Evolve

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT lands at rank 950 out of 1695 tested combos in Evolve. That places this configuration almost exactly in the middle of the database. The percentile data for the individual components tells a more nuanced story: the CPU sits at the 84th percentile against all processors, while the GPU ranks at the 77th percentile against all graphics cards. The combo's mid-pack ranking is a direct consequence of both components being solidly above-average but neither being exceptional within the context of this game's benchmark pool.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 27220 puts it within 1.2% of its nearest rivals, which include the Intel Core i9-9900K at 27043 and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 at 26909. The deltaPct values here are remarkably tight, ranging from just 0.7% to 1.2% across four rival processors. This indicates that the Ryzen 7 5700's compute performance is extremely competitive with several well-known chips from different generations and market segments. The GPU tells a similar story with its average benchmark score of 33721, sitting within 1.3% of the NVIDIA RTX A5000 and within 0.7% of the AMD Radeon RX 6800. Interestingly, the RX 6700 XT actually trails two older AMD cards by 1% — the Radeon HD 7950 and the Radeon RX 480 — though these deltas are within measurement noise.

In practical terms, this combo's rank of 950 out of 1695 means that roughly 44% of tested configurations deliver higher frame rates in Evolve, while about 56% deliver lower frame rates. The data suggests this is a balanced pairing where neither component dramatically bottlenecks the other, but the overall result is firmly mid-table rather than top-tier.

FAQ

Q: How does the CPU's multi-threaded performance compare to its single-threaded performance?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 shows strong scaling from 2 threads to 16 threads in 3DMark tests. The 2-thread score is 1762, the 4-thread score is 3382, the 8-thread score is 5585, and the 16-thread score is 6628. This scaling pattern indicates that the processor effectively utilizes its 8 cores and 16 threads, with diminishing returns beyond 8 threads.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration and how does it affect performance?

A: The Radeon RX 6700 XT features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This configuration provides ample memory capacity and bandwidth for Evolve at all tested resolutions, as evidenced by the consistent frame rates across the measured settings.

Q: How does the CPU's cache hierarchy support gaming workloads?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. This hierarchy is typical for the Zen 3 architecture and provides sufficient data locality for gaming workloads, which typically rely on moderate cache sizes.

Q: What are the measured frame rates at 1080p Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the combo delivers an average of 82 FPS. This is the most demanding settings combination at this resolution, and it still maintains playable frame rates.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, the average frame rates range from 30.3 FPS at Ultra settings to 72.6 FPS at Low settings. The High preset yields 43.7 FPS, and Medium yields 54.8 FPS. This indicates that 4K Ultra is borderline playable, while lower settings are comfortably playable.

Q: What is the processor's power profile?

A: The Ryzen 7 5700 has a 65-watt TDP and supports ECC memory. This modest power envelope makes it suitable for a wide range of system builds without requiring elaborate cooling solutions.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals clear patterns in how performance scales across resolutions. At 1080p, the combo delivers 193.9 FPS at Low settings, which drops to 117.3 FPS at High and 82 FPS at Ultra. Moving to 1440p, those numbers become 126.6 FPS at Low, 79.7 FPS at High, and 53.8 FPS at Ultra. At 4K, the figures fall further to 72.6 FPS at Low, 43.7 FPS at High, and 30.3 FPS at Ultra.

The scaling factors tell an important story about which component limits performance. From 1080p to 1440p at Low settings, frame rates drop by 34.7%. From 1440p to 4K at Low, the drop is another 42.6%. At Ultra settings, the corresponding drops are 34.4% and 43.7%. This consistent reduction pattern across all settings suggests the GPU is the primary scaling factor as resolution increases, since pixel count grows by 2.25x from 1080p to 1440p and by 4x from 1080p to 4K.

However, the CPU's influence becomes apparent when examining the Low versus Ultra gap at each resolution. At 1080p, Low produces 193.9 FPS while Ultra produces 82 FPS — a 57.7% reduction. At 4K, the same settings comparison shows a 58.3% reduction. This relatively consistent gap regardless of resolution indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor even at high frame rates; the GPU is responsible for the performance differences across settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. Low settings produce an average of 193.9 FPS, Medium achieves 150.9 FPS, High reaches 117.3 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 82 FPS. These numbers show that even the most demanding settings at 1080p remain comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average frame rates remain strong. Low settings deliver 126.6 FPS, Medium produces 100.4 FPS, High achieves 79.7 FPS, and Ultra drops to 53.8 FPS. The Ultra setting at 1440p is the first configuration where the combo dips below 60 FPS, indicating that this resolution pushes the GPU's limits when all graphical features are maxed out.

At 3840x2160, the performance envelope tightens considerably. Low settings still deliver a playable 72.6 FPS, and Medium maintains 54.8 FPS. High settings drop to 43.7 FPS, and Ultra falls to 30.3 FPS. These results show that 4K gaming is viable with this combo provided the user is willing to reduce graphical quality, but Ultra settings at this resolution are only suitable for 30 FPS gaming scenarios.

The progression across resolutions shows a consistent pattern: each step up in resolution costs roughly 35-44% of the previous resolution's frame rate, regardless of settings. This consistency suggests the GPU's rendering pipeline handles the increased pixel load linearly without unexpected bottlenecks.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 7 5700 brings 8 cores and 16 threads to this pairing, built on the Zen 3 architecture with a 7 nm process node. The base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.60 GHz provide substantial single-thread performance, as evidenced by the 3DMark single-thread score of 901 and the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2916. These figures indicate that the CPU can keep up with the GPU's output demands in Evolve, a title from 2015 that does not heavily stress modern processors.

The CPU's multi-threaded capabilities are robust, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20655 and a PassMark multi-thread score of 24303. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 6628 shows near-linear scaling from the 4-thread score of 3382, suggesting that Evolve's engine can utilize additional cores if needed. However, the game's 2015 release date means it likely does not require all 16 threads to maintain high frame rates.

The processor's memory support includes dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is sufficient for the GPU's needs at all tested resolutions. The PCIe Gen 3 interface with 20 CPU lanes provides adequate bandwidth for the RX 6700 XT, which uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface but does not saturate even Gen 3 bandwidth in gaming workloads. The 16 MB of L3 cache is shared across all cores, providing efficient data sharing for workloads that span multiple threads.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 84 against all processors indicates it is well above average, but its nearest rivals show that it does not dominate its competitive set. The deltaPct values of 0.7% to 1.2% against the i9-9900K, i7-12700H, i7-1370P, and Ryzen AI 5 340 mean that any of these processors would perform nearly identically in Evolve.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimal settings at each resolution. At 1920x1080, all settings deliver playable frame rates, but the High preset at 117.3 FPS offers the best balance of visual quality and performance headroom. The Ultra preset at 82 FPS is also viable, though the additional visual fidelity comes at a significant frame rate cost compared to High. Low settings at 193.9 FPS are excessive for most displays, making Medium at 150.9 FPS a better choice for high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 2560x1440, the High preset at 79.7 FPS is the sweet spot, providing smooth gameplay while maintaining strong visual quality. Medium at 100.4 FPS is the better choice if the user prioritizes frame rate over visual fidelity, as it maintains a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. Ultra at 53.8 FPS is marginally below the 60 FPS threshold and may feel less smooth on standard 60 Hz displays. Low at 126.6 FPS is only recommended for competitive play where frame rate is paramount.

At 3840x2160, the Medium preset at 54.8 FPS is the most balanced option, though it falls slightly short of 60 FPS. Users who prioritize frame rate should select Low at 72.6 FPS, which provides a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. High at 43.7 FPS is suitable for 30-40 FPS gaming, while Ultra at 30.3 FPS is only appropriate for cinematic experiences where visual quality outweighs smoothness.

The data shows a clear pattern: this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can maintain high frame rates across most settings. The 4K experience is functional but requires accepting lower graphical presets to achieve smooth gameplay.