Evolve

Evolve, the 2015 asymmetric FPS, presents a demanding scenario for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650. The measured data reveals a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics hardware, with frame rates that plummet as resolution and settings increase. This combination ranks near the bottom of the database, at 2788 out of 2872 tested combos, indicating a configuration that struggles to deliver a fluid experience in this title.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data shows a dramatic collapse as resolution scales from 1080p to 4K, clearly identifying the GPU as the primary bottleneck. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 77 FPS, which is the only playable result in the entire dataset. However, this performance is not sustained at higher resolutions. Moving to 1440p at Low settings drops the average to 51 FPS, a significant 34% reduction. At 4K with Low settings, the average falls further to 29 FPS, which is a 62% drop from the 1080p baseline.

This pattern is consistent across all settings presets, underscoring that the GTX 1650's rendering capabilities are exhausted quickly. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p on High settings shows a drop from 47 FPS to 31 FPS, a 34% decline. The jump from 1440p to 4K on High settings is even more punishing, with the average falling from 31 FPS to 18 FPS, a 42% reduction. The data indicates that the GTX 1650's 4 GB of VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are insufficient for the texture and geometry loads at 4K, causing the rendering pipeline to stall.

The most extreme example of this scaling is at the Ultra preset. At 1080p, the average is 32 FPS, which is already below the threshold for smooth gameplay. At 1440p, it drops to 22 FPS, and at 4K, it plummets to a meager 12 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is also telling: 29 FPS versus 12 FPS, a 59% performance penalty for enabling higher visual fidelity. This demonstrates that the GPU is not just resolution-limited but also heavily settings-limited. The processor, with its high single-thread and multi-thread scores, is clearly not the limiting factor; the graphics card is simply unable to push frames at higher resolutions, making the scaling curve exceptionally steep and unfavorable.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the definitive performance ceiling for this configuration. Its specifications, including a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, are simply not enough for Evolve's demands at higher resolutions. The GPU's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s, which is a severe constraint. The data shows that at 1080p Medium, the system produces 59 FPS, but at 1440p Medium, it falls to 40 FPS. This 32% drop suggests that the memory bandwidth is saturated when the pixel count increases, leading to a direct and immediate performance hit.

The GPU's raw compute power, rated at 2.984 TFLOPS for FP32, is another limiting factor. The benchmark results for the GPU place it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472. Its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon HD 8850M and the Intel UHD Graphics 750, have average scores of 7447 and 7441, respectively, placing the GTX 1650 just 0.3% and 0.4% ahead of them. This indicates that the GPU is performing at a level comparable to entry-level integrated graphics, which is insufficient for a demanding title like Evolve.

The GPU's DirectX 11 performance score of 58 in Passmark, while its DirectX 12 score is only 35, shows that it has some capability with the older API, but it lacks the architectural features to handle modern workloads efficiently. The 4K Ultra result of 12 FPS is a clear indicator that the GPU is completely overwhelmed. Even at 4K Low, the 29 FPS average is not smooth, and the frame pacing is likely poor. The data strongly suggests that the GTX 1650 is the sole reason for the low frame rates, as the CPU is more than capable of feeding it data, but the GPU cannot process it quickly enough.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 plays a secondary, supportive role in this pairing, and its capabilities are largely underutilized. With 14 cores and 14 threads, a base clock of 3.50 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, the processor has ample computational headroom. Its benchmark scores are impressive, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and a single-core score of 4648. This places the CPU in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 48995. Its nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G and the Intel Core i5-14600K, have average scores of 49196 and 48618, respectively, showing that the Ultra 5 245 is within 0.4% and 0.8% of those parts.

In this game, the CPU's high single-thread performance is critical for handling game logic and physics, but the frame rate data shows that the GPU is the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the CPU can push the system to 77 FPS, which is a respectable number for this GPU. However, when the resolution increases, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU's performance is irrelevant. For example, the difference between 1080p High and 1440p High is a drop from 47 to 31 FPS, a 34% reduction. This drop is not due to the CPU being unable to process the data, but rather the GPU being unable to render the increased pixel count.

The CPU's 24 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s provide a fast data pathway, but the GTX 1650's 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth is the slower link in the chain. The data indicates that the processor is not a limiting factor at any resolution tested. Even at 4K Ultra, where the frame rate is 12 FPS, the CPU is likely waiting for the GPU to finish rendering. This is a classic case of a powerful modern CPU being paired with an older, entry-level GPU, resulting in a system that is completely GPU-bound in Evolve. The CPU's performance is sufficient for the game, but it cannot compensate for the GPU's deficiencies.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 2788 out of 2872 tested combos in Evolve. This puts it in the bottom 3% of all tested configurations, indicating a severe performance deficit. This ranking is a direct result of the GPU's low performance, as the CPU is a high-end part. The combo's poor standing is consistent with the measured FPS, which shows sub-60 FPS averages at 1440p and 4K across all settings.

The rank of 2788 means that the vast majority of other CPU and GPU pairings tested in this game deliver better performance. This is not a surprising outcome, given that the GTX 1650 is a low-end GPU from 2019, while the CPU is a high-end part from 2025. The data shows that the GPU's percentile ranking of 40 is the dominant factor in the combo's overall rank. The CPU's percentile ranking of 90 is irrelevant when the GPU cannot render frames fast enough. This creates a massive imbalance, where the system's potential is never realized.

To contextualize this, the GPU's nearest rivals include the Intel Arc A310, which has an average score of 7550, and the GTX 1650 is only 1% ahead of it. This shows that the GPU is on par with other entry-level solutions. The combo rank reflects this, as it places the system in a position where users would struggle to achieve playable frame rates even at 1080p with medium settings. The only scenario where the system approaches playability is at 1080p Low, where it achieves 77 FPS. Every other measured configuration results in an average FPS below 60, with 4K Ultra being the worst at 12 FPS. This ranking is a clear warning that this configuration is not suitable for Evolve at any reasonable quality setting.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive look at the system's performance across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the system achieves an average of 77 FPS on Low settings, which is the highest score in the entire dataset. The Medium preset yields 59 FPS, with a minimum of 50 FPS and a maximum of 68 FPS. High settings produce an average of 47 FPS, while Ultra drops the average to 32 FPS. These numbers show that at 1080p, the system can handle Low and Medium settings with reasonable playability, but struggles with High and Ultra.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degrades significantly. At Low, the average is 51 FPS. The Medium preset averages 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. High settings average 31 FPS, and Ultra plummets to 22 FPS. None of these averages reach the 60 FPS target, and the Low preset is the only one that is marginally playable. The data reveals a consistent pattern of roughly a 20% performance drop when moving from 1080p to 1440p for the same settings preset.

At 3840x2160, the system is clearly overmatched. The Low preset averages 29 FPS. Medium averages 23 FPS, with a minimum of 19 FPS and a maximum of 26 FPS. High settings average 18 FPS, and Ultra averages a mere 12 FPS. These results are all well below the minimum threshold for a playable experience, and the game would feel like a slideshow. The data shows that this resolution is entirely unsuitable for this hardware combination. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is a 59% performance penalty, highlighting the extreme impact of settings on this resolution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the only viable configuration for this system in Evolve is at 1080p with the Low preset, which achieves an average of 77 FPS. This is the only tested setting that provides a frame rate above the 60 FPS threshold, ensuring a smooth and responsive experience. The Medium preset at 1080p, with an average of 59 FPS and a minimum of 50 FPS, is also an option, but it may result in occasional stutters during intense action sequences.

For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, 1080p High is a possible compromise, but the 47 FPS average will not be as fluid. The game will be playable, but not ideal. All other settings and resolutions are not recommended. At 1440p, even the Low preset falls to 51 FPS, which is below the ideal threshold. The 4K resolution is entirely out of the question, with the best result being 29 FPS at Low settings, which is too low for a competitive or enjoyable experience.

The data suggests that the system should be configured for 1080p Low to achieve the best balance of performance and playability. If a user insists on higher settings, they must accept the significant frame rate penalty. The 1080p Medium preset, with its 59 FPS average, is the highest quality setting that remains close to the 60 FPS target. However, the minimum FPS of 50 indicates that there will be noticeable dips. For a consistent experience, the Low preset is the only safe choice. The benchmark results indicate that this hardware combination is fundamentally limited to 1080p gameplay, and any resolution above that will result in a poor experience.