Evolve

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is a combination that targets 1440p and 1080p gaming in Evolve, a 2015 FPS title. The benchmark data shows a system that can handle high refresh rates at lower resolutions, but struggles to maintain playable frame rates at 4K with higher graphical presets. This analysis examines the measured FPS results, component roles, and settings recommendations based solely on the provided data.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 2135th out of 2872 tested combinations in Evolve, placing it in the 74th percentile of all tested systems. This mid-tier ranking reflects a pairing where the GPU is the primary bottleneck, particularly at higher resolutions. The CPU, despite its modern architecture, does not compensate for the GPU’s limitations in this specific title.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 sits in the 90th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 48995. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, which scores 49196 (a delta of -0.4%), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 49228 (delta -0.5%). The Intel Xeon Gold 5318H trails slightly at 48698 (delta 0.6%), while the Intel Core i5-14600K scores 48618 (delta 0.8%). These margins are all within 1% of the Ultra 5 245, indicating that the CPU’s raw compute performance is highly competitive with these alternatives, though none of them dramatically alter the gaming outcome.

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT, in contrast, ranks in the 59th percentile among GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16361. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (16351, delta 0.1%), NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (16408, delta -0.3%), AMD Radeon PRO W7500 (16415, delta -0.3%), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 (16504, delta -0.9%). All these deltas are under 1%, showing the RX 5700 XT is closely matched to a broad group of GPUs in synthetic benchmarks. However, in Evolve, the real-world performance is heavily dependent on resolution and settings, as the measured FPS data demonstrates.

The discrepancy between the CPU’s high percentile (90th) and the GPU’s lower percentile (59th) explains the combo’s mid-pack ranking. The CPU is not the limiting factor; the GPU is. This is evident from the FPS scaling across resolutions, where the frame rate drops dramatically as resolution increases, a classic sign of GPU-bound performance.

FAQ

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

A: The data shows 1920x1080 delivers the highest frame rates, with an average of 157 FPS at Low settings and 95 FPS at High settings. At 2560x1440, the average drops to 105 FPS at Low and 64 FPS at High. For a balance of visual quality and performance, 1920x1080 is clearly the most favorable resolution.

Q: Can this system run Evolve at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 60 at Low settings down to 25 at Ultra settings. The Medium preset yields an average of 46 FPS with minimum and maximum values of 39 and 53 FPS respectively. While 4K is technically playable at Low settings, the frame rates at higher presets drop below smooth thresholds.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High?

A: Across all resolutions, the Ultra preset significantly reduces performance. At 1920x1080, High averages 95 FPS while Ultra drops to 66 FPS. At 2560x1440, High averages 64 FPS and Ultra falls to 44 FPS. At 3840x2160, High averages 36 FPS while Ultra bottoms out at 25 FPS. The visual upgrade from High to Ultra comes at a substantial FPS cost.

Q: What is the difference between Low and Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 157 FPS while Medium averages 121 FPS, a difference of 36 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low averages 105 FPS and Medium averages 81 FPS, a 24 FPS difference. At 3840x2160, Low averages 60 FPS and Medium averages 46 FPS, a 14 FPS difference. Medium also provides minimum and maximum FPS data, showing a range from 103 to 140 FPS at 1080p.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for this game’s performance?

A: The benchmark results indicate the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU has 14 cores and 14 threads with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The GPU, with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and a boost clock of 1905 MHz, ranks in the 59th percentile. The FPS drops sharply with increasing resolution, which is characteristic of GPU-bound scenarios.

Q: What settings provide the most consistent frame pacing?

A: The Medium preset is the only one with reported minimum and maximum FPS values at all three resolutions. At 1920x1080, the range is 103 to 140 FPS. At 2560x1440, the range is 69 to 94 FPS. At 3840x2160, the range is 39 to 53 FPS. This suggests Medium offers more predictable performance than other presets, which lack min/max data.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance on the optimal settings for this combo. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers an average of 95 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset averages 121 FPS with a minimum of 103 FPS, offering a better experience for high-refresh-rate monitors. Low settings push the average to 157 FPS, but the visual quality trade-off is likely unnecessary for most users.

At 2560x1440, the High preset produces an average of 64 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for competitive play. The Medium preset averages 81 FPS with a minimum of 69 FPS, providing a smoother experience while retaining more visual fidelity than Low. The Low preset averages 105 FPS, but the graphical downgrade may be noticeable. For 1440p, Medium is the recommended preset, as it balances frame rate and image quality.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. The High preset averages 36 FPS, which falls below the 60 FPS target. The Medium preset averages 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS, still below ideal smoothness. The Low preset averages 60 FPS, making it the only 4K option that hits the 60 FPS mark. Users prioritizing frame rate at 4K should use Low settings; those who prefer higher visual quality will need to accept sub-60 FPS performance.

The best overall experience is the Medium preset at 1920x1080, which provides an average of 121 FPS and a minimum of 103 FPS. This combination offers a high frame rate with headroom for frame time spikes, making it suitable for most gaming scenarios. For users with 1440p monitors, Medium at that resolution is the strongest choice, with an average of 81 FPS and a minimum of 69 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, providing a comprehensive view of performance. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 157 FPS, the highest of any configuration. The Medium preset averages 121 FPS, with a minimum of 103 FPS and a maximum of 140 FPS. The High preset averages 95 FPS, while the Ultra preset drops to 66 FPS. This progression shows a clear linear decline as graphical fidelity increases.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 105 FPS, a 33% reduction compared to 1080p Low. The Medium preset averages 81 FPS, with a minimum of 69 FPS and a maximum of 94 FPS. The High preset averages 64 FPS, while the Ultra preset falls to 44 FPS. The performance drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across all presets, with the High preset losing 31 FPS and the Ultra preset losing 22 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 60 FPS, exactly half of the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset averages 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. The High preset averages 36 FPS, while the Ultra preset drops to 25 FPS. The 4K results show the GPU is heavily taxed, with even the Low preset barely maintaining 60 FPS.

The Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data across all resolutions. At 1080p, the range is 103 to 140 FPS, a 37 FPS spread. At 1440p, the range is 69 to 94 FPS, a 25 FPS spread. At 4K, the range is 39 to 53 FPS, a 14 FPS spread. This narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates the GPU is becoming more consistently bottlenecked, reducing frame time variability.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 reveals the nature of the bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 157 at 1080p to 105 at 1440p, a 33% reduction, and then to 60 at 4K, a 43% reduction from 1440p. This scaling pattern is typical of a GPU-bound system, where the render resolution directly impacts frame rate.

At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 121 at 1080p to 81 at 1440p, a 33% reduction, and then to 46 at 4K, a 43% reduction from 1440p. The relative reductions are nearly identical to Low settings, suggesting the GPU is the limiting factor regardless of preset. The High settings show a similar pattern: 95 FPS at 1080p, 64 at 1440p (a 33% drop), and 36 at 4K (a 44% drop).

The Ultra preset follows the same trend: 66 FPS at 1080p, 44 at 1440p (a 33% drop), and 25 at 4K (a 43% drop). The consistent 33% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and 43% reduction from 1440p to 4K across all presets indicates that the GPU is the primary constraint. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain more constant at lower resolutions, but the data shows no such plateau.

The pixel count increase from 1080p (2.07 million pixels) to 1440p (3.69 million pixels) is 78%, while the FPS drops by 33%. From 1440p to 4K (8.29 million pixels), the pixel count increases by 125%, while the FPS drops by 43%. This non-linear relationship suggests the GPU’s memory bandwidth and compute resources are being saturated, with the 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth playing a critical role.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. Its base clock is 3.50 GHz with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The CPU has 24 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. It scores 32924 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4648 in single-core, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs.

In Evolve, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. With 14 cores and 14 threads, the Ultra 5 245 has ample processing power for a 2015 title. The single-core performance, as measured by Cinebench R23 (4648), is more than sufficient for most game engines, which typically rely on a few main threads. The multi-core score of 32924 ensures that any background tasks or physics calculations will not cause bottlenecks.

The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo. The FPS scaling across resolutions is purely GPU-driven, as demonstrated by the consistent percentage drops. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 157 FPS, which is a high frame rate that would stress many CPUs, yet the Ultra 5 245 handles it without issue. The lack of a CPU plateau in the FPS data confirms that the processor is operating well within its capabilities.

The CPU’s 65 W TDP and unlocked multiplier (false) indicate it is a power-efficient desktop part, but these characteristics do not directly impact gaming performance. The memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while lower than the GPU’s 448.0 GB/s, is sufficient for the game’s data requirements. The 24 MB L3 cache helps reduce memory latency, which can improve frame pacing in CPU-bound scenarios, though the data suggests this is not a concern here.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is based on the RDNA 1.0 architecture and the Navi 10 chip, built on a 7 nm process. It has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1605 MHz, a game clock of 1755 MHz, and a boost clock of 1905 MHz. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 9.754 TFLOPS, with a pixel rate of 121.9 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 304.8 GTexel/s.

The RX 5700 XT ranks in the 59th percentile among GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16361. Its nearest rivals are all within 1% of this score, showing that the GPU is a mid-tier performer in synthetic tests. In Evolve, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck, as evidenced by the FPS scaling patterns. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at most settings, but at 4K Ultra, the GPU’s compute resources are overwhelmed.

The measured FPS data shows the RX 5700 XT’s limits. At 1080p, it can deliver 157 FPS at Low settings, which is excellent. At 4K Ultra, it drops to 25 FPS, a 84% reduction from 1080p Low. This steep decline is typical of a GPU that lacks the raw compute power for 4K rendering. The 9.754 TFLOPS FP32 performance is respectable for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results show it is insufficient for high settings.

The GPU’s memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s is a critical factor. At 4K, the high pixel count requires significant memory bandwidth, and the RX 5700 XT’s 256-bit bus and 14 Gbps effective memory speed are stretched. The Medium preset at 4K shows a minimum FPS of 39 and a maximum of 53, indicating some frame time variability, likely due to memory bandwidth constraints. The GPU’s 64 ROPs also limit fill rate at high resolutions, contributing to the performance drop.

The RX 5700 XT’s end-of-life production status and 225 W TDP are notable, but the gaming performance is what matters here. The data shows that the GPU is the primary determinant of FPS in Evolve, and its mid-tier ranking explains why the combo sits in the 74th percentile overall. For users seeking higher frame rates at 4K, a more powerful GPU would be necessary, but for 1080p and 1440p gaming, the RX 5700 XT delivers acceptable performance.