Minimum

The pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti produces results in Minimum that are overwhelmingly dictated by the graphics card. The data shows a clear pattern where the CPU’s substantial processing power is left largely untapped, with frame rates scaling almost entirely with resolution and settings changes. This combination ranks 1615th out of 2939 tested combos, placing it in the lower-middle tier of the database for this specific title, a position that reflects the GPU’s age and performance ceiling rather than any deficiency in the processor.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate drop from 1080p to 4K in Minimum is severe and reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p with High settings, the combo delivers an average of 124 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 reduces that to 80 FPS, a 35% decrease. At 4K, the average falls further to 43 FPS, which represents a 65% drop from the 1080p figure. This steep decline is the signature of a graphics card that is being pushed to its absolute limits, as the rendering load increases exponentially with pixel count.

The pattern is consistent across all settings. With Low settings, the average frame rate goes from 192 FPS at 1080p to 124 FPS at 1440p and finally to 67 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset shows the same trajectory, starting at 94 FPS at 1080p, dropping to 61 FPS at 1440p, and collapsing to 33 FPS at 4K. In every case, the 4K result is less than half of the 1080p result, confirming that the GTX 1080 Ti’s memory bandwidth and compute resources are the limiting factor. The CPU, with its 24 cores and 36 MB of shared L3 cache, is not the bottleneck; the data strongly suggests that even a significantly less powerful processor would produce nearly identical frame rates in this game.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Minimum with this combo?*

A: The data indicates that 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combo consistently achieves high frame rates. At 1080p with High settings, the average is 124 FPS, and with Low settings, it reaches 192 FPS. At 1440p, the average drops to 80 FPS on High, which is playable but less smooth, while 4K results are below 70 FPS across all settings, making it a poor choice for responsive gameplay.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at 1080p?

A: The measured data shows a significant performance cost for the Ultra preset. At 1080p, the average frame rate drops from 124 FPS on High to 94 FPS on Ultra, a decline of 30 FPS. This indicates that the jump to Ultra introduces a substantial load on the GTX 1080 Ti, likely due to more demanding shading and post-processing effects.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus the reason for the low 4K performance?

A: No, the benchmark results point to the GPU as the limiting factor. The CPU is a high-end part with a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs and scores 51,731 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The consistent frame rate drops with increasing resolution are characteristic of a GPU bottleneck, meaning the processor is capable of feeding frames faster than the GTX 1080 Ti can render them.

Q: What kind of frame time variance can be expected at Medium settings?

A: The data provides min and max FPS values for the Medium preset. At 1080p, the average is 147 FPS, with a minimum of 125 FPS and a maximum of 169 FPS. This 44 FPS spread indicates some frame time inconsistency, but the high average and minimum suggest the experience remains smooth overall. At 1440p, the average is 95 FPS with a min of 81 and max of 109, while at 4K, the average is 51 FPS with a min of 43 and max of 59.

Q: How does this combo’s ranking compare to the CPU and GPU’s individual standings?

A: The combo ranks 1615th out of 2939 in Minimum. This is lower than the CPU’s individual 96th percentile standing and the GPU’s 58th percentile standing. This discrepancy highlights that the combination’s performance is not a sum of its parts; the older GPU severely hampers the overall gaming experience despite the powerful processor.

Q: Is the GTX 1080 Ti’s performance in this game consistent with its synthetic benchmarks?

A: Yes, the game performance aligns with the GPU’s profile. The GTX 1080 Ti has an average benchmark score of 15,548, placing it near the AMD Radeon R9 M380 and below the AMD Radeon Pro W5500. Its passmark G3D score is 18,600, which is respectable but not high-end by modern standards, and the measured FPS in Minimum reflects this mid-range capability.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is an exceptionally powerful processor, but its role in Minimum is largely that of a spectator. With 24 cores and 24 threads, a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731, the CPU has ample headroom for any game. Its single-thread performance is also strong, with a Cinebench R23 score of 7,303 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4,823. These figures indicate that the processor is more than capable of handling the game’s logic and physics calculations.

However, the benchmark data reveals that this power is not being utilized. The frame rates at 4K, which are below 70 FPS on all settings, do not improve in a way that would suggest a CPU limitation. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see frame rates that are more consistent across different resolutions, as the CPU’s workload would remain constant regardless of pixel count. Instead, the frame rates scale with resolution in a linear fashion, which is the definitive sign of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU’s 96th percentile ranking and its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which scores 0.2% lower, further underscore that the processor is not the weak link. In this title, the CPU’s role is to ensure the GPU is fed with data, but the GTX 1080 Ti simply cannot render frames fast enough to challenge it.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience with this hardware combination, the data strongly favors the High preset at 1920x1080. This setting provides an average of 124 FPS, which is well above the threshold for smooth, responsive gameplay. The Medium preset at 1080p offers a higher average of 147 FPS, but the High preset provides a better visual quality per frame. The jump from High to Ultra at 1080p costs 30 FPS on average (from 124 to 94), which is a significant performance hit for a visual improvement that is unlikely to be worth the trade-off on a GTX 1080 Ti.

At 2560x1440, the High preset remains the most balanced option, delivering an average of 80 FPS. While this is lower than the 1080p result, it is still playable. The Medium preset at 1440p yields 95 FPS, which could be a better option for those prioritizing frame rate. However, the High preset is recommended for a better visual experience without dropping below 60 FPS. For 4K, the data is less encouraging. The Low preset is the only one that achieves an average above 60 FPS, at 67 FPS. The High preset only manages 43 FPS, and Ultra drops to 33 FPS. Therefore, if 4K is a requirement, the Low preset is the only viable choice, but the overall experience will be less polished than at lower resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti ranks 1615th out of 2939 tested combos in Minimum. This places it in the 55th percentile of all tested systems, meaning that 54% of combinations perform better. This ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU’s performance ceiling. The CPU is a top-tier part, but it is paired with a GPU that, while historically significant, is now several generations old. The data shows that the combo’s performance is much closer to the GPU’s 58th percentile standing than the CPU’s 96th percentile.

This suggests that if the goal is to improve performance in Minimum, the upgrade path is clear: replace the GTX 1080 Ti with a more modern graphics card. The CPU would not need to be changed, as it has ample headroom to support a much faster GPU. The ranking also indicates that the combo is not an outlier in terms of balance. It is a typical pairing of a high-end processor with an older, mid-range graphics card, and the results reflect that. The 1615th rank is a sobering reminder that a powerful CPU cannot compensate for a GPU that is struggling to keep up with modern game’s demands.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact average FPS values measured for each resolution and settings combination.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

| :--------- | :------- | :------ | :------ | :------ |

| 3840x2160 | High | 43 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 67 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 51 | 43 | 59 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 33 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 80 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 124 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 95 | 81 | 109 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 61 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 124 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 192 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 147 | 125 | 169 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 94 | - | - |

At 1080p, the combo shows a wide performance range, from 192 FPS on Low to 94 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset’s min and max FPS of 125 and 169, respectively, show a 44 FPS variance, which is noticeable but not disruptive. At 1440p, the range is from 124 FPS on Low to 61 FPS on Ultra, with the Medium preset averaging 95 FPS. At 4K, the performance drops significantly, with the Low preset being the only one to break 60 FPS at 67. The High and Ultra presets are effectively unplayable for a smooth experience at 43 and 33 FPS, respectively. The data clearly shows that the GTX 1080 Ti is the deciding factor in all of these results, as the CPU’s performance is consistent and high across the board.