Evolve

Evolve, the 2015 asymmetrical FPS, presents an interesting stress profile for modern hardware. This dataset pairs Intel's Core Ultra 9 275HX mobile flagship with NVIDIA's RTX 5090, and the measured frame rates reveal a title that is heavily dependent on both resolution and the graphics preset. The data shows a configuration capable of extreme performance at 1080p, but one that is brought to heel by the game's demanding Ultra settings at 4K, indicating a complex relationship between the CPU's immense processing power and the GPU's raw throughput.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 is the most defining characteristic of this data. At Low settings, the transition from 1080p to 4K results in a drop from 275 FPS to 105 FPS, a significant 61.8% reduction in performance. This steep decline strongly indicates that at lower resolutions, the system is not fully GPU-bound; the CPU is capable of feeding frames faster than the graphics card can render them at 1080p, and the bottleneck gradually shifts to the GPU as pixel count increases. The difference between 1080p and 1440p at Low settings is 90 FPS, while the difference between 1440p and 4K is 80 FPS, showing a fairly linear scaling pattern that points to the GPU becoming the primary limiting factor as resolution climbs.

At the High preset, the scaling pattern shifts. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 55 FPS (167 to 112), and the drop from 1440p to 4K is 48 FPS (112 to 64). While still significant, the percentage drops are less severe than at Low settings. This suggests that the increased graphical workload at High settings is already beginning to engage the GPU more fully, reducing the headroom the CPU had at lower resolutions. The 4K High result of 64 FPS is playable, but it shows that Evolve's High preset is a substantial load for even a flagship GPU like the RTX 5090.

The scaling to Ultra settings is the most dramatic. The 4K Ultra average of 44 FPS is less than half the 1080p Ultra average of 116 FPS. This massive performance hit indicates that the Ultra preset introduces a significant number of computationally expensive effects that scale heavily with resolution. The data suggests that Evolve's Ultra preset is not optimized for modern hardware scaling, creating a scenario where the RTX 5090, despite its enormous 32 GB frame buffer and 1.79 TB/s memory bandwidth, is overwhelmed by the combination of high resolution and maximum settings. The gap between Medium and Ultra at 4K is 37 FPS (81 to 44), which is a larger performance penalty than the gap between Low and Medium (24 FPS), confirming that the Ultra preset carries a disproportionately heavy load.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded in the data for this configuration?

A: The highest average frame rate is 275 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: Can this system run Evolve at 4K resolution with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, but the experience varies significantly by preset. At 4K Low, the average frame rate is 105 FPS, and at 4K Medium it is 81 FPS. However, at 4K Ultra, the average drops to 44 FPS, which is below the standard for smooth gameplay.

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the average frame rate at 1080p is 167 FPS, while at 4K it is 64 FPS. This represents a 103 FPS reduction when moving from 1080p to 4K.

Q: Are there any frame rate consistency metrics provided for this setup?

A: The dataset only includes minimum and maximum frame rates for Medium settings. At 1920x1080 Medium, the minimum is 181 FPS and the maximum is 245 FPS. At 2560x1440 Medium, the range is 122 FPS to 165 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Medium, it is 69 FPS to 94 FPS.

Q: How does the RTX 5090's benchmark percentile rank compare to its in-game performance?

A: The RTX 5090 has a percentile rank of 92 against all GPUs, indicating it is a top-tier part in synthetic benchmarks. However, in Evolve, the in-game combo rank is 567 out of 2872, suggesting that this specific CPU/GPU pairing is not necessarily optimal for this particular title.

Q: What is the impact of the Ultra preset on performance relative to High?

A: The Ultra preset is significantly more demanding. At 4K, the average frame rate drops from 64 FPS at High to 44 FPS at Ultra, a 31.3% reduction in performance for the increase in visual quality.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is a monumental piece of silicon, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture and the GB202 chip on a 5 nm process. Its specifications are colossal: 21,760 shading units, 680 texture mapping units, and 176 raster output pipelines. The memory subsystem is equally impressive, featuring 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, providing 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. The core clock operates at a base of 2017 MHz with a boost of 2407 MHz. In synthetic benchmarks, the GPU scores 39,650 in Passmark G3D and 18,355 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs.

In Evolve, the GPU's role is clearly defined by the resolution scaling. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 275 FPS, which reflects the CPU's ability to feed the GPU, but the GPU is not the limiting factor here. The performance data indicates the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution increases. The 4K Low result of 105 FPS shows that even with a massive 32 GB frame buffer, the raw pixel-pushing demands of 4K are substantial. The fact that the 4K Ultra setting yields only 44 FPS is a clear sign that Evolve's Ultra preset contains effects that are particularly punishing on the GPU's compute and shading resources, despite the RTX 5090's 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance.

The GPU's memory bandwidth plays a critical role in the higher-resolution results. The 1.79 TB/s bandwidth is necessary to feed the 512-bit bus and keep the 32 GB of GDDR7 memory saturated. Without this bandwidth, the 4K Medium result of 81 FPS would likely be lower. The data shows a consistent pattern: the RTX 5090 is more than capable at 1080p and 1440p, delivering high frame rates at High and Medium settings, but its performance at 4K is heavily dependent on the preset. The Ultra preset, in particular, demonstrates that raw compute power is not a panacea for unoptimized or extremely demanding game settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the configuration demonstrates exceptional performance. With Low settings, the average frame rate is an extremely high 275 FPS, showing that the CPU and GPU are not heavily stressed. Medium settings yield an average of 213 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 181 FPS and maximum of 245 FPS, indicating a smooth and consistent experience. High settings drop the average to 167 FPS, which is still well above the threshold for high-refresh-rate monitors. The most demanding 1080p preset, Ultra, still manages an average of 116 FPS, proving that at this resolution, even the most demanding settings are playable.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales down predictably. Low settings average 185 FPS, a 90 FPS drop from 1080p. Medium settings produce an average of 143 FPS, with a minimum of 122 FPS and a maximum of 165 FPS. High settings reduce the average to 112 FPS, which is a solid result for 1440p gaming. The Ultra preset at 1440p averages 78 FPS, which is a significant drop from its 1080p counterpart but remains in a playable range for most users.

The 3840x2160 results tell a story of diminishing returns. Low settings at 4K yield an average of 105 FPS, which is impressive but a far cry from the 275 FPS at 1080p. Medium settings average 81 FPS, with a minimum of 69 FPS and a maximum of 94 FPS. High settings bring the average down to 64 FPS, which is on the edge of what many would consider acceptable for a fast-paced FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K is the worst-case scenario, averaging just 44 FPS, which is not a playable experience for a competitive title. The data shows a clear hierarchy of performance, with the gap between presets widening as resolution increases.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rates, the optimal experience depends heavily on the target resolution. For 1920x1080 users with high-refresh-rate displays, the High preset is an excellent choice, delivering 167 FPS. This provides a significant visual improvement over Medium's 213 FPS while still maintaining frame rates high enough to take advantage of most gaming monitors. The Ultra preset at 116 FPS is also viable for users who prioritize visual fidelity over competitive advantage, as it remains well above the 60 FPS standard.

For 2560x1440, the High preset is the recommended choice, offering 112 FPS. This balances visual quality with smooth performance. The Medium preset at 143 FPS is a better option for those seeking higher refresh rates, but High provides a more immersive experience. The Ultra preset at 78 FPS is playable, but the performance cost relative to High may not justify the graphical gains for all users. For those with 144Hz or 165Hz 1440p monitors, Medium is the safer bet to ensure frame rates stay closer to the display's capabilities.

At 3840x2160, the recommendations change significantly. The Medium preset is the sweet spot, delivering an average of 81 FPS with a minimum of 69 FPS. This provides a smooth gameplay experience while still offering a reasonable level of graphical detail. The High preset at 64 FPS is acceptable for single-player or less competitive modes, but the frame rate dips below 60 FPS in the minimum readings could be problematic. The Low preset at 105 FPS is the only way to get a truly high-refresh-rate experience at 4K, but the visual sacrifice is substantial. The Ultra preset at 44 FPS is not recommended for active gameplay, as the frame rate is too low for a responsive feel.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The processor features a substantial cache hierarchy, with 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and a 36 MB shared L3 cache. Its memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 35,589 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,204 in single-core, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs.

In Evolve, the CPU's role is most evident at lower resolutions and settings. The 275 FPS result at 1080p Low is a clear indicator that the Core Ultra 9 275HX, with its high boost clock and 24 cores, is able to process game logic and draw calls at an extremely rapid pace. The single-core performance, evidenced by the 2,204 Cinebench R23 score, is crucial for a game like Evolve, which may have a primary game thread. The high boost clock of 5.40 GHz ensures that this thread is processed as quickly as possible, preventing a CPU bottleneck at high frame rates.

The data shows that the CPU is not the bottleneck at higher resolutions or with more demanding settings. As the resolution increases, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU's workload does not scale linearly with pixel count. However, the CPU's performance is still vital to maintain the high frame rates seen at 1080p Medium (213 FPS) and High (167 FPS). The processor's 36 MB of L3 cache is likely beneficial for keeping frequently accessed game data close to the cores, reducing latency. The comparison to rivals shows the Core Ultra 9 275HX is nearly on par with the Intel Xeon w5-3525, with a delta of -0.3%, and slightly behind the AMD EPYC 4484PX, with a delta of -0.5%, confirming its position as a high-end processor. The CPU's robust multi-threading capabilities are less critical in this title, but they ensure that background tasks and the game engine's various subsystems do not interfere with the primary rendering pipeline.