Minimum

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i7-13700K is a 16-core, 24-thread Raptor Lake-S part with a 3.40 GHz base clock and a 5.40 GHz boost clock. Its benchmark profile is distinctly top-heavy: the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39000 and PassMark multithread score of 45887 show massive parallel throughput, while the single-core PassMark result of 4333 and 3DMark single-thread score of 1136 indicate strong but not extraordinary per-thread performance. The processor sits in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 47282. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-13700KF, scores 47334 — a delta of -0.1% — meaning the two are effectively identical in aggregate performance. The AMD EPYC 4364P and Intel Core i9-12900F trail by 0.3% and 0.4% respectively, while the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 leads by 0.5%.

For a third-person shooter released in 2014, this CPU is dramatically over-provisioned. The game's age means it cannot meaningfully utilize 24 threads; the 3DMark 16-thread score of 10717 versus the max-thread score of 12412 shows that scaling flattens beyond 16 threads. The 2-thread score of 2262 and 4-thread score of 4469 are what matter for older game engines. The 13700K's 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB L2 per core provide ample headroom for game logic, but the bottleneck in this title is clearly not the processor. At 1080p Low, the system hits 180.1 FPS average, which is likely near the engine's practical ceiling given the game's 2014 release. The 13700K's 5.40 GHz boost clock ensures that even poorly threaded game code receives maximum single-core attention, and the PassMark single-thread score of 4333 places it well above what this title requires.

The data suggests the CPU is never the limiting factor in this configuration. Even at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS drops to 28.8, the processor's 125 W TDP and 16 cores are idle relative to the GPU's workload. The Cinebench R15 single-core score of 554 and Geekbench single-core score of 2850 confirm that the 13700K's per-core performance is more than sufficient for a 2014-era shooter. The real story is how the GPU scales across settings, which the measured FPS data makes clear.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the configuration delivers playable frame rates across all settings. Low settings produce 180.1 FPS average, Medium drops to 134.7 FPS, High yields 113.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 87.1 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra represents a 51.6% performance reduction. The gap between Medium and High is 21.3 FPS, while High to Ultra costs 26.3 FPS. These are large absolute drops, indicating that Ultra settings impose a heavy shading load.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages are 111.5 FPS at Low, 87.3 FPS at Medium, 75.3 FPS at High, and 57 FPS at Ultra. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is 68.6 FPS, which is a 38% reduction. At Ultra, the 1440p result of 57 FPS is still above 60 FPS territory but uncomfortably close to it. High settings at 1440p deliver 75.3 FPS, which is a solid baseline for smooth gameplay.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes marginal. Low settings yield 60 FPS exactly, Medium produces 46.8 FPS, High drops to 42 FPS, and Ultra falls to 28.8 FPS. The 4K Low result is the only setting at this resolution that maintains a 60 FPS average. The difference between 4K Low and 4K Ultra is 31.2 FPS, a 52% reduction. The 4K High result of 42 FPS is below the 1440p Ultra result of 57 FPS, showing that resolution scaling is steep.

The combo ranks 1114th out of 1733 tested configurations in this game. That places it in the lower-middle tier, which aligns with the GPU's 72nd percentile ranking among all GPUs. The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking is significantly higher, confirming that the Graphics card is the performance ceiling.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run the game at 60 FPS in 4K?

A: Only at Low settings. The 3840x2160 Low measurement shows 60 FPS average. Medium drops to 46.8 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best resolution for a 144 Hz monitor?

A: At 1920x1080, High settings produce 113.4 FPS and Medium produces 134.7 FPS. Neither reaches 144 FPS, but Low settings at 180.1 FPS exceed it. At 2560x1440, Low settings at 111.5 FPS is the only option above 100 FPS.

Q: How much performance is lost when going from 1080p to 4K?

A: At Low settings, the drop is from 180.1 FPS to 60 FPS, a 120.1 FPS reduction. At Ultra settings, the drop is from 87.1 FPS to 28.8 FPS, a 58.3 FPS reduction.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU. The CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile while the GPU ranks in the 72nd percentile. The FPS scaling with resolution and settings follows GPU load patterns, not CPU thread utilization.

Q: Does the game benefit from the 13700K's 16 cores?

A: No. The 3DMark 2-thread score of 2262 and 4-thread score of 4469 show that the game's workload is minimal. The max-thread score of 12412 is irrelevant for a 2014 title.

Q: What settings provide the best balance for 1440p?

A: High settings at 2560x1440 produce 75.3 FPS. Medium produces 87.3 FPS. Both are above 60 FPS, while Low at 111.5 FPS is the smoothest option.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The FPS degradation across resolutions is steep and consistent. At Low settings, the progression is 180.1 FPS at 1080p, 111.5 FPS at 1440p, and 60 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 68.6 FPS (38%), and the 1440p-to-4K drop is 51.5 FPS (46%). At Ultra settings, the progression is 87.1 FPS at 1080p, 57 FPS at 1440p, and 28.8 FPS at 4K. The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 30.1 FPS (34.5%), and the 1440p-to-4K drop is 28.2 FPS (49.5%).

The percentage losses are larger at higher resolutions, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound rendering. At 4K, the pixel count quadruples relative to 1080p, and the FPS does not scale linearly — it drops by roughly 60-67% depending on settings. This indicates that the GPU's 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated. The RX 6650 XT's 128-bit memory bus is the likely constraint, as the 4K Low result of exactly 60 FPS suggests the card is hitting a memory bandwidth wall rather than a compute limit.

The fact that the CPU's performance ranking (93rd percentile) far exceeds the GPU's (72nd percentile) reinforces this interpretation. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect FPS to remain flat across resolutions. Instead, the measured data shows FPS falling by roughly half at each resolution step, which is the signature of a GPU-limited system. The 1080p Ultra result of 87.1 FPS versus the 4K Low result of 60 FPS further demonstrates that resolution has a greater impact than settings — a 4x pixel increase costs more than the Ultra-to-Low settings reduction saves.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is a RDNA 2.0 part with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth. Its boost clock is 2635 MHz with a game clock of 2410 MHz and base clock of 2055 MHz. The card has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 32 ray accelerators. Its FP32 throughput is 10.79 TFLOPS, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The GPU's benchmark profile shows a PassMark G3D score of 17166 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1859. Its average benchmark score is 29024, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the AMD Radeon RX 6800M scores 29011 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 470 scores 28996 (0.1% delta), the Intel Arc A370M scores 29175 (-0.5% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH scores 29197 (-0.6% delta). This means the 6650 XT is statistically indistinguishable from these parts in aggregate benchmarks, despite being a newer architecture.

For this game, the GPU's role is decisive. The measured FPS data shows that at 4K Ultra, the card produces 28.8 FPS, which is unplayable. At 4K Medium, it produces 46.8 FPS, still below 60. The card's 8 GB VRAM is not necessarily the limiting factor for a 2014 title — the game's texture requirements are modest — but the 128-bit memory bus and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth are. The 17.5 Gbps effective memory speed helps, but the narrow bus width caps fill rate.

The GPU's compute capabilities, while adequate for modern titles, are overkill for this game's older rendering pipeline. The PassMark DirectX 11 score of 169 and DirectX 12 score of 62 show that the card's API performance is respectable but not exceptional. The 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is more than enough for a 2014 shooter; the bottleneck is memory bandwidth and ROP throughput, not shader compute. The 168.6 GPixel/s pixel rate and 337.3 GTexel/s texture rate explain why 4K Ultra falls to 28.8 FPS — the ROPs are simply overwhelmed at that resolution and settings combination.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The data shows a clear hierarchy of playable configurations. At 1920x1080, every settings preset delivers above 60 FPS: Low at 180.1, Medium at 134.7, High at 113.4, and Ultra at 87.1. For competitive play, Low settings maximize frame rate, but High at 113.4 FPS offers a strong balance of visual quality and smoothness. Ultra at 87.1 FPS is still perfectly playable and provides the best image quality at 1080p.

At 2560x1440, the choices narrow. Low at 111.5 FPS is the only preset above 100 FPS, making it ideal for high-refresh monitors. Medium at 87.3 FPS and High at 75.3 FPS are both solid options, with High offering the best visual fidelity while staying above 60 FPS. Ultra at 57 FPS falls below the 60 FPS threshold, making it a poor choice unless the user prioritizes image quality over smoothness. The 0.3 FPS gap between Medium and High at 1440p is negligible — High is the better pick.

At 3840x2160, only Low at 60 FPS is acceptable. Medium at 46.8 FPS, High at 42 FPS, and Ultra at 28.8 FPS are all below 60 FPS and will feel sluggish in a fast-paced third-person shooter. The recommendation is to play at 4K Low if 4K output is required, or drop to 1440p High for a far better experience. The 1440p High result of 75.3 FPS is a 15.3 FPS improvement over 4K Low, with significantly better visual quality.

The best overall experience per the measured rows is 1440p High. It delivers 75.3 FPS, which is smooth, and the visual uplift from Medium to High is worth more than the 12 FPS cost. For users with 1080p monitors, 1080p Ultra at 87.1 FPS is the recommended preset — it is the highest settings option that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 28.8 FPS is the worst measured configuration and should be avoided entirely.