Evolve

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates across resolutions paint a clear picture of a system heavily constrained by its graphics solution. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo produces 80 FPS, but stepping up to 1440p drops that to 52.4 FPS, and 4K further reduces it to 26.4 FPS. This scaling pattern—roughly a 35% loss from 1080p to 1440p and another 50% loss from 1440p to 4K—indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, not the CPU.

The Intel Core i7-12700KF is a high-end desktop processor with 12 cores and 20 threads, boosting to 5.00 GHz, and it ranks in the 89th percentile against all CPUs. Its synthetic benchmarks, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28,979, show immense headroom for gaming workloads. However, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, with its 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, sits in the 43rd percentile against all GPUs. This massive disparity in relative performance explains why resolution scaling affects frame rates so dramatically.

Looking at the settings progression at 4K, the data reveals how quickly the GPU saturates. High settings yield 17.7 FPS, Medium produces 26.2 FPS, and Low achieves 26.4 FPS—nearly identical to Medium. This suggests that beyond a certain point, the GPU is so overwhelmed that reducing settings from Medium to Low provides no tangible benefit. The Ultra preset collapses to 11.6 FPS, confirming that the GTX 1650 simply lacks the pixel throughput for 4K gaming in this title.

At 1440p, the scaling is more linear. Low delivers 52.4 FPS, Medium drops to 39.6 FPS, High falls to 28.9 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 22 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 12.8 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High is 10.7 FPS—a consistent degradation that suggests the GPU's shading units are being progressively taxed. The 1080p results show a similar pattern but with higher absolute numbers: Low hits 80 FPS, Medium 56.9 FPS, High 45.1 FPS, and Ultra 32.5 FPS.

FAQ

Q: Why does the frame rate barely improve when dropping from Medium to Low at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, Medium produces 26.2 FPS while Low achieves 26.4 FPS—a negligible 0.2 FPS difference. This indicates the GPU is memory-bandwidth or fill-rate limited rather than shader-limited at these settings, so reducing graphical features that stress the shading units does little when the underlying pixel throughput is the bottleneck.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-12700KF holding back the GTX 1650 in Evolve?

A: No. The CPU ranks in the 89th percentile against all CPUs with a Geekbench multi-core score of 13,596 and single-core score of 2,526. The GPU sits in the 43rd percentile. The resolution scaling data confirms the GPU is the limiting component, as frame rates drop consistently with increasing resolution while the CPU has ample headroom.

Q: Can this combo achieve 60 FPS at 1080p?

A: Only at Low settings, where it produces 80 FPS. Medium settings deliver 56.9 FPS, High drops to 45.1 FPS, and Ultra yields 32.5 FPS. So 60 FPS is achievable but only with the lowest graphical preset.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 8,713. Its closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, scores 8,746, which is 0.4% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 scores 8,761 (0.5% higher), while the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 8,671 (0.5% lower).

Q: What is the GTX 1650's memory configuration and how does it affect 4K performance?

A: The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth. At 4K, the Ultra preset produces only 11.6 FPS, and even Low settings fail to break 30 FPS, suggesting the memory capacity and bandwidth are insufficient for the pixel workload at that resolution.

Q: Is the i7-12700KF's performance competitive with other CPUs in its class?

A: The i7-12700KF has an average benchmark score of 35,355. The Intel Core i5-14400 scores 35,336 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core i7-13800H scores 35,416 (0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i9-12900HX scores 35,289 (0.2% lower). These are all within a fraction of a percent, indicating near-identical synthetic performance.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture using the TU117 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It contains 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1485 MHz with a boost clock of 1665 MHz, and its memory runs at 2001 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed. This configuration delivers 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s.

The 4 GB GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. This is the critical constraint in Evolve at higher resolutions. The game's measured FPS shows that at 4K Ultra, the combo manages only 11.6 FPS, while 4K Low achieves 26.4 FPS. The difference between Medium (26.2 FPS) and Low (26.4 FPS) is negligible, reinforcing that memory bandwidth, not shader complexity, is the limiting factor at 4K.

The GPU's synthetic benchmark results contextualize its gaming performance. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 305, and its Passmark G3D score is 7,880. These numbers place it in the 43rd percentile against all GPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly 43% of the graphics cards in the database. Its nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the AMD Radeon 550X at 8,749 (0.4% higher) and the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 at 8,671 (0.5% lower), showing it sits in a tightly contested mid-to-low tier.

The GPU's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it a low-power solution, but this also caps its performance ceiling. The suggested PSU is 250 W, which is modest, but the card's dual-slot design and 229 mm length are standard. The GTX 1650 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which covers Evolve's API requirements, but the hardware itself is end-of-life.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers playable frame rates across most settings. Low settings produce 80 FPS, which is the highest measured result in the entire dataset. Medium settings drop to 56.9 FPS, still comfortable for most displays. High settings yield 45.1 FPS, and Ultra falls to 32.5 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 23.1 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 12.6 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset imposes a significant additional load on the GPU.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance degrades substantially. Low settings achieve 52.4 FPS, which is still playable but a 34.5% reduction from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings produce 39.6 FPS, High drops to 28.9 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 22 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 12.8 FPS loss, and from Medium to High another 10.7 FPS loss. This consistent degradation suggests the GPU's shading units are increasingly saturated at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the results are largely unplayable. Low settings achieve 26.4 FPS, Medium 26.2 FPS, High 17.7 FPS, and Ultra 11.6 FPS. The near-identical Low and Medium results (26.4 vs 26.2) are notable, as they suggest the GPU is hitting a hard performance wall. The drop from Medium to High is 8.5 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 6.1 FPS, showing that pixel throughput constraints dominate at 4K.

The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference is 47.5 FPS (80 vs 32.5). At 1440p, it narrows to 30.4 FPS (52.4 vs 22). At 4K, it shrinks to 14.8 FPS (26.4 vs 11.6). This pattern indicates that at lower resolutions, the GPU has enough headroom for settings to matter, but at 4K, the GPU is so overwhelmed that even the lowest settings cannot escape the resolution penalty.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i7-12700KF and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1,659 out of 1,695 tested combos in Evolve. This places it in the bottom 2.1% of all configurations, a stark result given the CPU's high-end status. The ranking reflects the GPU's limitations rather than the CPU's capabilities.

The i7-12700KF itself is a top-tier processor, ranking in the 89th percentile against all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 35,355. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i5-14400 (35,336, 0.1% lower), Intel Core i7-13800H (35,416, 0.2% higher), and Intel Core i9-12900HX (35,289, 0.2% lower). These delta percentages are all within statistical noise, indicating that the CPU is competitive with the best available processors.

In contrast, the GTX 1650 ranks in the 43rd percentile against all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 8,713. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8,746, 0.4% higher) and AMD Radeon 550X (8,749, 0.4% higher). The GPU's low percentile ranking, combined with the measured FPS data showing sub-30 FPS at 4K across all settings, explains why this combo ranks so poorly in Evolve.

The disparity between CPU and GPU performance is extreme. The CPU's average benchmark score of 35,355 is roughly four times the GPU's 8,713. This imbalance means the system is severely GPU-bound in Evolve, and upgrading the graphics card would yield substantial performance gains without needing a CPU change. The measured FPS data confirms this: even at 1080p Low, the combo achieves only 80 FPS, which is modest for a CPU that can handle far more demanding workloads.

The ranking of 1,659 out of 1,695 combos places this configuration near the bottom of the database. It outperforms only 36 other tested combinations, which is a poor result for a system with a high-end 12th-gen Core i7 processor. This underscores that in Evolve, the GPU is the dominant factor in determining overall performance, and the GTX 1650's 4 GB memory and 128-bit bus are insufficient for the game's demands at higher resolutions and settings.