High On Life

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the Intel Arc B570 is a combination that lands near the bottom quartile in High On Life. The combo ranks 2356 out of 2958 tested combinations, placing it in the 21st percentile of all tested configs. That rank is heavily influenced by the GPU, which sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU is a top performer at the 96th percentile among all CPUs. The data suggests a significant imbalance: the processor is capable of far more than the graphics card can deliver in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

At 2356 out of 2958 tested combos, this configuration sits below the midpoint of the database for High On Life. The ranking is not a reflection of a weak CPU; the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus scores an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 96th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in raw CPU benchmarks are the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (avg score 83807, delta 0.2%), the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83090, delta 1.1%), and the AMD EPYC 9135 (82980, delta 1.2%), while the AMD EPYC 7F72 (85072) is 1.3% faster. The CPU is clearly not the bottleneck in most scenarios.

The GPU, however, tells a different story. The Intel Arc B570 has an average benchmark score of 20556, placing it at the 65th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (avg score 20534, delta 0.1%), the Intel Arc A750 (20582, delta -0.1%), the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20480, delta 0.4%), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (20662, delta -0.5%). These deltas are all within one percent, meaning the Arc B570 is essentially performance-equivalent to a laptop-class RTX 3070 and a previous-generation desktop Arc A750.

Given that the CPU ranks near the top while the GPU ranks near the lower-middle, the combo rank reflects the GPU's ceiling. The 21st percentile rank in High On Life indicates that most tested systems outperform this pairing in this specific game. The CPU's high percentile does not offset the GPU's modest standing. The data shows a system that is far more capable in compute-heavy workloads than in gaming at higher resolutions. The combo rank is what it is because the game's frame rate is bound by the graphics card in nearly every measured scenario.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus a high-performing CPU?

A: Yes. The CPU has an average benchmark score of 84003, placing it at the 96th percentile among all CPUs. In Cinebench R23, it scores 51731 multi-core and 7303 single-core. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83807, a mere 0.2% difference.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B570 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Arc B570's average benchmark score is 20556. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534 (0.1% slower), the Intel Arc A750 scores 20582 (0.1% faster), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X scores 20662 (0.5% faster). These differences are negligible.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 119 FPS, which is the highest measured. Medium produces 93 FPS, High produces 77 FPS, and Ultra drops to 58 FPS. Low is the only preset that clearly exceeds 100 FPS.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming?

A: At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 25 FPS, High averages 33 FPS, Medium averages 40 FPS, and Low averages 51 FPS. None of these reach 60 FPS. The Medium preset provides a playable 40 FPS average with a minimum of 34 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in High On Life?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU's 96th percentile standing and strong multi-core scores (e.g., 21727 in Cinebench R20, 60860 in Passmark multithread) contrast sharply with the GPU's 65th percentile. Resolution scaling shows FPS dropping consistently as resolution increases, which points to GPU-bound performance.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the GPU?

A: The Intel Arc B570 has a launch MSRP of 219 USD.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience based on the measured data, the choice of settings depends heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Low preset provides an average of 119 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate displays. The Medium preset offers 93 FPS, still well above 60 FPS, and includes a measured minimum of 79 FPS and maximum of 107 FPS, indicating smooth performance. The High preset at 77 FPS is also viable for 60 Hz monitors. The Ultra preset at 58 FPS is borderline; it is below 60 FPS and may feel less fluid. Given that Low and Medium offer significantly higher frame rates, Medium is the recommended preset for 1080p because it balances visual quality with a 93 FPS average and a minimum above 75 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 84 FPS, which is the only preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. Medium averages 66 FPS with a minimum of 56 FPS and maximum of 75 FPS, making it playable but with occasional dips below 60. High averages 54 FPS, and Ultra averages 41 FPS. For 1440p, the Low preset is the safest choice for consistent frame rates. Medium is acceptable if you prefer slightly better visuals and can tolerate the occasional sub-60 FPS dip. High and Ultra are not recommended for a smooth experience.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more constrained. Low averages 51 FPS, Medium averages 40 FPS with a minimum of 34 FPS, High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. None of these reach 60 FPS. The Medium preset is the most balanced, offering a 40 FPS average that is more consistent than High or Ultra. Low is the highest-performing preset at 51 FPS but sacrifices visual quality. For 4K, Medium is the recommended preset if you prioritize playability over maximum quality, while Low is the only option if you want the highest frame rate possible, though it remains below 60 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured FPS values are as follows. The Low preset averages 119 FPS. Medium averages 93 FPS, with a minimum of 79 FPS and a maximum of 107 FPS. High averages 77 FPS. Ultra averages 58 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline: 119 to 93 to 77 to 58. The gap between Low and Medium is 26 FPS, between Medium and High is 16 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 19 FPS. The Medium preset's minimum of 79 FPS is notably high, indicating that even the worst-case frame times are well above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 84 FPS. Medium averages 66 FPS, with a minimum of 56 FPS and a maximum of 75 FPS. High averages 54 FPS. Ultra averages 41 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 35 FPS (from 119 to 84), a 29% reduction. At Medium, the drop is 27 FPS (from 93 to 66), a 29% reduction as well. High drops by 23 FPS (from 77 to 54), a 30% reduction. Ultra drops by 17 FPS (from 58 to 41), a 29% reduction. The consistent percentage drop across settings indicates a scaling pattern tied to resolution rather than settings.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 51 FPS. Medium averages 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. High averages 33 FPS. Ultra averages 25 FPS. Moving from 1440p to 4K at Low settings reduces the average from 84 to 51 FPS, a 39% decrease. At Medium, the drop is from 66 to 40 FPS, a 39% decrease. High drops from 54 to 33 FPS, a 39% decrease. Ultra drops from 41 to 25 FPS, a 39% decrease. The uniformity of these percentage drops suggests the GPU is handling the increased pixel count consistently across all settings presets.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, average FPS drops consistently. At Low settings, the average goes from 119 FPS at 1080p to 84 FPS at 1440p to 51 FPS at 4K. That is a 57% reduction from 1080p to 4K. At Medium, the averages are 93, 66, and 40 FPS, a 57% reduction from 1080p to 4K. High goes from 77 to 54 to 33 FPS, a 57% reduction. Ultra goes from 58 to 41 to 25 FPS, also a 57% reduction. The fact that the percentage drop is nearly identical across all settings strongly indicates that the limiting factor scales with pixel count, which is characteristic of GPU-bound performance.

The CPU is not the bottleneck here. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 is in the 96th percentile. If the CPU were the limiting factor, you would expect frame rates to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU workload per frame does not change with resolution. Instead, the FPS drops by over half from 1080p to 4K, which is what you expect when the GPU is rendering more pixels and hitting its limits.

The Arc B570's specifications support this conclusion. It has 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 380.0 GB/s bandwidth. Its FP32 throughput is 11.52 TFLOPS, and it has 2304 shading units. The GPU's 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs puts it below most desktop discrete cards. At 4K, the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth are insufficient to maintain high frame rates, as shown by the 25 FPS average at Ultra settings and 51 FPS at Low. The resolution scaling data confirms that the GPU is the primary constraint in High On Life.

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 has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a thermal design power of 125 W. Its cache configuration includes 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel access and a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It also features integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, though the discrete Arc B570 handles the rendering in this configuration.

In terms of raw compute, the CPU is exceptionally strong. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and single-core score of 7303 are top-tier. The Passmark multithread score of 60860 and integer math score of 166194 further demonstrate its capability. The CPU's average benchmark score of 84003 places it at the 96th percentile, and it outperforms or closely matches its nearest rivals: the Core Ultra 9 285K is 0.2% slower, the EPYC 4584PX is 1.1% slower, and the EPYC 9135 is 1.2% slower.

However, in High On Life, the CPU's role is diminished by the GPU's limits. The game's frame rates are consistently bound by the graphics card, as evidenced by the resolution scaling pattern. At 1080p Low, the CPU could likely drive higher frame rates than 119 FPS if paired with a stronger GPU, but the Arc B570's performance ceiling prevents that. The CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads are more than sufficient for this game's threading requirements. The boost clock of 5.80 GHz ensures strong single-thread performance, which is often important for game logic and draw calls, but the measured FPS numbers suggest the GPU is saturated well before the CPU reaches its limits.

The data shows no scenario where the CPU becomes the bottleneck. Even at 1080p Low, where the GPU workload is lightest, the average FPS is 119, which is below what this CPU could theoretically push in a less GPU-limited title. The CPU's benchmark scores, such as the Passmark single-thread score of 4823 and Cinebench R20 single-core score of 3067, indicate it can handle any game logic requirements. The CPU's 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth ensure data feeds the GPU without stalling. In this pairing, the CPU is a high-end component whose potential is left untapped because the GPU cannot deliver enough frames to stress it.