 41 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops more noticeably. Low settings average 206 FPS. Medium settings average 172 FPS, with a minimum of 146 and a maximum of 198. High settings average 154 FPS, and Ultra settings average 136 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 70 FPS, which is the largest absolute spread across all resolutions.

The data shows a consistent trend: as resolution increases, the FPS drops, and the impact of settings becomes more pronounced. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is minimal, suggesting the CPU is the main limit. At 4K, the difference is larger, as the GPU starts to do more work, but the FPS is still very high, indicating that the RTX 4080 is still not fully stressed. The Medium settings at each resolution provide the only rows with min and max FPS data, which is useful for understanding frame time consistency.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 ranks 642nd out of 3710 tested combos in Dave The Diver. This places it in the top 17.3% of all systems tested. This rank is notable, given that the CPU is a mid-range part from a previous generation, while the GPU is a high-end current-generation part.

The high rank despite the CPU's age suggests that the game is not heavily CPU-dependent, or that the i5-10400F is sufficient for the game's requirements. However, the data on resolution scaling suggests that the CPU is still a bottleneck, and a better CPU would likely push this combo higher in the rankings. The rank of 642 out of 3710 means there are 641 combos that perform better, likely featuring more powerful CPUs paired with similar or better GPUs.

The percentile data for the individual components is telling. The CPU is in the 68th percentile, while the GPU is in the 86th percentile. The combo rank being in the 82.7th percentile (100 - 17.3) suggests that the system is performing better than the CPU's percentile alone would suggest, but not as well as the GPU's percentile would imply if it were paired with a top-tier CPU. This indicates a performance ceiling imposed by the CPU, which is consistent with the resolution scaling analysis. The combo's rank demonstrates that while the RTX 4080 is a massive performance contributor, its potential is not fully realized with this specific processor.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS measured for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 268, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 242 at 1080p to 154 at 4K, a 36% decrease.

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

A: The data suggests the CPU is the primary limiter. The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is smaller than the increase in GPU load, and the GPU is in the 86th percentile while the CPU is in the 68th.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The minimum FPS recorded is 146, which occurred at 3840x2160 resolution with Medium settings.

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

A: The combo ranks 642nd out of 3710 tested combos, placing it in the top 17.3% of systems.

Q: What is the difference in average FPS between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 4K, the average FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings is 70 FPS (from 206 to 136 FPS).

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience is achieved by balancing frame rate and visual fidelity. At 1920x1080, all settings yield high frame rates above 232 FPS. To maximize visual quality without sacrificing performance, Ultra settings are recommended, providing a 232 FPS average. This ensures the most detailed visuals while still maintaining a frame rate far above the standard 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the system maintains high performance across the board. Ultra settings provide a 203 FPS average, which is still exceptionally smooth. This is the recommended choice for a high-refresh-rate monitor, as it offers the best visual quality while staying well above 144 FPS. If the user prefers to push frame rates to the maximum, Low settings at 244 FPS would be the choice, but the visual compromise is significant.

At 3840x2160, the data indicates a need for a more careful selection. High settings provide a 154 FPS average, which is excellent for 4K gaming. This is the recommended preset for a 4K experience, as it balances high visual fidelity with a frame rate that is still very high. While Ultra settings are playable at 136 FPS, the drop to Medium settings (172 FPS) offers a more stable and faster experience. For the most consistent frame rate at 4K, Medium settings are recommended, as they provide a 172 FPS average with a minimum of 146 FPS, ensuring no drops below 144 FPS for adaptive-sync displays.