Fivem

Fivem’s performance with the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 9060 reveals a system that is heavily influenced by resolution and graphics settings. The measured data shows a wide range of frame rates, from a highly playable 175 FPS at 1080p Low to a demanding 31 FPS at 4K Ultra. This combination of a top-tier 24-core CPU and a mid-range 8 GB GPU creates a bottleneck profile that shifts depending on the workload, making it a fascinating case study in component balancing. The following analysis breaks down the measured FPS, scaling behavior, and the roles each component plays in this specific game.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and tells a clear story about the game's limiting factors. At 1080p with Low settings, the system produces 175 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops that to 115 FPS, a significant 34% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls further to 64 FPS, which is a 63% decrease from the 1080p figure. This pattern indicates that at lower resolutions, the CPU is capable of feeding frames very quickly, but the GPU's workload increases dramatically as pixel count rises.

The scaling is even more pronounced at higher settings. For instance, at Ultra settings, the system averages 86 FPS at 1080p, but this collapses to just 31 FPS at 4K. This is a 64% performance loss from 1080p to 4K. The data suggests that the GPU quickly becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution and settings increase. The RX 9060, with its 8 GB of VRAM, is likely struggling to maintain the data throughput required for 4K, especially at higher quality presets that demand more memory and shading power.

Interesting nuances appear when looking at the scaling between settings. At 4K, the gap between High (40 FPS) and Ultra (31 FPS) is 9 FPS, while the gap between Low (64 FPS) and Medium (50 FPS) is 14 FPS. This suggests that the jump from Low to Medium is particularly demanding on this GPU at 4K. The 1440p results show a similar trend, with Low at 115 FPS and Ultra at 56 FPS, indicating that the graphics card is the dominant factor in these scenarios. The data implies that for a smoother experience at 4K, users must make significant compromises on settings, as the GPU cannot maintain high frame rates at that resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve a high refresh rate experience?

A: At 1920x1080, the system achieves 175 FPS on Low and 111 FPS on High settings. At 2560x1440, it reaches 115 FPS on Low and 73 FPS on High. For a consistent 144 Hz experience, 1080p Low is the only setting that comfortably exceeds that threshold.

Q: How does the RX 9060's performance compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GPU's average benchmark score is 16014. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, has an average score of 16129, which is 0.7% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 scores 15852, placing it 1% behind the RX 9060.

Q: Is the CPU's performance a limiting factor at 4K resolution?

A: No, the data suggests the GPU is the bottleneck at 4K. The CPU is very powerful, with an average benchmark score of 84003, placing it in the 96th percentile. The FPS drops sharply from 1440p to 4K, indicating the GPU cannot keep up with the increased pixel workload.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The measured data only includes min and max FPS values for Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the FPS ranged from 117 to 159. At 1440p Medium, it ranged from 77 to 105. At 4K Medium, it ranged from 43 to 58.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-core performance compare to the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K's score of 83807. This makes them statistically very close in overall performance.

Q: Does the GPU's VRAM capacity affect the results at higher settings?

A: The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and a 128-bit bus width. The significant FPS drops at 4K Ultra settings suggest that the memory capacity and bandwidth are insufficient for the demands of this game at that resolution, though this is an inference from the performance data.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 plays the critical role of rendering the game's visuals, and its performance is the defining factor at higher resolutions and settings. The GPU is based on the RDNA 4.0 architecture and features 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Its boost clock is listed at 2990 MHz, with a game clock of 2400 MHz. The memory configuration consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The synthetic benchmarks show a Passmark G3D score of 17631 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 88183, placing it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs.

The GPU's performance relative to its rivals is tight. Its average benchmark score of 16014 is only 0.7% lower than the RTX 3060 Ti's score. In-game, this translates to the observed FPS figures. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a key factor; while it is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, the 4K results suggest it is a limiting factor. The data shows a 33% performance drop from 1080p to 1440p at High settings (111 to 73 FPS), and a further 45% drop from 1440p to 4K (73 to 40 FPS). This compounding loss indicates that the GPU is overwhelmed at 4K.

The GPU's compute capabilities also play a role. Its FP32 performance is listed at 21.43 TFLOPS. This raw compute power is likely sufficient for the physics and simulation aspects of Fivem, but the rasterization workload at 4K is too heavy. The data suggests that this GPU is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can deliver high frame rates, but it is not a 4K-capable part for this title at high settings.

How This Combo Ranks

In the grand scheme of tested configurations, this combo ranks 1714 out of 3005 combinations in Fivem. This places it in the lower-middle portion of the ranking, which is an interesting outcome given the high-end CPU. The ranking is determined by the measured FPS, and the GPU's performance appears to be the anchor that prevents this combo from ranking higher. The CPU is a top-tier part, but the overall frame rate is capped by the RX 9060's capabilities.

This ranking suggests that while the CPU is not a bottleneck, it is also not being fully utilized in this configuration. The data implies that many other combos with less powerful CPUs but more powerful GPUs would rank higher in this game. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84003. In contrast, the GPU is only in the 59th percentile. This mismatch highlights that the system's overall gaming performance is heavily weighted by the GPU's output.

The rank of 1714 out of 3005 indicates that a significant number of other systems achieve higher frame rates in Fivem. This is likely because many users pair mid-range CPUs with higher-end GPUs, which is a more balanced configuration for gaming. The data from this specific combo shows that the CPU's immense processing power does not translate to top-tier gaming performance when paired with this particular GPU, as the frame rate is ultimately constrained by the graphics card.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the combo's performance across three resolutions and four settings. At 1920x1080, the results are strong, with an average of 175 FPS on Low, 138 FPS on Medium, 111 FPS on High, and 86 FPS on Ultra. The Medium setting has a recorded min FPS of 117 and a max FPS of 159, showing a stable range. These numbers indicate that 1080p is the sweet spot for this combo, allowing for high refresh rates on all but the most demanding presets.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain respectable but show a clear decline. The average FPS is 115 on Low, 91 on Medium, 73 on High, and 56 on Ultra. The Medium setting again provides min and max data, ranging from 77 to 105 FPS. At 1440p, the system can still deliver a playable experience, but users aiming for 144 Hz would need to stick to Low or Medium settings.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops significantly. The average FPS is 64 on Low, 50 on Medium, 40 on High, and 31 on Ultra. The Medium setting's range is from 43 to 58 FPS. These results confirm that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combo if a smooth, high-FPS experience is desired. Even on Low settings, the system only manages an average of 64 FPS, which is below the threshold for a high-refresh-rate monitor. The data shows a consistent and predictable decline in performance as both resolution and settings increase.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend heavily on the user's target resolution and refresh rate. For a 1080p monitor with a 144 Hz or higher refresh rate, the Low preset at 175 FPS is the only option that fully saturates the display. However, the High preset at 111 FPS is a better balance of visual quality and performance, providing a fluid experience that is still well above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 86 FPS is also playable, but it may not be ideal for competitive play where higher frame rates are advantageous.

For 1440p users, the High preset at 73 FPS offers a good balance for a 60-75 Hz monitor. The Medium preset at 91 FPS is a better choice for those with a 100 Hz display, providing a noticeable improvement in smoothness. The Low preset at 115 FPS is the best option for high-refresh-rate 1440p monitors, but the visual fidelity is compromised. The Ultra preset at 56 FPS is not recommended for a smooth experience, as it dips below the 60 FPS threshold.

For 4K users, the data suggests that this combo is not well-suited for demanding gameplay. The Low preset at 64 FPS is the only setting that approaches a playable frame rate, but it is still below what most would consider ideal. The Medium preset at 50 FPS and the High preset at 40 FPS are too choppy for a satisfying experience. The Ultra preset at 31 FPS is essentially unplayable. Therefore, for 4K, the recommendation is to use Low settings and accept the frame rate, or to lower the resolution to 1440p for a much better experience. The data clearly shows that the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a powerhouse processor, but its role in Fivem is nuanced. With 24 cores and 24 threads, it has immense parallel processing capability. Its boost clock is rated at 5.80 GHz, and it has a substantial 36 MB of L3 cache. The CPU's synthetic benchmarks are exceptional, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303. Its average benchmark score is 84003, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs.

In the gaming context of Fivem, the CPU's role appears to be primarily that of a stable foundation. The FPS data shows that at 1080p Low, the system can hit 175 FPS, which suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with a high number of frames. However, the CPU is not the limiting factor in most scenarios tested. This is evident from the fact that the FPS drops dramatically with resolution increases, which is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck.

The CPU's performance relative to its rivals is strong. It is 0.2% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K in average benchmark score. Its single-threaded performance is also notable, with a Passmark single-thread score of 4823. This is important for Fivem, which is a multiplayer game that may rely on single-threaded performance for game logic and network handling. The data indicates that the CPU provides more than enough power for this game, and its performance headroom means that it will not be a limiting factor even when paired with a more powerful GPU in the future. The bottleneck in this system is clearly the GPU, as the CPU's vast resources are left largely underutilized at higher resolutions.