Evolve

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 combination delivers a performance profile defined by a stark contrast: a strong, modern CPU coupled with a flagship-class GPU, tested in the 2015 FPS title Evolve. The benchmark results reveal a system that is unequivocally GPU-bound at higher resolutions, while at 1080p, the CPU's capabilities become the primary factor in achieving exceptionally high frame rates. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS data to explain the role each component plays, how the system scales across resolutions, and what settings offer the best experience.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. For a game like Evolve, which launched in 2015, the title's engine is not designed to fully utilize the high thread counts of modern processors. The 14 physical cores provide substantial headroom, but the game's performance is more sensitive to single-threaded speed and raw clock frequency.

In this context, the boost clock of 5.00 GHz is the critical specification. The measured FPS at 1080p with Low settings reaches 371 avg FPS, a figure that is only achievable if the CPU can feed frames to the GPU at an extremely high rate. The single-core benchmark scores support this capability. The Core Ultra 5 235 scores 210 points in Cinebench R15 single-core, 875 in Cinebench R20 single-core, and 2085 in Cinebench R23 single-core. These scores place the processor in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong single-thread performance that is essential for high-FPS gaming in older titles.

The processor's cache hierarchy features 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 24 MB L3 cache. For a game like Evolve, the L3 cache is likely sufficient to hold frequently accessed game data, reducing memory latency. The system's memory bandwidth is rated at 102.4 GB/s via dual-channel DDR5 memory. While this is a significant figure, the FPS data suggests that memory bandwidth is not a limiting factor at 1080p, as the CPU is able to maintain frame times consistent with its 5.00 GHz boost clock.

The CPU's performance relative to its nearest rivals is effectively a tie. Its average benchmark score of 46062 is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030), 0.1% lower than the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098), and 0.2% higher than both the AMD EPYC 4364P (45970) and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960). This indicates that the Core Ultra 5 235 is a high-performing chip, but it is not in a class of its own. In Evolve, the comparison to the Core i9-13900HX is the most relevant, as that is also a high-end processor. The data shows that the Core Ultra 5 235 can hold its own, and the 5.00 GHz boost clock is likely the reason it can achieve the high frame rates observed at 1080p.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is the undisputed performance leader in this system. Built on the Ada Lovelace architecture and the AD102 chip, it features 16,384 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 176 ROPs. Its core clocks are listed with a base of 2235 MHz and a boost of 2520 MHz. The memory subsystem is equally impressive, with 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 1.01 TB/s. This configuration is massive overkill for a game from 2015, but the benchmark results show how the GPU's raw power translates into frame rates.

The GPU's role is most clearly defined by its performance at 4K resolution. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the system achieves 60 avg FPS. At High settings, it reaches 86 avg FPS. These figures are not limited by the CPU; they are purely a function of the GPU's rendering workload. The RTX 4090's FP32 performance of 82.58 TFLOPS and texture rate of 1,290.2 GTexel/s are the driving forces here. The 24 GB of VRAM is far more than Evolve requires, ensuring there is no memory capacity bottleneck even at 4K.

The GPU's benchmark scores are also notable. In Passmark G3D, it scores 38194, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 271631. These numbers place it in the 88th percentile of all GPUs. However, its nearest rival list is unusual, showing it tied with the Intel Arc Pro A60 (0% delta), which is a professional workstation card, and within 3% of several AMD Radeon Pro cards. This suggests that the aggregate benchmark score does not fully capture the RTX 4090's gaming dominance, but the measured FPS in Evolve does.

At 1080p, the GPU is often not the limiting factor. The jump from Low to High settings at 1920x1080 only reduces average FPS from 371 to 225, indicating that the GPU can handle these settings with ease. The RTX 4090's boost clock of 2520 MHz ensures that it can process the draw calls and geometry quickly, but at these resolutions, the CPU's frame generation rate is the ceiling. The RTX 4090 is so powerful that it is waiting for the CPU to send data, making the system CPU-bound at 1080p Low and Medium settings.

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

The FPS scaling across resolutions clearly demonstrates the transition from a CPU-bound scenario to a GPU-bound one. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 225 at 1920x1080, to 151 at 2560x1440, and finally to 86 at 3840x2160. This is a 62% drop from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is not linear; the drop from 1080p to 1440p (74 FPS) is nearly identical to the drop from 1440p to 4K (65 FPS). This suggests that the GPU's rendering load is increasing proportionally with the pixel count, confirming that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at these settings.

At Low settings, the pattern is even more pronounced. The average FPS is 371 at 1080p, 248 at 1440p, and 141 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 123 FPS, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 107 FPS. The fact that 1080p Low produces 371 FPS while 4K Low produces only 141 FPS indicates that the GPU is still the limiting factor, but the CPU is also heavily engaged at 1080p. If the CPU were the sole bottleneck, the 4K score would be higher relative to 1080p, as the GPU would have more time to render each frame.

The data shows that the system is never truly CPU-bound in a way that caps performance below 100 FPS, even at 4K Ultra (60 FPS). However, the 1080p results are the only place where the CPU's limits are visible. The 371 FPS at Low settings is likely near the maximum frame rate the CPU can generate, regardless of GPU power. This is a classic sign of a CPU bottleneck at low resolutions and settings, where the GPU is underutilized. The RTX 4090, with its 1.01 TB/s memory bandwidth and 2520 MHz boost clock, has more than enough throughput to render Evolve at 1080p, but it is constrained by the speed at which the Core Ultra 5 235 can issue draw calls and process game logic.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this system in Evolve?*

A: The highest measured average FPS is 371, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

*Q: Is the system capable of running Evolve at 4K with Ultra settings?*

A: Yes, the system achieves an average of 60 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, which is playable, though not at the high refresh rates seen at lower resolutions.

Q: At which resolution and settings is the CPU the limiting factor?

A: The CPU appears to be the limiting factor at 1920x1080 with Low settings, where the 371 FPS average is likely near the CPU's maximum frame generation rate, despite the RTX 4090's power.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 235 compare to its nearest rival, the Core i9-13900HX?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46062, which is 0.1% lower than the Core i9-13900HX's score of 46098, indicating nearly identical overall CPU performance.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Medium and High settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset yields an average of 193 FPS, while High yields 151 FPS, a difference of 42 FPS.

Q: Does the system maintain consistent frame times at 4K Medium settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the system reports a minimum FPS of 93 and a maximum of 126, around the average of 110 FPS, indicating relatively consistent frame times.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact measured average FPS for each resolution and settings preset combination.

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

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

| 3840x2160 | High | 86 | N/A | N/A |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 141 | N/A | N/A |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 110 | 93 | 126 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 60 | N/A | N/A |

| 2560x1440 | High | 151 | N/A | N/A |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 248 | N/A | N/A |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 193 | 164 | 221 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 105 | N/A | N/A |

| 1920x1080 | High | 225 | N/A | N/A |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 371 | N/A | N/A |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 287 | 244 | 330 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 156 | N/A | N/A |

The data set is complete for average FPS across all presets and resolutions. Minimum and maximum FPS data is only available for the Medium preset at each resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user's display refresh rate and resolution preference.

For 1920x1080, all presets are highly playable. The Low preset at 371 FPS is excessive for almost all displays. The Medium preset provides a substantial visual upgrade over Low while still delivering 287 FPS, which is more than enough for a 240Hz monitor. The High preset at 225 FPS is also an excellent choice, offering higher visual fidelity than Medium. The Ultra preset at 156 FPS is the most visually demanding, but it still provides a smooth experience on high-refresh-rate monitors, though it represents a 45% performance drop from Medium. The data suggests that High is the best balance for 1080p, as it provides a significant visual improvement over Medium while remaining above the 200 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, the High preset at 151 FPS is the recommended choice for users with a 144Hz monitor, as it is the only preset that comfortably exceeds that refresh rate. The Medium preset at 193 FPS is better for users with a 165Hz or 240Hz display, and it offers a more consistent frame time experience, with a minimum of 164 FPS. The Ultra preset at 105 FPS is playable on a 100Hz monitor, but the drop from High is steep. For 1440p, the Medium preset offers the best combination of high frame rates and the safety margin of a high minimum FPS.

At 3840x2160, the situation is different. The Ultra preset at 60 FPS is playable but is at the edge of what is considered smooth. The High preset at 86 FPS is a much better experience for 4K gaming, providing a 43% performance increase over Ultra. The Medium preset at 110 FPS is the best choice for 4K if the display supports 120Hz, as it offers a 28% improvement over High. The Low preset at 141 FPS shows the RTX 4090's capability, but it sacrifices too much visual quality for 4K. For 4K, the High preset is recommended as the baseline for a great experience, with Medium being the target for high-refresh-rate 4K displays.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is ranked 81st out of 2872 tested combinations in Evolve. This places the system in the top 3% of all tested hardware configurations. The ranking reflects the system's ability to deliver high frame rates across all resolutions, particularly the strong 1080p performance that leverages the CPU's 5.00 GHz boost clock.

While the RTX 4090 is a top-tier GPU, its ranking is slightly tempered by the CPU choice. The data shows that the system is CPU-bound at 1080p Low settings, meaning that a more powerful CPU would not yield higher frame rates in that specific scenario. However, the Core Ultra 5 235 is powerful enough to avoid being a significant bottleneck at higher resolutions, allowing the RTX 4090 to stretch its legs. The rank of 81 indicates that there are 80 other combinations that perform better, which are likely to include even higher-end CPUs paired with the same GPU, or possibly dual-GPU setups that are not present here.

The ranking confirms the RTX 4090's dominance. The GPU's 88th percentile standing among all GPUs is reflected in the system's ability to maintain over 60 FPS at 4K Ultra in a demanding title. The CPU's 89th percentile standing ensures that it keeps pace, preventing the system from falling behind in CPU-bound scenarios. The result is a well-balanced system that ranks in the 97th percentile of all tested combos. The gap between the Core Ultra 5 235 and its nearest rivals is minimal (less than 0.2%), suggesting that the CPU is not the factor differentiating this combo from others in its immediate rank range. Instead, the GPU's raw power is the primary driver of this high ranking.