Hitman 2

The measured frame rates for Hitman 2 with the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT reveal a system that pushes high refresh rates at 1080p, remains capable at 1440p, but shows clear GPU limitation as resolution climbs. The dataset includes only average, minimum, and maximum FPS for a few combinations; min and max appear only for Medium presets, while other settings report only the average. That gap itself is a data point worth noticing: the lack of minimum/maximum values on Low, High, and Ultra frames suggests those runs were shorter or not fully captured.

Resolution Scaling

The most obvious pattern is the steep decline from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At High settings, the average drops from 145 FPS at 1080p to 92 FPS at 1440p, then to 49 FPS at 4K. That is a 37% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and another 47% reduction from 1440p to 4K. Low settings tell a similar story: 255 FPS at 1080p, 163 FPS at 1440p, and 87 FPS at 4K. These ratios are not proportional to pixel count — moving from 1080p to 4K multiplies pixel area by four, yet the FPS drops by only 66–82% depending on preset. The scaling is sub-linear, indicating the game is still somewhat CPU-bound at 1080p, but the GPU becomes the main constraint at 4K.

Look at the Medium preset, where we have minimum and maximum spreads. At 1080p Medium the average is 191 FPS with a minimum of 162 and maximum of 220 — a 53% spread around the average. At 1440p Medium, average is 122, min 104, max 141 — a narrower absolute range. At 4K Medium, average 65, min 55, max 75. The 4K numbers show only a 20 FPS gap between min and max, which is typical for a GPU-limited scenario. In contrast, the 1080p numbers have a 58 FPS gap, suggesting CPU or system factors contribute variance at low resolution. This aligns with the hypothesis that the CPU’s frame-pushing ability saturates at high refresh rates, while the GPU’s fill rate limits the higher resolutions.

The excerpt data does not provide per-frame percentiles, but the min/max on the Medium preset gives a snapshot. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 55 FPS is still above 60 Hz, but the Ultra preset at 4K only reaches 36 FPS average, which would be playable only on a 30-class display or with adaptive sync. The scaling from Low to Ultra at each resolution is also telling: at 1080p, Low gives 255, Medium 191, High 145, Ultra 106 — a 60% difference between Low and Ultra. At 4K, Low is 87, Medium 65, High 49, Ultra 36 — a 42% difference. The smaller relative gap at 4K again shows that any setting changes, even from Ultra to Low, cannot restore the frame rate because the pixel shading load dominates.

It is clear from the measured rows that this pairing reaches 4K60 only on Medium, and even that setting comes with risk of drops to 55 FPS. For a gamer targeting 144Hz, the system clears that bar only at 1080p Low and Medium (255 and 191 respectively). The resolution scaling data suggests that the RX 7900 XM eliminates most of the GPU bottleneck at 1080p, leaving the CPU to to around. At 4K Ultra, the GPU’s 207 billion ray and pixel engines are still maxed out, as evidenced by the 36 FPS result.

FAQ

Q: What are the average frame rates for each resolution and setting?

A: The dataset lists averages for every combination of four resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). For example, 1080p Low averages 255 FPS, 1440p High averages 92 FPS, and 4K Ultra averages 36 FPS.

Q: Which preset at 4K keeps the frame rate above 60 FPS?

A: Only the Medium preset at 4K does, with an average of 65 FPS, a minimum of 55, and a maximum of 75. The High preset averages 49, Ultra 36, and the Low preset averages 87, but Low is the only other that clears 60.

Q: What is the best preset for 1080p if the user wants a high refresh?

A: At 1080p, the Medium preset provides 191 FPS average with a minimum of 162 — enough to hold a 144 Hz display without dropped frames. The Low preset does 255 average, but Low is visually lower. High gives 145 average, which still rents above 60.

Q: How does the CPU’s core count relate to the in-game results?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. Its single-thread benchmark score (PassMark single-thread 3685, Cinebench R23 single-core 2943) suggests it can feed the GPU at low resolutions, which is consistent with 1080p Low fetching 255 FPS.

Q: What is the relative performance of this CPU compared to the nearest rivals listed?

A: In the CPU’s average benchmark score of 25005, it sits 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (24964), and 0.4% above the Intel Core i7-13620H (24911). It also trails the AMD EPYC 9474F (25103) by –0.4%. So its CPU bench score is narrowly competitive.

Q: How many out of all tested combos does this pair rank?

A: The functionality lists comboRankInGame as rank 756 out of 3711. This places it in the 20th percentile (756/3711 ≈ 20.4%), meaning roughly 79% of the benchmarked combos are slower.

CPU Role

The CPU’s core and thread configuration likely determines how the frame rate behaves at low resolution, especially when the GPU is not the bottleneck. The 8400F has six cores and twelve threads across four CPUs (one Phoenix) with a base clock of 4.20 and boost up to 4.70. The large L3 cache of 16 MB shared and a high memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s (DDR5 dual-channel) suggest a capable processor, but the measured results in this title show it can sustain 255 FPS average at 1080p Low, which is a strong number for a six-core chip.

Cinebench R23 multi-thread score is 20851, and single-core is 2943. These numbers compare to the nearest CPU rival the Ryzen 5 7500F: the 8400F’s average benchmark score is 25005, just 0.2% higher. The role of the CPU here is not clouded: at 1080p High the average is 145 FPS, while at 4K High the average drops to 49. If the GPU were the only limit, the scaling would be closer to the pixel count change (a 4.0x factor when moving from 1080 to 4K, which would put 255 → 64). But the measured 1080p Low of 255 and 4K Low of 87 show the CPU is still able to push over the frame at high rates. The evidence suggests the CPU is sufficient for maintaining a high refresh at low resolutions, but that the engine’s viewport processing still takes away some performance at 4K even when the GPU load increases.

The CPU’s boost clock of 4.70 and single-thread PassMark score of 3685 demonstrate strong single-thread performance. In a game like Hitman, which relies on a single main thread for many millions of frame updates, that solid clock and a boost rate of 4.20 base allow the GPU to receive a steady stream of frames. At 1080p this combo achieves 191 FPS on Medium without dipping below 162 minimum, which is also likely benefiting from the CPU’s memory absorption.

Settings Recommendations

The measured frame rates show that the Medium preset yields the only average above 60 FPS for every resolution. At 4K Medium, the average is 65 FPS, with a minimum of 55 — borderline, but still above the primary threshold; High is 49, Ultra 36, and Low 87, so if the user wants a playable frame with the highest setting possible, Medium is the only one that keeps it alive. At 1440p, Medium averages 122 FPS and has a minimum of 104, whereas High averages 92 and Ultra 68. Since High is also above 60, the smoother medium feels like a better balance. For 1080p, Medium gives 191 and 162 min, which is enough for a 144Hz display; Low gives 255 but with no existence of min data, so we cannot guarantee stability. Ultra at 1080p gives 106 average, which is also fine.

Thus, across all resolutions, the Medium preset delivers the highest average while staying above a 60 FPS target for most of the run. For example, at 4K Medium is the only non-Low preset that preserves the visual.

How This Combo Ranks

Among all 3711 combos tested that include this same game, the pair of Ryzen 5 8400F and RX 9070 XT places at position 756. That rank means it is slower than about 79.6% of tested setups. While the raw numbers in this article are high, the class of combos includes many with faster GPUs or CPUs that can exceed those numbers. The position of 756, given the component hardware, indicates there are roughly 2,955 faster combos. The fact that the combo still manages 1440p High at 92 FPS shows it is a mid-pack performer — certainly not at the top of the ranking curve. The data yields rank is specific to Hitman 2, not a general synth rank.

The GPU alone has a percentile victory of 55 percent (average score 13745), but CPU’s is 77 percent (score 25005). That mix of a relatively strong CPU and a middling GPU placed together contributes to the 756th rank. One can interpret that the CPU is not the limitation for improving rank; the GPU load does.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following frames were measured for each resolution and preset (data from the JSON):

• 1920x1080
• Low: 255 avg
• Medium: 191 avg, min 162, max 220
• High: 145 avg
• Ultra: 106 avg

• 2560x1440
• Low: 163 avg
• Medium: 122 avg, min 104, max 141
• High: 92 avg
• Ultra: 68 avg

• 3840x2160
• Low: 87 avg
• Medium: 65 avg, min 55, max 75
• High: 49 avg
• Ultra: 36 avg

No minimum/maximum values are reported for Low, High, or Ultra in any resolution. The only spread for Medium, and that ranges from 22 to 58 FPS across the three resolutions.

These numbers show a monotonic decrease with resolution for every preset, as expected. The Ultra preset at 1440p has 68 FPS, but at 4K it plummets to 36 — a 53% drop. The Low preset goes from 255 to 87, a drop of 66%. The data visually shows that the GPU render time is the inverse of these values.

GPU Role

The RX 7900 XT is built with 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus delivering 800 GB/s bandwidth. It has 5376 shading units, 336 texture units, 192 ROPs, and 84 ray-tracing cores. Its boost clock is 2394 MHz, game clock 2025 MHz, and base 1387 MHz. This is a large chip made on TSMC 5 nm with 57,700 million transistors. Despite its power, the GPU only holds a percentile of 55 among all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 13745. Compared to its immediate rivals — the AMD Radeon 660M (avg 13812, delta –0.5%), an NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile (avg 13821) — the RX 7900 XT actually comes in slightly lower. (It sits 0.5% below the RX 660M and 0.5% below the RTX A2000) but remains 1.5% above the RX 9070 XT? Actually the pack lists RX 9070 XT with avgScore 13543 and deltaPct 1.5, meaning the 7900 XT is about 1.5% faster than that 9070 XT. That is a narrow margin, making the gold a mid-tier GPU in Octane performance.

In actual game, the GPU shows extreme pressures: at 4K Ultra average of 36 FPS, meaning the GPU is triple the board fully maxed. The 20 GB VRAM, at that resolution, is not maxed; with the settings falling on a 55% percentile, it is not the VRAM that is limiting. the 51.48 TFLOPS FP32 and 459.6 GPixel/s (pixel rate) mean the card can output at a high rate, but the game code at 4K Ultra demands more than that, causing the low 36 FPS. The memory bus width 320–bit is not a bottleneck, but the data says the 1892 same.

The GPU’s percentile of 55 places it just above average, but the in-game numbers at 1080p are impressive, suggesting that the CPU allows the GPU to stretch its legs. At 4K, the GPU falls short of 60 on High–Ultra, making the RX 7900 XT not a true 4K ultra-capable card for this specific title. The numbers teach that the GPU is more a high-refresh 1080p / entry 1440p card rather than a 4K native card.

Thus the over (U) included summary: 6 cores/12 threads, GPU 20 GB, and the measured ranks at 756/2000, show a middle extreme player.