Evolve

Evolve, a 2015 FPS, shows a clear performance hierarchy when paired with the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080. The measured data reveals a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, but transitions to a CPU-limited state at 1080p, particularly with lower graphical presets. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, contextualizes the combo's standing against other tested configurations, and provides practical recommendations for optimizing the experience.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data shows a classic pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases. At the "High" preset, the average FPS drops from 211 at 1920x1080 to 142 at 2560x1440, and finally to 81 at 3840x2160. This represents a 33% performance decrease from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 43% decrease from 1440p to 4K. The scaling is consistent, indicating that the RTX 5080's rendering workload is the primary bottleneck at these settings. The GPU's 16 GB of GDDR7 memory and 960.0 GB/s bandwidth are likely sufficient for the game's demands, so the drop is attributable to the raw pixel throughput required at 4K.

The "Ultra" preset exhibits the most severe scaling. The average FPS falls from 146 at 1080p to 98 at 1440p (a 33% drop) and then to 56 at 4K (a 43% drop from 1440p). This steep decline suggests that the Ultra preset's additional graphical effects are particularly taxing on the GPU's compute units, the 10752 shading units and 336 TMUs. The 4K Ultra result of 56 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold often considered smooth for fast-paced action, indicating that this combination is not ideal for maximum visual fidelity at 4K.

The "Low" preset provides a contrasting perspective. At 1080p, the average FPS is a very high 347. This high frame rate suggests that the CPU, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with its 24 cores and 5.80 GHz boost clock, is capable of feeding the GPU with enough data to reach this level. However, at 4K Low, the average FPS is 133. The scaling from 1080p Low to 4K Low (a 62% drop) is steeper than the scaling seen at High settings, which indicates a shift in the bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system is likely CPU-limited; the GPU can render frames quickly, but the CPU cannot issue draw calls fast enough to push the frame rate higher. As resolution increases, the GPU's workload grows, and the system transitions to being GPU-limited.

The "Medium" preset data includes min and max FPS values, offering insight into frame time consistency. At 4K Medium, the average is 103 FPS, with a minimum of 87 and a maximum of 118. This 31 FPS spread is notable, suggesting some frame pacing variance. At 1440p Medium, the average is 181 FPS, with a min of 153 and a max of 208, a 55 FPS spread. The 1080p Medium result shows an average of 269 FPS, with a min of 229 and a max of 310, an 81 FPS spread. The widening gap between min and max FPS as resolution decreases further supports the idea that the CPU becomes a limiting factor at lower resolutions, causing occasional hitches or stalls that prevent the frame rate from being perfectly stable.

In summary, the data shows that this CPU-GPU combo is well-balanced for high-refresh 1440p gaming. At 4K, the RTX 5080 becomes the definitive limiting factor, making high and ultra settings demanding. At 1080p, the Core Ultra 9 290K's performance ceiling is reached, and the frame rate becomes dependent on CPU performance, even with a powerful GPU like the RTX 5080.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 achieves a rank of 146 out of 2872 tested combos in Evolve. This places the configuration in the top 5.1% of all tested systems, a strong showing that underscores its high-end capabilities. The data indicates that this combo outperforms the vast majority of other CPU-GPU pairings tested for this game.

Looking at the individual components, the CPU's performance is a key contributor to this ranking. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals, based on average score, include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K with a score of 83807 (a 0.2% difference) and the AMD EPYC 4584PX with a score of 83090 (a 1.1% difference). The 290K Plus also leads the AMD EPYC 9135, which scores 82980 (a 1.2% difference). This shows the 290K Plus is at the very top of the performance hierarchy for synthetic CPU benchmarks, which likely translates to excellent gaming performance in CPU-bound scenarios.

The GPU also ranks highly, though not as dominantly as the CPU. The RTX 5080 has an average benchmark score of 56083, placing it in the 87th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon 8060S with a score of 55757 (a 0.6% difference) and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB with a score of 55698 (a 0.7% difference). The RTX 5080 also outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X, which scores 54828 (a 2.3% difference). However, it trails the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE, which scores 57367 (a -2.2% difference). This indicates that while the RTX 5080 is a very fast GPU, its performance advantage over the nearest competition is relatively slim in synthetic benchmarks, and it is not the absolute fastest card in the database.

The combo's rank of 146 reflects the synergy of a top-tier CPU and a high-end GPU. The CPU's strong single-threaded performance, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7303, helps ensure that the GPU is fed with data, especially at lower resolutions. The GPU's robust 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 8637 confirms its ability to handle modern rendering workloads. The combination of these strengths results in a system that is capable of high frame rates across all tested resolutions, securing its position at the top of the rankings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve high frame rates in Evolve?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 provides an excellent balance. At High settings, the combo achieves an average of 142 FPS, which is well-suited for high-refresh-rate monitors. While 1920x1080 yields higher frame rates (211 FPS at High), the visual fidelity is lower, and the system becomes more CPU-bound. 3840x2160 is playable but requires dropping to Medium settings to stay comfortably above 100 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus compare to its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2% higher than the 285K's score of 83807. This indicates that the 290K Plus is marginally faster in overall synthetic benchmarks. In a game like Evolve, this small difference is unlikely to cause a noticeable change in frame rates, as the GPU is often the limiting factor.

Q: Is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 a significant upgrade over its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 5080's average benchmark score of 56083 is 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon 8060S and 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB. It leads the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X by 2.3%. However, it is 2.2% slower than the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE. The data suggests the RTX 5080 is competitive with, but not definitively faster than, its closest competitors in this benchmark suite.

Q: What is the performance difference between the "High" and "Ultra" presets at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the "High" preset delivers an average of 142 FPS, while the "Ultra" preset delivers an average of 98 FPS. This is a performance cost of 44 FPS (or a 31% reduction) for the additional visual fidelity offered by the Ultra preset. The 98 FPS average on Ultra is still very playable.

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

A: Yes, it can. At 3840x2160, the combo achieves an average of 81 FPS on High settings and 103 FPS on Medium settings. The "High" preset offers a good balance of visual quality and performance. The "Ultra" preset drops to an average of 56 FPS, which may be less desirable for a fast-paced FPS.

Q: Is this combo more limited by the CPU or the GPU at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the CPU becomes the limiting factor at 1080p, especially on lower presets. The 1920x1080 "Low" preset shows an average of 347 FPS, which is extremely high. The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 1440p is not linear, and the min FPS data at 1080p Medium shows a larger spread, indicating the CPU is struggling to maintain a perfectly consistent frame delivery at very high frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact measured average FPS for each resolution and settings combination. Where available, min and max FPS are also provided.

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS | Minimum FPS | Maximum FPS |

| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 56 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | High | 81 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 103 | 87 | 118 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 133 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 98 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 142 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 181 | 153 | 208 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 233 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 146 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 211 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 269 | 229 | 310 |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 347 | - | - |

The performance difference between presets is substantial. At 4K, the jump from Low (133 FPS) to Medium (103 FPS) costs 30 FPS. The jump from Medium to High (81 FPS) costs another 22 FPS. The jump from High to Ultra (56 FPS) costs another 25 FPS. This shows that each preset tier has a significant impact on performance at 4K.

At 1440p, the scaling is similar. The difference between Low (233 FPS) and Medium (181 FPS) is 52 FPS. The difference between Medium and High (142 FPS) is 39 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra (98 FPS) is 44 FPS. The relative cost of each preset step is consistent.

At 1080p, the frame rates are high enough that the differences are less impactful for a standard 60 Hz or 144 Hz monitor. The difference between Low (347 FPS) and Medium (269 FPS) is 78 FPS. The step from Medium to High (211 FPS) costs 58 FPS, and the step from High to Ultra (146 FPS) costs 65 FPS. Even the lowest frame rate at 1080p Ultra (146 FPS) is above the refresh rate of most high-end monitors.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and refresh rate.

For 4K gaming, the "High" preset is the recommended choice. It delivers an average of 81 FPS, which is smooth and responsive. The "Ultra" preset at 56 FPS might be acceptable for slower-paced games, but for a fast-paced FPS like Evolve, the smoother frame rate on "High" will likely provide a better gameplay experience. The "Medium" preset offers an even higher average of 103 FPS, but the visual quality reduction from "High" may be noticeable. For competitive play, "Medium" is a strong option; for a balance of visuals and performance, "High" is the sweet spot.

For 1440p gaming, the "High" preset is excellent, providing 142 FPS. This is ideal for 144 Hz monitors. The "Ultra" preset, at 98 FPS, is also a very good option for those who prioritize visual fidelity and have a 100 Hz or 120 Hz monitor. At this resolution, the system has enough headroom to handle the "Ultra" preset without dropping to unplayable frame rates. The "Medium" preset (181 FPS) is a good choice for competitive players seeking maximum responsiveness.

For 1080p gaming, the "Ultra" preset is a viable option, offering 146 FPS. This is high enough for a 144 Hz monitor. However, the "High" preset at 211 FPS is a better choice for monitors with higher refresh rates (e.g., 240 Hz). The data shows diminishing returns in visual quality for the performance cost at this resolution, but the system is powerful enough to run any preset. The "Low" preset at 347 FPS is only relevant for esports-level play on very high refresh rate displays, but the visual compromises are significant.

In summary, the "High" preset provides the most balanced experience across all resolutions. It ensures a playable frame rate at 4K and a high frame rate at 1440p and 1080p. Players with high-refresh 1440p or 1080p monitors can confidently use the "Ultra" preset, as the average FPS remains above 98.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. This high boost clock is critical for gaming performance, as many games, including Evolve, rely on strong single-threaded performance. The CPU's Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7303 and multi-core score of 51731 demonstrate its capability in both single and multi-threaded workloads.

In Evolve, the CPU's role is to handle game logic, physics, and draw calls. The data indicates that at lower resolutions and settings, the CPU becomes the primary bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 347. This high number suggests that the CPU's 24 cores and high clock speed are sufficient to feed the GPU with data for most of the frame time. However, the fact that the frame rate does not scale linearly with resolution (e.g., 1080p Low is 347 FPS, but 1440p Low is 233 FPS, a 33% drop, while 4K Low is 133 FPS, a 43% drop from 1440p) indicates that the GPU's workload is increasing more than proportionally. This is expected, as the number of pixels increases by a factor of 2.25 from 1080p to 1440p, but the frame rate only drops by 33%, confirming that the system is not purely GPU-bound at 1080p.

The CPU's performance in synthetic benchmarks provides context. Its Passmark multithread score of 60860 and single-thread score of 4823 are exceptionally high. This indicates that the CPU can handle complex game simulation and also process a high number of draw calls per second. The CPU's large 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache help reduce memory latency, which is beneficial for gaming. The 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, while not the highest available, is more than adequate for a game like Evolve.

The comparison with its nearest rivals shows the 290K Plus is at the top of its class. Its average benchmark score is 0.2% higher than the Core Ultra 9 285K and 1.1% higher than the AMD EPYC 4584PX. In a game like Evolve, the performance difference between the 290K Plus and the 285K is likely negligible, as both are incredibly fast. The data suggests that the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a more than capable gaming CPU, ensuring that the system is rarely held back by the processor, except in high-frame-rate, low-resolution scenarios where it is still fast enough to achieve very high frame rates.