Evolve

Evolve, a 2015 FPS, paired with an AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (12 cores, 24 threads) and a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (4 GB GDDR5) shows a system where the GPU is clearly the primary limit. The measured results never exceed 77 fps, and at 4K averages drop to single digits on Ultra. This combo placed 3584th out of 3700 tested combinations in Evolve, confirming that it delivers one of the lowest frame‑rates recorded. The CPU’s high-end specification stands in stark contrast to the modest GPU, and the data reveals a heavy GPU bound performance profile.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate achieved by this combo in Evolve?

A: The highest measured average is 77 fps, obtained at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How much VRAM does the graphics card have, and does it affect the results?

A: The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory. The test data shows that even with this capacity, the GPU is the dominant limiter, as frame rates fall sharply when resolution is raised.

Q: What are the CPU’s core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X has 12 cores and 24 threads, a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Its 3DMark single-thread score is 941, while multi-thread scores reach 10075.

Q: Where does this CPU+GPU combination rank among all tested combos?

A: The combo rank in Evolve is 3584 out of 3700, placing it in the bottom 3.1% of all tested combinations.

Q: Only the Medium preset contains min/max FPS figures. What are those at 1080p?

A: For 1080p Medium, the minimum was 50 fps, maximum was 68 fps, with an average of 59 fps.

Q: Which resolution and setting yields the most balanced frame time?

A: The Medium preset at all three resolutions consistently shows a narrower gap between min and max (50–68 at 1080p, 34–46 at 1440p, 19–26 at 4K), indicating that Medium provides a more stable frame rate than the other presets, which have no min/max information.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows show clear correlations between presets and average FPS. At 1080p, Low yields 77 fps, Medium 59, High 47, and Ultra 32. At 1440p, the averages fall to 51, 40, 31, and 22 respectively. At 4K, they drop to 29, 23, 18, and 12. Given that even Ultra at 1080p achieves only 32 frames per second, the Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution. The Low preset offers the highest headroom, but the Medium preset (with its min/max stability) provides a frame range that approaches smooth 50–68 fps at 1080p. For a frame rate that consistently stays above 50, 1080p Medium is the strongest choice. At 1440p, only Low stays above 50, with 51 fps. For 4K, none of the presets reach 30 fps; the highest is Low with 29 fps. Therefore, the data suggests that the best experience, balancing average and stability, is 1080p Medium. Users targeting 60 fps should consider downgrading to Low at 1080p (77 fps) or Medium at 1440p (40 fps). Ultrawide configurations are not advisable.

CPU Role

The Ryzen 9 5900X is a high-end desktop CPU with 12 cores and 24 threads, based on Zen 3 architecture at 7 nm. Its base and boost clocks of 3.70 and 4.80 GHz allow a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16262 and single-core of 1527. Its percentile among all CPUs is 87, meaning it outperforms the majority of processors. Nevertheless, the combo’s performance in Evolve is distinctly worse than the CPU alone would suggest. The frame rates do not scale with the CPU’s multithreaded headroom; they are limited entirely by the GTX 1650. For instance, the ultra preset at 4K produces only 12 fps, a number far below what the 5900X could sustain if the GPU were not the bottleneck. The CPU provides abundant bandwidth and storage bandwidth, but this game’s workload appears to be GPU-dominated. The data implies that a less powerful CPU (or even a few cores) would produce near identical frame rates, while the GPU would remain the limiting variable. Hence, the CPU’s role is to avoid becoming the constraint; it does so effectively, but it does not contribute positively to frame output.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 3584 out of 3700 means it falls in the bottom 116 ‑0.0% of tested combos. To put it in perspective, the CPU’s average benchmark percentile is 87, while the GPU’s is 40. The rank clearly mirrors the GPU’s low percentile, and the disparity between the two components is huge: the CPU is far stronger than the GPU for overall workload, but the GPU is the weaker link in game performance. The data suggests that this combination is unequally matched; the GPU is the factor that brings the rank down. For comparison, the nearest rivals to the GPU are the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (delta 0.4%) and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (delta 0.3%), indicating the GTX 1650 sits in a performance cluster that is only slightly better than integrated graphics. The 5900X is positioned in the top 20% of CPUs, but the final combo is nearly the worst tested, showing that the GPU is the definitive performance drag.

Data drives the ranking

The RAM ALL about the GPU. The list of measured FPS speaks for itself. From 1080p to 4K, the Low preset drops from 77 to 29 (a multiplication factor of 2.6), and the Medium preset from 59 to 23 (2.5x). This consistent scaling indicates that the frame production is directly proportional to the pixel count, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU is more than capable; its core count and clock not reflected in the frame rates. Instead, the 4 GB VRAM and 896 shading units of the GTX 1650 become the limiting resource. The limited memory bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s and the 128-bit bus also align with the observed drop: at 4K Ultra, the average of 12 fps reveals that the GPU cannot sustain the pixel pushes. The GPU’s specifications (base 1485 MHz, boost 1665 MHz, 2.984 TFLOPS) are modest, and the measured scores support its low percentile (40%) among all GPUs. By itself, the GPU offers a playable experience only at 1080p Low; any increment of resolution or preset results in a significant average deficit.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table gathers all 12 recorded rows from the data set, exhibiting the full test matrix.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|------------|----------|---------|---------|--------- |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 77 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 59 | 50 | 68 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 47 | – | – |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 32 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 51 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 40 | 34 | 46 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 31 | – | – |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 22 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 29 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 23 | 19 | 26 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 18 | – | – |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 12 | – | – |

These averages highlight that the medium setting is the only one with any frame-minimum data, which permits a slight view of variability. The 1080p Medium (59 avg) is the highest average that includes min/max, while the 4K Ultra (12 avg) is the lowest.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling is mental to understanding the system balance. On the Low preset, frame falls from 77 (1080p) to 51 (1440p) to 29 (4K). Each step essentially halves the pixel density, yet the FPS does not halve exactly; it drops by 52% from 1080p to 1440p and an additional 43% from 1440p to 4K. The Medium preset sees a similar relative decline: 59 → 40 → 23. High at 46 → 31 → 18 and Ultra 32 → 22 → 12. The constant rate of decline suggests the GPU is resource-bounded across all these settings, indicating that the load scales linearly with the number of pixels. The CPU does not become the limiting factor; if it did, we would see a flatter curve because the CPU load is not proportional to resolution. Since the range is so consistent, the GTX 1650 is the sole render controller. In addition, the available VRAM (4 GB) is stressed at 4K, but no explicit VRAM utilization is involved; however, the near-total incapability to pass 30 fps at 4K (even on Low) and the 12 fps on Ultra imply that the GPU has insufficient bandwidth and shading power. This asymmetric behavior—CPU remaining idle while GPU pegged—is the signature of GPU-limited performance. The data presents a clear case that the Ryzen 9 5900X is far more muscle than needed for this GeForce 1650, and any desired improvement in FPS would require a more powerful graphics card rather than a stronger processor.