Minimum

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT combination delivers a highly capable 4K experience in Minimum, though its overall ranking among tested hardware configurations is surprisingly modest. The pair secures the 650th position out of 2939 tested combos, placing it in the top 22% of all systems evaluated for this title. This rank reflects a strong balance of CPU and GPU resources, yet the data indicates that the graphics card's synthetic benchmark standing is far lower than its real-world gaming performance would suggest, making this a case where in-game results substantially outperform theoretical compute metrics.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 650 out of 2939 tested configurations places it within the upper quartile of systems benchmarked for Minimum. This position is notable because the individual components paint a conflicting picture: the CPU sits in the 90th percentile among all processors, while the GPU only reaches the 55th percentile among all graphics cards. The disparity suggests that the pairing’s overall standing is heavily influenced by the processor’s exceptional multi-threaded capabilities, which help maintain high frame rates even when the GPU becomes the limiting factor at lower resolutions.

Benchmark results for the CPU show a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32924 and a single-core score of 4648, underscoring its strength in both heavily threaded and lightly threaded workloads. This is further evidenced by its average benchmark score of 48995, which places it within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G and 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, while running ahead of the Intel Core i5-14600K by 0.8% and the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H by 0.6%. These narrow margins mean that in synthetic tests, the Ultra 5 245 is effectively interchangeable with those rivals, yet its real-world impact on Minimum is substantial, as the game’s engine appears to leverage the CPU’s high core count effectively.

Conversely, the GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 26795 and average benchmark score of 13543 place it in a peculiar position: its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7770M, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570, NVIDIA P106-090, and AMD Radeon Pro 555, with delta percentages of only 0.1% to 1.0%. These are all significantly older or lower-tier cards, which makes the RX 9070 XT’s actual in-game performance at 4K all the more remarkable. The measured FPS data reveals that this GPU is capable of delivering a 62 FPS average at 4K High settings, a feat that its synthetic benchmark percentile would not lead one to expect. This discrepancy highlights that the PassMark suite may not adequately stress the RDNA 4.0 architecture’s strengths in modern game engines.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a 4 nm process, featuring 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units. Its memory subsystem is robust for high-resolution gaming: 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus delivers 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth, with memory clocks running at 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective). The GPU’s boost clock reaches 2970 MHz, while the game clock is rated at 2400 MHz, and its FP32 performance is rated at 48.66 TFLOPS. These specifications translate directly into strong 4K performance in Minimum, where the 16 GB frame buffer ensures that texture-heavy scenes at Ultra settings do not cause memory-related stutters.

The GPU’s role in this combo is pivotal, particularly at 4K resolution where the data shows a clear scaling pattern across settings. At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 47 at Ultra to 97 at Low, with Medium hitting 74 and High reaching 62. The spread between Low and Ultra is 50 FPS, indicating that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at this resolution, as the CPU has ample headroom to feed frames. The 4K Medium setting shows a minimum FPS of 63 and a maximum of 85, providing a playable window that sits just above the 60 FPS threshold. This suggests that the RX 9070 XT’s 16 GB VRAM and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient to handle the game’s demands, though Ultra settings push the GPU to its limits with a 47 FPS average.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo at 4K resolution?

A: The highest 4K average FPS is 97, achieved at Low settings. At High settings, the average drops to 62 FPS, while Medium provides 74 FPS and Ultra falls to 47 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU’s performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 32924 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, placing it 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H. It also leads the Intel Core i5-14600K by 0.8%.

Q: Is the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM sufficient for Ultra settings?

A: Yes, the 16 GB GDDR6 memory with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth supports Ultra settings, though the average FPS at 4K Ultra is 47. At 1440p Ultra, the average rises to 88 FPS, indicating memory capacity is not the limiting factor.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p Low and 4K Ultra?

A: The gap is substantial: 278 FPS at 1080p Low versus 47 FPS at 4K Ultra, a difference of 231 FPS. This represents a 83% drop in performance when moving from the lowest settings at 1080p to the highest at 4K.

Q: How does the combo rank relative to all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 650th out of 2939 tested combinations, placing it in the top 22.1% of all systems benchmarked for Minimum.

Q: What are the CPU’s core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. It includes 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates for this combo reveal a consistent pattern across three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the performance is exceptionally high, with Low settings producing an average of 278 FPS, Medium reaching 213 FPS (with a minimum of 181 and maximum of 245), High hitting 179 FPS, and Ultra dropping to 136 FPS. These numbers indicate that at 1080p, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU far more frames than the display can likely show, making this resolution largely CPU-bound.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages remain strong but show a clear step down: Low delivers 179 FPS, Medium 137 FPS (min 117, max 158), High 115 FPS, and Ultra 88 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 35% across all settings, which is expected as pixel count increases by 78%. At 1440p, the GPU begins to exert more influence, but the averages are still high enough for smooth gameplay on high refresh rate monitors.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the dominant factor, and the settings spread widens significantly. Low settings yield 97 FPS, Medium 74 FPS (min 63, max 85), High 62 FPS, and Ultra 47 FPS. The 4K Medium setting is particularly noteworthy because it provides a minimum FPS of 63, meaning the frame rate never dips below the 60 FPS threshold, making it the optimal choice for a locked 60 Hz experience. The 4K Ultra setting, at 47 FPS average, is playable but not ideal for competitive play, as frame pacing may suffer in demanding scenes.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling from 1080p to 4K demonstrates a classic GPU-bound behavior, with the FPS dropping by a larger percentage than the pixel count increase would suggest. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 278 at 1080p to 179 at 1440p (a 35.6% drop) and then to 97 at 4K (a 45.8% drop from 1440p). The total reduction from 1080p Low to 4K Low is 65.1%, which is consistent with the 4x pixel increase, indicating the GPU is well-utilized at all resolutions.

The scaling at Ultra settings is slightly steeper in relative terms: 136 FPS at 1080p drops to 88 FPS at 1440p (a 35.3% drop) and then to 47 FPS at 4K (a 46.6% drop from 1440p). The overall reduction from 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra is 65.4%, nearly identical to the Low settings scaling. This consistency suggests that the RX 9070 XT scales predictably with resolution, and the game’s engine does not introduce unexpected overhead at higher pixel counts.

The fact that the percentage drops are almost identical across Low and Ultra settings indicates that the CPU is not a limiting factor at any resolution. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the gap between 1080p and 1440p would be smaller than the gap between 1440p and 4K, as the CPU load is resolution-independent. Instead, the data shows a uniform scaling pattern, confirming that the GPU is the sole limiting component in this combo, even at 1080p where the CPU could theoretically push even higher frame rates if the GPU were faster.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 plays a supporting but critical role in this combo, ensuring that the GPU is never starved of data. With 14 cores and 14 threads, the CPU has no hyper-threading, but its Arrow Lake architecture compensates with high single-thread performance. The base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz, combined with 24 MB of shared L3 cache, allow it to handle the game’s physics and AI workloads without becoming a bottleneck. The CPU’s PassMark single-thread score of 4394 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648 confirm its strength in lightly threaded tasks, which is typical for game engines.

The CPU’s 90th percentile ranking among all processors is reflected in the measured FPS data, particularly at 1080p where the frame rates exceed 200 FPS at Medium settings. A less capable CPU would likely cap out around 150-180 FPS in this scenario, but the Ultra 5 245 allows the RX 9070 XT to stretch its legs. The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 interface is adequate for feeding the GPU’s 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth, ensuring no data starvation at any resolution.

At 4K, the CPU’s role diminishes as the GPU takes over the frame rate ceiling. The fact that the 4K Low setting (97 FPS) is significantly lower than 1080p Ultra (136 FPS) indicates that the GPU is fully saturated at 4K, while the CPU still has headroom. This is the ideal balance for a gaming system: the CPU provides enough performance to avoid limiting the GPU at any resolution, while the GPU determines the final frame rate based on graphical load. The CPU’s 14 threads are more than sufficient for Minimum, a 2014 title that does not require the high core counts found in modern simulations, but the headroom ensures consistent frame times even in the most chaotic scenes.