Evolve

Evolve, a 2015 FPS title, shows a clear scaling pattern when paired with the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER. The measured frames per second (FPS) data across three resolutions and four settings tiers reveals a system where the GPU becomes the dominant constraint as pixel count rises, while the CPU’s headroom remains largely untapped even at lower resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 produces a predictable and steep decline in average FPS, indicating that the GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the primary limiting component in this configuration. At Low settings, the drop from 123 FPS at 1920x1080 to 83 FPS at 2560x1440 represents a 32.5% reduction, and the further fall to 47 FPS at 3840x2160 is a 43.4% reduction from the 1440p figure. This pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario, where doubling the pixel count from 1080p to 4K roughly halves the frame rate, though the exact scaling here is slightly less severe due to the game’s age and the specific workload.

At Medium settings, the measured data shows a similar trend: 96 FPS at 1920x1080, 64 FPS at 2560x1440, and 37 FPS at 3840x2160. The 1080p to 1440p drop is 33.3%, while the 1440p to 4K drop is 42.2%. These percentages are remarkably close to the Low settings figures, suggesting that the resolution scaling penalty is nearly independent of the quality preset. This is an important observation because it implies that the GPU’s fillrate and memory bandwidth, not the shading complexity, are the primary bottlenecks when moving up in resolution.

High settings produce 75 FPS at 1920x1080, 50 FPS at 2560x1440, and 29 FPS at 3840x2160. The relative declines are 33.3% and 42.0%, respectively, again mirroring the other presets. Ultra settings, however, show a slightly different pattern: 52 FPS at 1080p, 35 FPS at 1440p, and 20 FPS at 4K. The 1080p to 1440p drop is 32.7%, and the 1440p to 4K drop is 42.9%. The consistency across all four presets—with the 1440p-to-4K penalty hovering around 42-43%—strongly indicates that the limiting factor is the GPU’s pixel processing throughput rather than any CPU-side constraint.

The data suggests that at 1920x1080, the system is still partially CPU-limited at Low settings, where the 123 FPS average is high enough that the GPU has spare capacity. However, once the resolution increases to 2560x1440, the GPU becomes fully saturated, and further resolution increases yield proportional FPS losses. The absence of minimum and maximum FPS values for most rows (they are only provided for Medium settings) limits the analysis of frame time consistency, but the average FPS trends are sufficient to identify the bottleneck.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER, built on the Turing architecture with a 12 nm process node, provides the rendering muscle for this combination. Its specifications include a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1785 MHz, with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. These figures contextualize the measured FPS: the 6 GB frame buffer is adequate for Evolve at 1080p and 1440p, but at 3840x2160, the combination of higher pixel count and texture demands pushes the card to its limits, as evidenced by the sub-30 FPS averages on High and Ultra settings.

The GPU’s compute capabilities—1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units—translate to a pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 157.1 GTexel/s. These rates are directly relevant to Evolve’s rendering workload. At 3840x2160, the card’s fillrate becomes the bottleneck, which explains why even dropping from High to Medium settings only yields an improvement from 29 FPS to 37 FPS, and Low settings reach 47 FPS. The game’s visual effects, including dynamic lighting and particle systems, stress the GPU’s shading units more than its memory subsystem, but the 336.0 GB/s bandwidth still proves insufficient for 4K Ultra settings, where the average FPS falls to 20.

The GTX 1660 SUPER’s benchmark scores reinforce its mid-range positioning. Its PassMark G3D score of 12699 places it at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12986. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (0.4% higher score), the AMD Radeon RX 580 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon 740M (0.9% higher). These close margins indicate that the GTX 1660 SUPER is competitive with other mid-range options from its era, but none of these rivals would meaningfully change the resolution scaling conclusions drawn from this data.

The GPU’s DirectX 12 support (version 12_1) and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility are relevant for Evolve, which was released before these APIs became standard. The game likely runs in DirectX 11 mode, where the GPU’s PassMark DirectX 11 score of 104 indicates solid performance. The DirectX 12 score of 50 is lower, but this does not impact Evolve’s results. The card’s 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 performance provides a baseline for understanding its shading throughput, though the measured FPS data remains the most direct evidence of its in-game capabilities.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combination depend on the target resolution and the user’s preference for frame rate versus visual quality. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 96 FPS average with a minimum of 81 FPS and a maximum of 110 FPS, providing a smooth experience that comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS threshold for most displays. High settings at 1080p yield 75 FPS, which is still playable but offers diminishing returns over Medium given the 21 FPS loss. Low settings reach 123 FPS, but the visual compromise is substantial, and the extra frame rate beyond 120 FPS may not be perceptible on standard monitors.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings provide 64 FPS average with a minimum of 55 FPS, which is borderline for a 60 Hz display. High settings drop to 50 FPS, which introduces noticeable stutter on such displays. Low settings achieve 83 FPS, making this the recommended preset for 1440p if smoothness is prioritized, though Medium is preferable for visual fidelity on a 60 Hz monitor with adaptive sync. Ultra settings at 1440p yield only 35 FPS, which is below the threshold for enjoyable gameplay in a fast-paced FPS.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. Low settings produce 47 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for competitive play. Medium settings average 37 FPS with a minimum of 31 FPS and a maximum of 42 FPS, meaning frame times will be inconsistent. High settings fall to 29 FPS, and Ultra drops to 20 FPS. For 4K, Low settings are the only viable option for a remotely smooth experience, and even then, users should expect occasional dips below 40 FPS. The data clearly indicates that this GPU is not designed for 4K gaming in Evolve, and users should either lower resolution or accept reduced visual quality.

The Medium preset’s measured minimum and maximum FPS values (81-110 at 1080p, 55-74 at 1440p, 31-42 at 4K) provide the only frame time variance data in the pack. The spread of approximately 29 FPS at 1080p and 19 FPS at 1440p suggests moderate frame pacing, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario. At 4K, the 11 FPS spread indicates tighter frame times, but the low average makes this less relevant.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full dataset provides a comprehensive view of performance across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the average FPS values are 123 for Low, 96 for Medium, 75 for High, and 52 for Ultra. The Medium preset’s minimum and maximum are 81 and 110, respectively. This represents a 71 FPS gap between Low and Ultra, showing that the GPU has enough headroom at 1080p to handle even the most demanding settings, though Ultra’s 52 FPS average falls short of the 60 FPS ideal.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 83 for Low, 64 for Medium, 50 for High, and 35 for Ultra. The Medium preset’s range is 55 to 74 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 48 FPS, indicating that the GPU is becoming more constrained. The 1440p data suggests that Medium is the highest playable setting, with High dipping below 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 47 for Low, 37 for Medium, 29 for High, and 20 for Ultra. The Medium preset’s range is 31 to 42 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is now just 27 FPS, confirming that the GPU is saturated across all settings. Even Low settings cannot maintain 60 FPS at 4K, and the 20 FPS Ultra result is effectively unplayable for a fast-paced FPS.

Comparing across resolutions at the same settings clarifies the scaling. Low settings: 123 → 83 → 47. Medium: 96 → 64 → 37. High: 75 → 50 → 29. Ultra: 52 → 35 → 20. Each resolution step reduces performance by roughly one-third, with the 4K step being slightly more punishing. This consistency is a hallmark of GPU-bound performance, where the CPU is not the limiting factor.

FAQ

Q: Is this combination capable of running Evolve at 60 FPS at 1080p?

A: Yes, at 1080p the Low preset achieves 123 FPS, Medium achieves 96 FPS, and High achieves 75 FPS. Only Ultra settings fall below 60 FPS, with an average of 52 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p gaming?

A: Medium settings provide 64 FPS average with a 55 FPS minimum, which is the highest playable option for a 60 Hz display. Low settings reach 83 FPS for smoother motion, while High drops to 50 FPS and Ultra to 35 FPS.

Q: Can this system handle 4K resolution in Evolve?

A: The data shows 4K performance is limited. Low settings average 47 FPS, Medium averages 37 FPS, High averages 29 FPS, and Ultra averages 20 FPS. None of these maintain 60 FPS, and only Low settings approach playability.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score of 12986 is 0.4% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and AMD Radeon RX 580, 0.7% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla M2090, and 0.9% lower than the AMD Radeon 740M. These margins are negligible in real-world gaming.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck this GPU in Evolve?

A: The resolution scaling data indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 123 FPS, which suggests the CPU can feed the GPU at high rates, but the FPS drops proportionally with resolution, confirming GPU saturation rather than CPU limitation.

Q: What frame time variance can be expected?

A: Only the Medium preset has measured minimum and maximum values. At 1080p, the range is 81 to 110 FPS (29 FPS spread). At 1440p, it is 55 to 74 FPS (19 FPS spread). At 4K, it is 31 to 42 FPS (11 FPS spread), showing tighter frame times at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 with the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, provides the processing foundation for this system. It features 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Its 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB L2 cache per core, along with 192 KB L1 cache per core, offer substantial data locality for game workloads. The CPU’s memory support for DDR5 on a dual-channel bus provides 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for Evolve’s requirements.

In Evolve, the CPU’s role is primarily to handle game logic, AI pathfinding, and physics calculations. The 24 cores are far more than this 2015 title can utilize, as most games from that era were optimized for four to eight threads. The CPU’s PassMark multithread score of 68574 and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 44253 demonstrate immense parallel processing capability, but these strengths are largely untapped in Evolve. The single-thread performance, evidenced by a PassMark single-thread score of 5068 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2439, is more relevant, as Evolve’s main thread likely limits CPU-side performance.

The CPU’s benchmark scores place it at the 96th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93785. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6520P (0% delta), AMD EPYC 4564P (-1.5%), AMD EPYC 9175F (-1.9%), and AMD EPYC 4565P (-2.1%). These are all server-class processors, indicating that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus outperforms most consumer chips. However, this raw compute power does not translate to higher FPS in Evolve beyond what the GPU can render, as confirmed by the resolution scaling analysis.

The CPU’s boost clock of 5.50 GHz ensures that single-threaded tasks are handled quickly, which is crucial for Evolve’s frame pacing. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 123 FPS, suggesting the CPU can issue draw calls fast enough to support high frame rates. The fact that increasing resolution causes FPS to drop proportionally, rather than the CPU causing a ceiling, indicates that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is not a bottleneck in this configuration. Its 24 threads and high clock speeds provide ample headroom for any background processes or future games with higher thread utilization.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER ranks 2450 out of 2872 tested combos for Evolve, placing it in the bottom 15% of all configurations. This low ranking is primarily due to the GPU’s mid-range performance, as the CPU is among the top performers in its own benchmarks. The GPU’s 53rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12986, contrasts sharply with the CPU’s 96th percentile ranking and average score of 93785.

The ranking disparity highlights an imbalance: the CPU is far more capable than the GPU for this game. In Evolve, which is not heavily multithreaded, the CPU’s 24 cores provide no advantage over a modern six-core processor, while the GPU’s 6 GB VRAM and 5.027 TFLOPS FP32 performance become the limiting factors. The combo’s rank of 2450 out of 2872 suggests that most other tested combinations—likely those with newer or higher-tier GPUs paired with more modest CPUs—achieve better FPS in this title.

The data shows that this combo’s performance is acceptable for 1080p gaming at Medium to High settings, but it falls behind in higher resolutions. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (20 FPS) is particularly poor, placing this combo far below the median for 4K gaming. The GPU’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon RX 580, would likely produce similar results, meaning the ranking is representative of mid-range GPUs rather than a specific flaw in this pairing. Ultimately, the combo rank reflects the GPU’s limitations, and users seeking better Evolve performance would need to upgrade the graphics card while retaining the powerful CPU.