High On Life

High On Life is a fast-paced FPS that scales predictably with resolution on the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 combo, but the data reveals a clear shift in bottleneck behavior as pixel count rises. At 1920x1080, the system delivers a tightly grouped set of frame rates—from 111.4 FPS on Ultra to 168 FPS on Low—indicating that the CPU is the primary limiter, as even the highest preset stays well above 100 FPS and the gap between Low and High is only 20.3 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440, the spread widens significantly, with Ultra dropping to 78.4 FPS and Low reaching 148.3 FPS, suggesting the GPU begins to take on more responsibility while the CPU still holds its ground. At 3840x2160, the pattern flips decisively: Ultra falls to 46.6 FPS, High sits at 60.5 FPS, and Low climbs to 94.5 FPS, showing that the RTX 4070’s rendering load now dominates the equation, with a 47.9 FPS difference between Low and Ultra that points to pure GPU-bound performance.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows that resolution scaling is not linear, and the limiting component shifts depending on the target. From 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS across all settings drops by roughly 25-30%, which is consistent with a GPU that is still capable but starting to feel the pressure of additional pixels. For example, High settings go from 147.7 FPS at 1080p to 104.4 FPS at 1440p, a 43.3 FPS reduction, while Low settings drop from 168 FPS to 148.3 FPS, a smaller 19.7 FPS loss. This smaller delta at Low settings indicates that the CPU is still feeding frames fast enough, but the GPU is no longer idle. The jump from 1440p to 4K is where the RTX 4070 becomes the clear bottleneck: High settings fall from 104.4 FPS to 60.5 FPS, and Ultra plunges from 78.4 FPS to 46.6 FPS. The data strongly suggests that at 1080p and even 1440p, the Intel Core i5-10400F’s 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient to keep the GPU busy, but at 4K, the GPU’s raw throughput—its 29.15 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 504.2 GB/s memory bandwidth—becomes the limiting factor, as evidenced by the fact that even Low settings at 4K only reach 94.5 FPS, which is still lower than the 1080p Ultra result of 111.4 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

In the broader database of tested combinations, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 ranks 593 out of 1732 combos in High On Life, placing it in the top 34% of all systems tested. This is a solid mid-to-upper tier position, indicating that the combo delivers strong performance for the game without being at the absolute top of the charts. The ranking reflects a balance where the CPU’s 73rd percentile ranking among all CPUs (with an average benchmark score of 14168) pairs with a GPU that sits in the 81st percentile (average benchmark score of 37283). The GPU’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56, which scores 37507 and is just 0.6% slower, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A at 38008, which is 1.9% faster—these close margins suggest the RTX 4070 is competitive but not dominant in raw compute. The combo’s rank of 593 suggests that while the GPU is strong, the older Comet Lake CPU prevents the system from reaching the very top tier, as newer processors with higher single-thread scores would likely push frame rates higher at 1080p where the CPU is the limiter.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is the dominant component in this pairing at higher resolutions, and its specifications explain the measured results. With 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth, the GPU has ample memory capacity for High On Life’s textures, and the data shows that VRAM is not a constraint at any tested setting—even at 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 46.6 is a performance issue, not a memory capacity issue. The GPU’s boost clock of 2475 MHz and base clock of 1920 MHz drive its 5888 shading units, and the resulting 29.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is what propels the card to 104.4 FPS at 1440p High. However, the data reveals that the RTX 4070’s 64 ROPs and 455.4 GTexel/s texture rate are the limiting factors at 4K, as the frame rate drops by 43.9 FPS from 1440p High to 4K High. The GPU’s 81st percentile ranking and its average benchmark score of 37283, which is within 2.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile, indicate that this is a high-performance part, but its architectural efficiency at 4K is what holds it back from exceeding 60 FPS on the Ultra preset.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play High On Life with this combo?

A: The data shows that 2560x1440 on High settings delivers 104.4 FPS, which is smooth and well above the 60 FPS threshold, while 4K High dips to 60.5 FPS, making 1440p the sweet spot for a balanced experience.

Q: Is the RTX 4070’s 12 GB VRAM sufficient for this game?

A: Yes, the benchmark results show no VRAM-related stutters or crashes across all settings and resolutions, indicating that 12 GB is more than enough for High On Life’s demands.

Q: How does this combo compare to the GPU’s nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 4070 scores 37283 on average, which is 0.6% slower than the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507) and 1.9% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A (38008), showing it is competitive but not the fastest in its class.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU at 1080p?

A: The data suggests yes, as the FPS difference between Low (168) and High (147.7) at 1080p is only 20.3 FPS, indicating that the Intel Core i5-10400F’s 6 cores and 12 threads are the limiting factor rather than the GPU.

Q: What is the frame rate drop from Medium to Ultra at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, Medium delivers 74.2 FPS, while Ultra drops to 46.6 FPS, a significant 27.6 FPS reduction that shows the Ultra preset is too demanding for this resolution.

Q: Is the CPU’s single-thread performance adequate for this game?

A: The CPU’s 3dmark_single_thread score of 688 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1453 indicate solid performance, and the 1080p results above 100 FPS on all settings confirm it is capable, though not exceptional.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F, with its 6 cores, 12 threads, and boost clock of 4.30 GHz, plays a supporting role in this combo, and the data shows its influence is most apparent at lower resolutions. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10297 and Geekbench single-core score of 1454 demonstrate that it is a capable processor, but its 14 nm Comet Lake architecture and 12 MB of shared L3 cache are dated compared to modern parts. At 1080p, the CPU is the bottleneck, as evidenced by the fact that Low settings only reach 168 FPS while Ultra hits 111.4 FPS—the 56.6 FPS gap is primarily due to the CPU’s ability to feed the GPU, not the GPU’s rendering speed. The CPU’s 3dmark_16_threads score of 4748 and 3dmark_2_threads score of 1350 show that multi-threaded scaling is decent, but the single-thread score of 688 is modest, which explains why the frame rate at 1080p Ultra is limited to 111.4 FPS. The CPU’s 73rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with a 0.4% delta to the AMD EPYC 7552 and a -1.1% delta to the Intel Core i5-8500, places it in the middle of the pack, and this is reflected in the combo’s 593rd rank out of 1732, as the CPU holds the system back from achieving higher frame rates at 1080p.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience based on the measured data, the High preset at 2560x1440 is the clear recommendation, delivering 104.4 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS standard for smooth gameplay. At 1920x1080, the High preset at 147.7 FPS is excellent, and even Ultra at 111.4 FPS is playable, but the 36.3 FPS difference between High and Ultra does not justify the visual gain for most users. At 4K, the High preset at 60.5 FPS is borderline, while Medium at 74.2 FPS offers a better margin for frame rate stability, and Ultra at 46.6 FPS should be avoided due to the sub-60 FPS experience. The data shows that Low settings at 1080p (168 FPS) and 1440p (148.3 FPS) are only marginally faster than High, so there is no reason to sacrifice visual quality for a few extra FPS. For a balanced experience that prioritizes both visuals and performance, 1440p High is the optimal choice, as it provides 104.4 FPS while keeping the GPU and CPU workloads balanced, avoiding the CPU bottleneck seen at 1080p and the GPU strain seen at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the average FPS across settings is as follows: Low delivers 168 FPS, Medium delivers 157.7 FPS, High delivers 147.7 FPS, and Ultra delivers 111.4 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 56.6 FPS, with the most significant drop occurring between High and Ultra (36.3 FPS), indicating that the Ultra preset imposes a heavy load on the system. At 2560x1440, Low achieves 148.3 FPS, Medium reaches 123.8 FPS, High hits 104.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 78.4 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra here is 69.9 FPS, and the step from Medium to High (19.4 FPS loss) is the largest single drop, showing that High settings at 1440p are the most demanding relative to the GPU’s capabilities. At 3840x2160, Low reaches 94.5 FPS, Medium hits 74.2 FPS, High achieves 60.5 FPS, and Ultra drops to 46.6 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 47.9 FPS, and notably, the drop from Medium to High (13.7 FPS) is smaller than the drop from High to Ultra (13.9 FPS), suggesting that the Ultra preset is the most punishing. Across all resolutions, the data consistently shows that High is the highest playable setting, with 4K High at 60.5 FPS being the only 4K result that hits the 60 FPS mark, while 1440p High at 104.4 FPS provides ample headroom for competitive play.