Hard West

Hard West, played with a 12-core Intel Core i7-12700K alongside an 8GB NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER, produces a clear resolution-dependent performance curve. At 1920x1080 with High presets the combo reports 99 FPS, while 2560x1440 High falls to 62 FPS, and 3840x2160 High lands at 33 FPS. These three numbers summarize the scaling behavior across the three tested resolutions. The same pattern holds for the other presets: the video profile pushes the GPU harder as resolution grows, making the GeForce card the binding constraint.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS reveals a steep waterfall as resolution climbs. At 1920x1080, Low yields 157 FPS, Medium hits 128 FPS, High drops to 99, and Ultra falls to 74. Moving to 2560x1440, the same settings yield 99, 81, 62, and 47 FPS respectively. On the 3840x2160 output, the values plunge to 52, 43, 33, and 25 FPS for Low through Ultra. The drop from 1080p High to 1440p High is a 37 FPS loss, and from 1440p to 4K High another 29 FPS, while 1080p Ultra to 1440p Ultra loses 27 FPS and 1440p Ultra to 4K Ultra another 22. These steps show that the GPU is decisively the limiting component at 4K, and even at 1440p the video card loses nearly a third of its 1080p throughput. The 4K Low result (52 FPS) is comparable to the 1080p High result (99) if one looks at the ratio, yet the GPU resource is stretched far more at the larger pixel count.

For the Medium preset, which is the only setting with min/max records, the 1080p shows a 109–148 range around a 128 average, 1440p ranges from 69 to 93 with an 81 average, and 4K spans 36–49 with 43 on average. The relative constriction of the delta between min and max at higher resolution (about 19 FPS at 1080p, 24 at 1440p, 13 at 4K) is not a meaningful signal of CPU involvement, but the absolute numbers indicate that the game maintains a comfortable margin at 1080p and falls to an unsteady level at 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-12700K belongs to the Alder Lake-S family, with 12 physical cores and 20 threads, a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, a 125 W TDP, and 25 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU sits in the 84th percentile of all processors according to the aggregate benchmark scores gathered here, meaning it is a high-end chip. The game itself is turn-based and logically driven; the data shows that at 1920x1080 with Low settings the combo reaches 157 FPS, which is far higher than any typical monitor refresh rate. This indicates the CPU has abundant single-thread throughput for the game’s logic. At the other extreme, the 4K Ultra result of 25 FPS is obviously GPU-limited, as the CPU’s 12-core/20-thread configuration would not cramp a strategy title at that load.

Cinebench R23 numbers reinforce the strength: the multi-core score is 19784, and the single-core result is 1850.5. In the 16-thread 3DMark test, the CPU scores 9276, whereas the 2‑thread score is 2065, showing the high-core scaling. These numbers are not directly used by the game, but they explain why the CPU does not bottleneck the GPU even at 1080p low. The CPU occupies 84% of the percentile ranking, far above the GPU’s 62% overall position, and consistent with the fact that the CPU delivers enough peak throughput to keep frame rates high until the GPU becomes the limit.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database’s combination results for Hard West, this pairing lands at position 2632 out of 3722 tested combos. That’s the 71st percentile rank among all tested systems for this game—a sympathetic but not excellent standing. The rank is based on a measured FPS data set and it reflects the game’s GPU-heavy workload. The GPU outperforms the CPU in the pairing imbalance, but the CPU is still far above average in its own right, so the overall placement is modest because the graphics card—the RTX 2060 SUPER—achonly 62nd percentile among GPUs. The CPU’s 84th percentile does not compensate for the lower GPU class, so the FPS values place this combo just below the majority of other configs tested.

FAQ

Q: What is the lowest deliverable frame rate at 4K on Ultra preset?

A: The measured 3840x2160 Ultra average is 25 FPS, with no minimum value reported.

Q: Which resolutions have a minimum frame cap of at least 60 FPS in the Medium preset?

A: Only the 1920x1080 Medium row lists a min of 109 FPS. The 2560x1440 Medium shows a min 69, and 3840x2160 Medium shows min 36.

Q: At 1080p, what is the highest average FPS of any preset?

A: The highest 1080p value is the Low preset with an average of 157 FPS; the Ultra preset reaches 74 FPS at that resolution.

Q: How does the 2560x1440 High (62 FPS) compare to the 1920x1080 High (99 FPS)?

A: The 1440p High result is about 37% slower, but the number 37 is not in the data; the average drops from 99 to 62.

Q: Which resolution and setting yields the best combination of speed and quality?

A: The 2560x1440 Medium rewards an 81 FPS average with a 69–93 min/max range, the only 1440p setting with min/max data. The 1920x1080 Medium sits at 128 average and 109–148 range, while 4K Medium gives 43 average.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit frame rate at 1080p Low?

A: At 1080p Low the combo creates 157 FPS; such a high number, given the GPU’s own 62% percentile and the CPU’s 84th percentile, indicates the bottleneck is not the CPU, because typical monitors rarely exceed 150Hz. The CPU base/boost clocks of 3.60/5.00 GHz and 12 cores easily support the game’s logic.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset contains 12 measured frames per second rows, each with average, and seven with minimum and maximum values. The medium preset is the only one where min/max are captured for all accurate resolutions:

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS | Min–Max |

|------------|----------|-------------|---------|

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 25 | — |

| 3840x2160 | High | 33 | — |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 43 | 36–49 |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 52 | — |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 47 | — |

| 2560x1440 | High | 62 | — |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 81 | 69–93 |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 99 | — |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 74 | — |

| 1920x1080 | High | 99 | — |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 128 | 109–148 |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 157 | — |

At 1080p Low, the combo yields a 157-avg—the most the system is able to produce. The same resolution Medium at 128 avg is still above 90, while Ultra sits at 74. At 1440p, Low lands at 99, Medium at 81, High at 62, Ultra at 47. At 4K, the numbers drop to 52 (Low), 43 (Medium), 33 (High), 25 (Ultra). The pattern reveals that every preset loses more than half its FPS when moving from 1080p to 4K; the gradient is strongest for High (99→62→33) and Ultra (74→47→25). This is a classic indication that the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER with 8 GB GDDR6 memory and a 448 GB/s bandwidth is the scarce resource.

CPU Attributes and Their Effects

The i7-12700K contains 12 physical cores (20 threads), works at a 3.60 GHz base clock and 5.00 GHz boost, and includes 25 MB L3 cache. In 3DMark, the 2-thread result is 2065, 4-thread is 4011, 8-thread 7202, and 16-thread 9276; the continuous Cinebench R23 multi-core is 19748. For Hard West, these stats matter only insofar as the game’s AI and camera logic run on the CPU. The data shows that at 1080p Low the coalition’s 157 FPS is far above the GPU’s capability at Ultra, which means the CPU is never the limiting element in this game’s moderate geometry. The CPU reaches the 84th percentile among processors tested, which is higher than the GPU’s 62nd percentile, and that imbalance is reflected in the FPS curves: the GPU saturates first while the CPU still has headroom. In the measured data, there is no scenario where switching to a less powerful CPU would maintain the exact same outputs; instead, the FPS differences come solely from GPU loads due to pixel count.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured scores, the optimal preset for this hardware to balance smoothness and image quality lies in the medium tier. At 1920x1080, Medium yields 128 FPS with a 109–148 min/max window, which guarantees gameplay that never drops below a 60 FPS threshold, while High achieves 99 FPS and Low 157 but with lower overhead. At 2560x1440, Medium is the standout: 81 FPS average with a 69–93 min/max range, giving a comfortable experience for non-competitive play. 1440p High still hits 62, but the lower margin is noticeable. For 4K, Ultra is unacceptable with a 25 FPS average; the Low setting of 52 FPS is the only stable option, yet it still falls below the ideal 60 threshold. Consequently, the data advises running at 2560x1440 on Medium, or 1920x1080 on High for a balanced frame rate that suits both graphical quality and responsiveness. The 1080p Medium results show and the 1440p Medium show similar.

For users without a 1440p monitor, the 1920x1080 Medium preset (which is the only setting with min/max data at this resolution) delivers a 128 FPS average and a minimum of 109, ensuring it stays above the refresh of most displays. The 1920x1080 High (99 FPS) still yields absolute playability, but the Ultra preset (74) is better reserved for desktops with high refresh rate screens. The drop from High to Ultra at 1080p is only 25 FPS, but at 4K the difference is –9 FPS. The recommendation according to the measured frame data is to place the game on High at 1440p if the monitor supports it, the mid-range settings for maximum smoothness.

The GPU’s 8 GB VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are routinely common for the resolutions in the data, and the highest texture preset at 4K produces a sustained 33 FPS, which indicates the GPU is not enough for ultra at that resolution; Low at 52 remains the only truly playable row. In summary, the best combination of quality and final FPS among the measured outcomes is 2560x1440 Medium, yielding 81 FPS average, followed closely by 1920x1080 High with 99. No other profile falls within the same 'sweet spot' range. Thus, the recommendations can be phrased as: prefer 1440p Medium, or 1080p Medium/High; avoid 4K Ultra due to its sub-30 average.