Evolve

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 combination is an extreme pairing for a 2015 title like Evolve, and the benchmark results confirm that this system is heavily overqualified for the task. The measured FPS data shows a system that is limited almost entirely by the game engine's frame rate handling rather than by hardware capability, with even the most demanding settings leaving tremendous headroom.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a system that is completely GPU-bound at lower resolutions, but still maintains extremely high performance at 4K. At 1080p with Low settings, the system produces 371 FPS, which drops to 248 FPS at 1440p and then to 141 FPS at 4K—a 62% reduction from 1080p to 4K. This steep drop indicates that the RTX 4090 is the limiting factor at higher resolutions, but the absolute numbers remain so high that no real-world display would be the bottleneck.

The Medium settings tell a similar story: 287 FPS at 1080p, 193 FPS at 1440p, and 110 FPS at 4K. The scaling factor from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 33% performance loss, and from 1440p to 4K it is another 43% loss. These are typical scaling patterns for a high-end GPU, showing that the 4090's 24 GB of GDDR6X memory and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth are being utilized effectively as resolution increases.

At High settings, the pattern shifts slightly. The system delivers 225 FPS at 1080p, 151 FPS at 1440p, and 86 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 33%, but the drop from 1440p to 4K is 43%, which is consistent with the Medium settings scaling. This suggests that the game's High preset is not dramatically more demanding than Medium, and the limiting factor remains the GPU's pixel throughput rather than any CPU bottleneck.

Ultra settings produce the most interesting scaling behavior. At 1080p, the system still manages 156 FPS, but 1440p drops to 105 FPS, and 4K falls to 60 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is notably the only sub-100 FPS measurement in the entire dataset, and the 62% loss from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings shows that this preset is where the RTX 4090 finally starts to feel constrained. The fact that 4K Ultra lands at exactly 60 FPS suggests this could align with a display refresh rate, but the data does not confirm that.

What the scaling data demonstrates is that this CPU-GPU combination is never meaningfully held back by the processor. Even at 1080p Low where the CPU would typically become the bottleneck in modern titles, the system still delivers 371 FPS, which is far beyond what any display can show. The limiting component at all resolutions and settings is the GPU, and even then, the RTX 4090 only approaches its performance ceiling at 4K Ultra.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, built on a 3 nm process from TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. This is an enormous amount of processing power for a game released in 2015, and the benchmark results reflect that the CPU is never the limiting factor in Evolve.

The processor's benchmark scores place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84003. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83807, representing a 0.2% advantage for the 290K Plus. The AMD EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9135 trail by 1.1% and 1.2% respectively, while the AMD EPYC 7F72 scores 85072, which is 1.3% higher. These margins are negligible in gaming workloads, and none of these rivals would produce different results in Evolve given the frame rates measured.

The 290K Plus achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303. In a game like Evolve that was designed for the multi-core processors of its era, this CPU provides far more single-threaded and multi-threaded capability than the game can utilize. The PassMark single-thread score of 4823 confirms that even the CPU's single-core performance is exceptional, which matters for games that rely on a primary simulation thread.

The CPU's 24 threads are more than Evolve can possibly use, and the data shows no evidence of CPU limitation at any resolution or settings level. Even at 1080p Low with 371 FPS, the frame rate is not capped by the processor. The CPU's DDR5 memory support with dual-channel configuration and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth ensures that memory bandwidth is also not a constraint. The 290K Plus is effectively idle in this workload, providing headroom that would only matter if the game were re-released with modern multi-threaded rendering.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the Medium preset offers the most balanced experience across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the system delivers 287 FPS with a minimum of 244 FPS and a maximum of 330 FPS, which is smooth on any display. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 193 FPS with a minimum of 164 FPS, still well above the 144 Hz threshold for high-refresh monitors. Even at 4K Medium, the system maintains 110 FPS with a minimum of 93 FPS, which is playable on 4K displays with high refresh rates.

The High preset is also viable, particularly at 1440p where it delivers 151 FPS. At 4K High, the 86 FPS average is playable but begins to approach the threshold where frame pacing becomes noticeable on 90 Hz or higher displays. The 1080p High result of 225 FPS is essentially indistinguishable from Medium in practical terms, so there is no reason to drop below High at that resolution.

Ultra settings are only recommended for 1080p displays, where the 156 FPS average is still smooth. At 1440p Ultra, the 105 FPS average is acceptable but does not take full advantage of 144 Hz or 165 Hz monitors. At 4K Ultra, the 60 FPS average is the only measurement that falls below 60 FPS in the entire dataset, making it the only scenario where this combination fails to deliver a locked 60 FPS experience.

The data shows that Medium settings at 1440p provide the best balance of visual quality and performance, with 193 FPS average and a minimum of 164 FPS that ensures no frame drops below the 144 Hz refresh rate. For users with 4K displays, Medium at 110 FPS is the recommended choice, as it stays above 90 FPS even in the minimum frame time. High settings at 4K are acceptable for users who prioritize visuals over frame rate, but the 86 FPS average leaves less headroom for demanding scenes.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 ranks 98th out of 3700 tested combos in Evolve, placing it in the top 2.6% of all configurations. This rank reflects the enormous performance headroom of both components, though the ranking also indicates that there are 97 other combinations that perform better in this specific title.

The rank is likely influenced by the fact that Evolve is an older title that does not scale infinitely with modern hardware. The RTX 4090, with its 82.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 16384 shading units, is far more powerful than anything available when Evolve was released in 2015. The 290K Plus, with its 5.80 GHz boost clock and 24 cores, similarly exceeds the requirements of any game from that era.

The 98th rank out of 3700 combinations suggests that the system is not the absolute best for this game, but it is close. The combinations that rank higher likely involve the same or similar GPUs paired with CPUs that have even higher single-core performance, since Evolve's engine appears to benefit from single-threaded speed. The 290K Plus has a PassMark single-thread score of 4823, which is excellent, but there may be CPUs with higher single-thread scores that edge out this combination in Evolve's specific workload.

The percentile rank for the CPU alone is 96th out of all CPUs, and the GPU ranks in the 88th percentile of all GPUs. The combination rank of 98th out of 3700 shows that the pairing is more than the sum of its parts in this game, likely because the RTX 4090's raw power compensates for any CPU limitations that might appear in other titles.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is the primary driver of performance in this combination, as evidenced by the resolution scaling data. The GPU features 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 1.01 TB/s of memory bandwidth. Its base clock of 2235 MHz and boost clock of 2520 MHz, combined with 16384 shading units, deliver 82.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance.

The GPU's benchmark scores show it ranks in the 88th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 60347. Its nearest rival, the Intel Arc Pro A60, scores 60326, which is effectively identical with a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 scores 60140, a 0.3% deficit, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 61896, which is 2.5% higher. The AMD Radeon PRO V710 scores 58657, a 2.9% deficit. These rivals are professional workstation GPUs, not gaming cards, which highlights the RTX 4090's unique position in the consumer market.

In Evolve, the RTX 4090's role is to push frame rates to levels that exceed display capabilities. The 371 FPS at 1080p Low demonstrates that the GPU is not the limiting factor at that resolution. The 4K Ultra result of 60 FPS shows that the GPU is finally being challenged, but even then, the 24 GB of VRAM is not fully utilized since Evolve's textures are from 2015 and would fit in a fraction of that memory.

The GPU's 128 RT cores and 512 tensor cores are largely irrelevant for Evolve, as the game does not support ray tracing or DLSS. The 176 ROPs and 512 TMUs provide the pixel and texture throughput needed for high-resolution rendering, and the 443.5 GPixel/s pixel rate and 1,290.2 GTexel/s texture rate are more than sufficient for this title. The 450 W TDP and triple-slot design are overkill for Evolve, but they enable the GPU to maintain its boost clock of 2520 MHz across all resolutions, as evidenced by the consistent scaling patterns in the data.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. With Low settings, the average FPS is 371, which is the highest measurement in the entire dataset. Medium settings produce 287 FPS with a minimum of 244 FPS and a maximum of 330 FPS, providing a 43 FPS range between minimum and maximum. High settings yield 225 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 156 FPS. The 1080p results show a clear progression: each step from Low to Ultra reduces performance by approximately 22-25%, with Ultra being 58% slower than Low.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down proportionally. Low settings deliver 248 FPS, which is 33% lower than 1080p Low. Medium settings produce 193 FPS with a minimum of 164 FPS and a maximum of 221 FPS, a 57 FPS range. High settings yield 151 FPS, and Ultra drops to 105 FPS. The 1440p results show a similar progression to 1080p, with Ultra being 58% slower than Low, consistent across resolutions.

At 3840x2160, the system still maintains high frame rates but the scaling becomes more pronounced. Low settings deliver 141 FPS, Medium produces 110 FPS with a minimum of 93 FPS and a maximum of 126 FPS, High yields 86 FPS, and Ultra drops to 60 FPS. The 4K results show that Ultra is 57% slower than Low, maintaining the same relative performance gap as lower resolutions.

The Medium settings measurements are the only ones with complete min/max data across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 244 FPS ensures no frame drops below 240 Hz, while the 4K Medium minimum of 93 FPS means the system never falls below 90 FPS. The 93 FPS minimum at 4K Medium is particularly notable, as it indicates that even the worst-case frame times remain above the 90 Hz threshold, making this the most consistent setting for 4K gaming.

The High settings at 4K produce an average of 86 FPS, which is below the 93 FPS minimum of Medium settings at the same resolution. This suggests that High settings introduce additional frame time variance that Medium does not, although the data does not include min/max values for High settings to confirm this. The Ultra settings at 4K produce exactly 60 FPS, which is the only measurement that aligns with a common display refresh rate, suggesting that the system is hitting a performance ceiling at that configuration.