Evolve

Evolve, a 2015 FPS built on the CryEngine, presents an interesting stress profile for the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination. The measured data reveals a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics card at higher resolutions, while the processor demonstrates ample headroom to drive very high frame rates at 1080p. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings to understand where the bottleneck lies and how to optimize the experience.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1080p to 1440p and then to 4K shows a classic GPU-bound scaling pattern. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 192 FPS at 1920x1080 to 129 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 63 FPS. Pushing further to 3840x2160, the average falls to 73 FPS, a 56 FPS drop from the 1440p figure. This steep decline indicates that the RX 6700 XT is the primary limiting factor, as the pixel throughput demand increases dramatically with resolution.

The scaling pattern holds at higher settings. With High settings, the average goes from 117 FPS at 1080p to 78 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 45 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial, highlighting how the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth are saturated. The data suggests that while the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at lower resolutions, the RX 6700 XT simply cannot maintain the same level of performance as the resolution increases, which is expected for a card of its class.

Interestingly, the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (192 FPS) and Ultra (81 FPS) is 111 FPS. At 4K, the difference between Low (73 FPS) and Ultra (31 FPS) is 42 FPS. This compression of the frame rate range at higher resolutions further confirms that the GPU is the bottleneck; at 4K, even lowering settings cannot fully compensate for the raw pixel-pushing demands, whereas at 1080p, the GPU has enough headroom to render more complex scenes.

The data implies that users targeting 4K with this combo will face a challenging trade-off. To achieve a playable frame rate above 60 FPS at 3840x2160, one must use Low settings, which yields 73 FPS. However, the visual compromise is significant. The 1440p resolution appears to be the sweet spot for balancing visual fidelity and performance, as it offers playable frame rates across all settings, from 54 FPS on Ultra to 129 FPS on Low.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal experience depends heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p, the Medium preset provides an excellent balance, delivering an average of 149 FPS. This is likely to satisfy high-refresh-rate monitor owners, and the minimum FPS of 127 suggests good frame pacing. For users with a standard 60Hz display, the Ultra preset at 81 FPS average is a viable option for maximum visual quality, though it sacrifices the high frame rates available at lower settings.

At 2560x1440, the High preset is the recommended choice for a smooth experience, yielding an average of 78 FPS. This is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for most monitors and provides a significant visual upgrade over Medium. The Ultra preset, at 54 FPS average, is borderline; it is playable but may not feel as fluid, especially in fast-paced action. The Medium preset at 100 FPS is also an excellent choice for competitive play, offering a large frame rate headroom.

For 4K, the data reveals a difficult situation. The High preset at 45 FPS average is not ideal for a smooth experience, and the Ultra preset at 31 FPS is barely playable. The Low preset at 73 FPS is the only setting that achieves a playable average. The recommendation here is to prioritize frame rate and use the Low preset at 3840x2160, or to consider lowering the resolution to 1440p to unlock higher settings and a better overall visual experience. The Medium preset at 57 FPS with a minimum of 48 FPS is a compromise, but the frame drops may be noticeable.

The measured data suggests that the Medium preset offers the most consistent performance across all resolutions. It is the only preset with reported minimum and maximum FPS values, showing a stable range (e.g., 127-171 FPS at 1080p, 85-115 FPS at 1440p, 48-65 FPS at 4K). This indicates that the Medium preset is well-optimized for this hardware combination, avoiding the severe frame dips that might occur at higher settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture. Its benchmark scores, such as a 14,769 score in Cinebench R23 multi-core and a 2,085 score in single-core, place it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. These results indicate a very capable processor for gaming, with strong single-thread performance that is crucial for game logic and physics. The high multi-core score also ensures that background tasks and streaming won't interfere with gameplay.

In Evolve, the CPU's role appears to be primarily about maintaining a high enough frame rate ceiling. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 192 FPS, which suggests the CPU is not a limiting factor at this resolution. The GPU is clearly the bottleneck here, as the frame rate scales inversely with resolution. The CPU is powerful enough to feed the RX 6700 XT at these lower resolutions, allowing the GPU to be the sole determinant of performance.

However, the CPU's performance is relative to its rivals. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-13900HX, has a nearly identical average benchmark score (46,098 vs. 46,062), with a delta of -0.1%. This means the Core Ultra 5 235 is effectively on par with a high-end mobile processor in synthetic workloads. In gaming, this level of CPU performance ensures that the system will not be CPU-bound in most scenarios, allowing the focus to remain on the GPU's capabilities.

The data shows that the CPU's 14 cores and 14 threads, while not hyper-threaded, are sufficient for this game. The boost clock of 5.00 GHz provides the necessary single-thread responsiveness, while the 24 MB of shared L3 cache helps with data throughput. The processor's TDP of 65 W suggests it is efficient, but the actual gaming performance is what matters, and the measured FPS indicates that the CPU is not holding the system back at any resolution tested.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT ranks 1480 out of 2872 tested combos in Evolve. This places it in the middle of the pack, which is a notable finding given the individual strengths of the components. The CPU is in the 89th percentile, and the GPU is in the 72nd percentile, yet the combo's rank suggests that other pairings may yield better results for this specific title.

This rank of 1480 out of 2872 indicates that while this is a functional and capable setup, it is not optimized for Evolve. The performance is likely limited by the GPU at higher resolutions, as the data suggests. Many other combos above it in the ranking may feature more powerful GPUs paired with similar CPUs, which would push the frame rates higher. The combo's position in the lower half of the rankings suggests that users with this configuration should not expect top-tier performance in this game.

The data implies that the ranking is heavily influenced by the GPU's performance. Since the RX 6700 XT has an average benchmark score of 27,425, which is on par with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile (27,435) and RTX 3090 (27,565), its gaming performance is solid but not exceptional. In Evolve, this translates to a mid-tier experience. The combo's rank reflects that the CPU is not the weak link; rather, the GPU is the component that determines the overall standing.

For context, the rank of 1480 means that approximately 1,392 combos perform better and 1,480 perform worse. This suggests a balanced but undecided result; the system is not a high-end performer, but it is also far from being a low-end setup. Users looking to improve their ranking in Evolve would likely need to upgrade the GPU, as the CPU has more headroom than the graphics card provides.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is the primary driver of the measured FPS results. With 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, it provides a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s, which is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming but becomes a limiting factor at 4K. The GPU's boost clock of 2581 MHz and 2560 shading units contribute to its overall performance, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs.

In Evolve, the GPU's role is most apparent at higher resolutions. The frame rate drops significantly from 1440p to 4K, indicating that the card is struggling to manage the increased pixel count and texture data. At 4K Ultra, the card manages only 31 FPS, which is a clear sign of its limits. The card’s 12 GB VRAM is not the issue at these settings, but the raw compute power and memory bandwidth are insufficient for smooth 4K gameplay.

The GPU's performance is comparable to several rivals, including the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090, which has a similar average benchmark score. This suggests that in synthetic tests, the RX 6700 XT holds its own against much more expensive cards. However, in Evolve, the specific optimization of the game engine and the drivers will determine the final outcome, and the measured data shows that the card is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming.

The card's DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensures it can handle modern rendering techniques, but the game's age means it likely relies on older APIs. The measured scores for DirectX 11 (173) and DirectX 12 (77) in Passmark indicate that the card is more proficient in older APIs, which aligns with Evolve's 2015 release. This suggests that the card's architecture is well-suited for this game's engine, but the resolution scaling ultimately limits its performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Evolve?

A: Based on the data, 2560x1440 is the best resolution. It offers a playable 78 FPS average on High settings, which is a good balance of visual quality and performance. At 1080p, the frame rates are higher, but at 4K, the performance drops to unplayable levels on higher settings.

Q: Can this system achieve 4K 60 FPS in Evolve?

A: No. The measured data shows that at 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 73 on Low settings. The Medium preset drops to 57 FPS, and High is 45 FPS. None of the settings achieve a stable 60 FPS average, so 4K 60 FPS is not possible with this hardware.

Q: How does the RX 6700 XT compare to its nearest rival, the RTX 3090, in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 6700 XT has an average benchmark score of 27,425, while the RTX 3090 has a score of 27,565. This represents a delta of -0.5%, meaning the RX 6700 XT is only 0.5% slower in these tests, despite being a much smaller and lower-power card.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 a bottleneck for the RX 6700 XT?

A: The data suggests no. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 192 FPS, indicating the CPU is not limiting the GPU. The CPU's 89th percentile ranking and high single-core score of 2,085 in Cinebench R23 suggest it has ample power for this game.

Q: What is the average FPS difference between High and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the High preset yields an average of 117 FPS, while the Ultra preset yields 81 FPS. The difference is 36 FPS, showing a significant performance cost for the highest visual settings.

Q: How much VRAM does the RX 6700 XT have, and is it sufficient for this game?

A: The RX 6700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory. This is more than sufficient for Evolve, even at 4K, as the game's release in 2015 predates high-VRAM demands. The performance limitations at 4K are due to compute power, not memory capacity.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact measured average FPS for each resolution and settings combination tested. The data shows a clear progression of performance based on the graphical demands.

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

| :--------- | :------- | :------ | :------ | :------ |

| 3840x2160 | High | 45 | N/A | N/A |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 73 | N/A | N/A |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 57 | 48 | 65 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 31 | N/A | N/A |

| 2560x1440 | High | 78 | N/A | N/A |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 129 | N/A | N/A |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 100 | 85 | 115 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 54 | N/A | N/A |

| 1920x1080 | High | 117 | N/A | N/A |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 192 | N/A | N/A |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 149 | 127 | 171 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 81 | N/A | N/A |

The data indicates that the Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max FPS data, suggesting it was the primary test scenario for frame time analysis. At 1080p, the Medium preset provides a 149 FPS average with a minimum of 127 FPS, ensuring a smooth experience. At 1440p, the Medium preset averages 100 FPS, with a minimum of 85 FPS, which is still very playable. At 4K, the Medium preset drops to 57 FPS average, with a minimum of 48 FPS, which is on the edge of playability.

The Low preset offers the highest frame rates at every resolution, but the visual quality is significantly reduced. At 1080p, it achieves 192 FPS, which is excellent for competitive play. The High preset is the recommended balance for most users, offering 117 FPS at 1080p and 78 FPS at 1440p. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, and its performance metrics show that it is only suitable for 1080p and 1440p, with 81 FPS and 54 FPS averages respectively.