Evolve

Evolve running on the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile is a decisively GPU-bound experience. That single fact shapes every recommendation on this page: at 1080p the pairing is comfortably playable at every preset except Ultra, while at 4K even the Low preset fails to reach a smooth 60 FPS. The benchmark data — all of it measured, not estimated — shows a classic resolution-scaling pattern where frame rates fall in near-proportion to pixel count, which is the signature of a graphics limiter rather than a processor one. For a game released in early 2015, that outcome is instructive: modern mobile hardware does not struggle with Evolve's engine load, but the RTX 5050 Mobile's 8 GB of GDDR7 and its 50 W power envelope still define the ceiling at high resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H is a Meteor Lake mobile processor with 16 cores and 22 threads, a 3.80 GHz base clock, a 4.80 GHz boost clock, and a 28 W TDP on the Intel BGA 2049 socket. It sits in the 83rd percentile versus all CPUs in the database with an average benchmark score of 32697, which places it firmly in upper-midrange territory. Its nearest rivals make that positioning concrete: the Intel Core i5-14600T averages 32707 (a dead heat at 0% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 averages 32662 (0.1% behind), the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F averages 32750 (-0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H averages 32812 (-0.4%). In other words, the 155H trades blows within a fraction of a percent of all four.

For Evolve specifically, none of that head-to-head margin matters. An FPS title from 2015 does not demand much from a modern 16-core, 22-thread part. The single-thread results — 255 in Cinebench R15, 1235 in R20, and 1743 in R23, plus a PassMark single-thread score of 3468 — are more than sufficient for a game engine of that era, where per-thread responsiveness drives frame pacing. The multi-threaded scores (2450 in R15, 8754 in R20, 15028 in R23, and a PassMark multithread score of 24873) are effectively surplus capacity here. Supporting subsystems reinforce the surplus: 24 MB of shared L3 cache, dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity for the discrete GPU.

The evidence that the CPU is not the limiter is in the resolution scaling itself. If the Core Ultra 7 155H were constraining frame delivery, 1080p Low would not hit 140 FPS — the pipeline would cap out well before the GPU ran out of pixels to push. It doesn't. The CPU feeds frames as fast as the RTX 5050 Mobile can render them, and every performance deficit in this dataset traces back to the graphics side.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile is a Blackwell 2.0 part built on TSMC's 5 nm process, with the GB207 chip measuring 149 mm² and packing 16,900 million transistors at a density of 113.4 million per mm². It carries 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, 32 render output units, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. Clocks run from a 1020 MHz base to a 1500 MHz boost, with memory clocked at 1500 MHz (24 Gbps effective). The 8 GB of GDDR7 sits on a 128-bit bus delivering 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Peak throughput figures are 48.00 GPixel/s of pixel fill, 120.0 GTexel/s of texture fill, and 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute.

In the database's aggregate rankings the card sits in the 83rd percentile versus all GPUs with an average score of 43268, flanked by an interesting set of rivals: the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB at 43262 (0% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 at 43301 (-0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER at 43223 (0.1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at 43667 (-0.9%). Direct benchmark results for the card include 2365 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12) and 84171 in Geekbench OpenCL.

How does that translate into Evolve? The measured rows tell the story. At 1080p Medium the card delivers 108 FPS average with a 92–124 FPS range; at 1080p High it holds 85 FPS. The 384 GB/s of memory bandwidth and the 32 ROPs handle the 2015-era shader load without breaking a sweat at that resolution. But push to 4K and the card's limits emerge: 22 FPS at Ultra, 32 FPS at High, 41 FPS at Medium, and only 53 FPS at Low. Four times the pixels consume almost exactly the card's remaining headroom. The 8 GB VRAM buffer is not the culprit for a game this old — Evolve's asset pool is modest — but raw fill-rate and throughput at 2160p are, and the 50 W TDP of this mobile part leaves little room for the sustained boost that native 4K rendering demands.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling data is remarkably clean, and clean scaling is diagnostic. Moving from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 quadruples the pixel count, and the frame rate drops track that almost perfectly at every preset: Low falls from 140 to 53 FPS (a 62% drop), Medium from 108 to 41 (62%), High from 85 to 32 (62%), and Ultra from 59 to 22 (63%). When frame rates decline in near-linear proportion to pixel count, the GPU is the bottleneck — a CPU-limited configuration would flatten out at higher resolutions instead.

The 1440p midpoint confirms the pattern. Low lands at 94 FPS, Medium at 73 (with a measured 62–83 FPS range), High at 57, and Ultra at 39. Each 1440p figure sits roughly where you would predict between the 1080p and 4K endpoints, with no anomalies suggesting driver hitches or engine quirks. Frame-rate consistency at the Medium preset — the only rows with minimum and maximum captures — is also healthy: the 1080p Medium minimum of 92 FPS and the 1440p Medium minimum of 62 FPS both stay close to their averages, and the 4K Medium spread of 35–47 FPS is tight for that resolution.

The practical read: this pairing is a 1080p machine for Evolve at high settings, a capable 1440p machine at Medium and below, and not a viable 4K machine at any preset. The 59 FPS at 1080p Ultra just misses the 60 FPS line, which is worth noting for players who want maximum fidelity — a single preset step down to High recovers 26 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

Within Evolve's rankings across all tested hardware combinations, the Core Ultra 7 155H plus RTX 5050 Mobile pairing ranks 2960 out of 3700 combos. That places it in the bottom fifth of the field for this game — a reflection of how little Evolve demands from modern hardware rather than a condemnation of the pairing itself. Plenty of far older and weaker configurations will also run a 2015 title well, which inflates the ranked field and pushes this modern mobile duo down the order.

Context matters here. Both components individually sit in the 83rd percentile of their respective categories — the CPU at 83 versus all processors, the GPU at 83 versus all graphics solutions — yet the combined rank in this specific game is much lower. The explanation is straightforward: Evolve's performance ceiling is low enough that mid-range hardware from many generations converges on similar results, and ranking position becomes a contest of who can overflow the game's limits by the most. A mobile 28 W CPU and a 50 W GPU simply cannot multiply frame rates beyond a game's engine caps the way desktop towers can.

The ranking is therefore best interpreted as a relative placement, not a playability verdict. The measured data shows this combination delivering over 100 FPS at 1080p Medium — smooth by any standard — even while sitting near the bottom of the leaderboard.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows make the recommendations straightforward.

For 1080p play, High is the clear pick. At 85 FPS average it clears the 60 FPS bar with room to spare, and it preserves visual quality over Medium's 108 FPS. Players chasing maximum fluidity in this fast FPS title can drop to Medium for triple-digit frame rates with a 92 FPS measured minimum — the safer choice for competitive play where frame-time consistency matters. Ultra at 59 FPS average sits just under 60 and is best avoided; the visual gain over High is not worth dropping below the threshold on a 60 Hz panel.

For 1440p, Medium is the sweet spot. It averages 73 FPS with a 62 FPS minimum — above 60 at both ends of the measured range. High at 57 FPS average falls short of the line, and Ultra at 39 FPS is off the table.

For 4K, the honest recommendation is not to use it natively. Even Low manages only 53 FPS average and Medium sits at 41 with a 35 FPS minimum. A resolution reduction to 1440p with Medium settings delivers a strictly better experience than any native 4K preset this hardware can manage. If 4K must be used, Low is the only preset approaching playability, and even then the 53 FPS average falls short of smooth for a competitive shooter.

Across all presets, Medium is the only tier with full minimum/maximum captures in the dataset, and its consistently tight spreads — 92–124 at 1080p, 62–83 at 1440p, 35–47 at 4K — make it the most predictable choice for anyone sensitive to dips.

Measured FPS Breakdown

All figures below are measured averages from the dataset (dataIsMeasured: true); where captured, minimum and maximum values are noted.

1920x1080:

• Low: 140 FPS avg
• Medium: 108 FPS avg (92 min / 124 max)
• High: 85 FPS avg
• Ultra: 59 FPS avg

2560x1440:

• Low: 94 FPS avg
• Medium: 73 FPS avg (62 min / 83 max)
• High: 57 FPS avg
• Ultra: 39 FPS avg

3840x2160:

• Low: 53 FPS avg
• Medium: 41 FPS avg (35 min / 47 max)
• High: 32 FPS avg
• Ultra: 22 FPS avg

The shape of this table is consistent throughout: each preset step up in quality costs roughly 20–25% of the frame rate at any given resolution, and each resolution step up costs roughly 30–35%. The single largest cliff is Ultra at 4K, where the 22 FPS average is less than a sixth of the 140 FPS the same hardware delivers at 1080p Low. The best all-around measured result — 1080p Medium at 108 FPS with a floor of 92 — represents the sweet spot of the entire dataset, combining triple-digit average throughput with the highest measured minimum of any configuration tested on this pairing.