Outriders

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 pairing in Outriders presents a notable performance split, where the CPU’s high-end specifications contrast sharply with the GPU’s mid-range capabilities. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings reveal a system that is heavily constrained by the graphics card, particularly at higher visual presets. This analysis draws exclusively from the provided benchmark data to detail how this combination behaves in the looter shooter.

FAQ

*Q: What is the overall rank of this CPU and GPU combo in Outriders?*

A: The combination ranks 2257 out of 2913 tested combos in the game. This places it in the lower portion of the tested configurations, indicating that while it can run the game, many other pairings deliver better performance.

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 9900X3D compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF?

A: The AMD processor has an average benchmark score of 54762, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 55093. This makes the Intel part 0.6% faster on average, a negligible difference in real-world gaming scenarios. The AMD chip is 1.3% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K and 2.1% faster than the Intel Core i7-14700F.

Q: What is the best average FPS achievable at 1080p with this hardware?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 189 FPS, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. At Medium settings, the average drops to 137 FPS, and at High settings, it is 103 FPS. The Ultra preset yields 74 FPS.

*Q: Does the RTX 2060 hold up at 4K resolution in Outriders?*

A: At 3840x2160, the performance is limited. The High preset averages 34 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages only 24 FPS. The Low preset averages 62 FPS, and Medium averages 45 FPS. Only the Low preset approaches playable smoothness, suggesting 4K is not a strong resolution for this GPU in this game.

Q: How much VRAM does the RTX 2060 have, and what memory type is it?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is equipped with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is a key factor in its performance at higher resolutions and settings.

Q: What is the CPU’s boost clock, and how many cores does it have?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz and a base clock of 4.40 GHz. It features 12 cores and 24 threads, based on the Zen 5 architecture with a 128 MB L3 cache.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 2257 out of 2913 tested configurations places this pairing in the bottom 22.5% of all combinations tested in Outriders. This is a critical data point, as it suggests the system is not optimized for high-end performance in this particular title. The rank is not a measure of failure, but rather an indication that the RTX 2060 is the limiting factor, holding back the otherwise powerful Ryzen 9 9900X3D. When considering the CPU’s individual standing, it sits in the 91st percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54762. This places it just below the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, which has an average score of 55093 and a delta of -0.6%. The CPU also outperforms the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54053, 1.3% faster), the Intel Xeon 6505P (53701, 2% faster), and the Intel Core i7-14700F (53620, 2.1% faster). These are marginal differences, showing that the 9900X3D is a top-tier processor by synthetic benchmarks.

However, the GPU tells a different story. The RTX 2060 has a percentile rank of 58 against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 15290. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580, which scores 15283, a delta of 0%. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270 (0.1% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM scores 15199 (0.6% slower), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 scores 15171 (0.8% slower). The proximity of these scores indicates that the RTX 2060, while not obsolete, is firmly in the mid-range category. In Outriders, this GPU’s performance ceiling is evident; even with a top-10 percentile CPU, the combo rank cannot escape the GPU’s limitations. The data suggests that for this game, the CPU’s potential is largely untapped, as the frame rates are consistently bound by the GPU’s rendering capabilities. The 2257th rank out of 2913 is a direct consequence of this imbalance, making it clear that the user experience will be defined by the RTX 2060’s output, not the Ryzen 9 9900X3D’s computational strength.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 is the primary determinant of frame rates in this pairing. Its specifications—6 GB of GDDR6 memory, a 192-bit bus, and 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth—are adequate for 1080p gaming but become strained at higher resolutions. The GPU’s base clock is 1365 MHz, with a boost clock of 1680 MHz, and it features 1920 shading units. The memory operates at 1750 MHz, which translates to 14 Gbps effective. These clocks are modest by modern standards, and the data shows their impact. In Outriders, the GPU’s performance scales poorly with increasing settings. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra settings is stark: 189 FPS versus 74 FPS. This 115 FPS drop is a direct result of the GPU’s limited processing power and memory bandwidth when handling more complex lighting, shadows, and effects.

The VRAM capacity of 6 GB is another critical factor. At 4K resolution with High settings, the average FPS falls to 34, and at Ultra, it drops to 24. These numbers suggest that the GPU is running out of memory or bandwidth to maintain smooth performance, as the higher resolutions demand more texture data and frame buffer space. The Medium preset at 4K shows a minimum FPS of 38 and a maximum of 52, with an average of 45, indicating that even moderate settings cause significant frame time variance. The GPU’s nearest rival, the GTX 580, has a nearly identical average benchmark score (15283 vs 15290), which underscores that the RTX 2060 is not a high-end part. In synthetic tests, it scores 14111 in Passmark G3D, 1242 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, and 65846 in Geekbench Vulkan. These figures align with its mid-range positioning. For Outriders, the GPU’s role is to provide playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p with adjusted settings, but at 4K, it cannot deliver a consistently smooth experience. The data confirms that the RTX 2060 is the bottleneck, as the CPU’s high core count and clock speeds cannot compensate for the GPU’s fill rate and memory constraints.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. Beginning at 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 189 FPS, which is the highest recorded value for this combo. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 137 FPS, with a minimum of 117 FPS and a maximum of 158 FPS. High settings yield 103 FPS, while Ultra brings the average down to 74 FPS. These numbers indicate that 1080p is the most viable resolution for high refresh rate monitors, though Ultra settings will cap out around 74 FPS, which is still playable but not optimal for competitive play.

At 2560x1440, the performance decreases noticeably. The Low preset averages 119 FPS, which remains smooth. Medium settings average 87 FPS, with a minimum of 74 FPS and a maximum of 99 FPS. High settings produce 65 FPS, and Ultra drops to 47 FPS. This resolution strikes a balance between visual fidelity and performance, but the Ultra preset falls below the 60 FPS threshold, making it less desirable for action-heavy sequences. The 1440p data shows a 54 FPS difference between Low and Ultra, highlighting the GPU’s sensitivity to settings.

At 3840x2160, the limitations become severe. Low settings average 62 FPS, which is marginally playable. Medium settings average 45 FPS, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 52 FPS. High settings average 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The 4K results are consistently below 60 FPS except for the Low preset, and even that is near the boundary. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 38 FPS, showing that the GPU cannot handle the increased pixel count and graphical load. Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: the RTX 2060’s performance degrades significantly as settings increase, and the gap between Low and Ultra widens at higher resolutions. For example, at 1080p, the Ultra preset is 115 FPS slower than Low, while at 1440p, this gap is 72 FPS, and at 4K, it is 38 FPS. This suggests that at 4K, the GPU is already so constrained that changing settings has a smaller absolute effect on FPS, but the overall experience is poor regardless.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution. For 1920x1080, the High preset at 103 FPS offers a strong balance between visual quality and smoothness. It provides a substantial improvement over Medium’s 137 FPS in terms of graphics, while still maintaining a frame rate well above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 74 FPS is also viable if the user prioritizes maximum visual detail, but it sacrifices significant performance. For competitive play or high refresh rate displays, the Medium preset at 137 FPS is the best choice, as it delivers near-140 FPS performance with acceptable visual trade-offs. The Low preset at 189 FPS is only recommended for esports-style play where frame rate is paramount.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset at 87 FPS is the recommended starting point. It offers a smooth experience above 60 FPS while providing better visuals than Low. The High preset at 65 FPS is also playable, but the frame rate is less stable, particularly in combat scenarios with many enemies and effects. The Ultra preset at 47 FPS should be avoided, as it falls below the 60 FPS threshold and may cause noticeable stuttering. For users with variable refresh rate monitors, the Medium preset’s minimum of 74 FPS ensures a mostly fluid experience, whereas High’s lower average could lead to more frequent dips.

At 3840x2160, the data does not support high or ultra settings. The High preset at 34 FPS and Ultra at 24 FPS are not playable for a fast-paced looter shooter. The Medium preset at 45 FPS is borderline, but the minimum of 38 FPS suggests inconsistent performance. The Low preset at 62 FPS is the only setting that provides a consistently smooth experience at 4K, though it sacrifices much of the game’s visual detail. For most users, 4K gaming with this GPU is not recommended, and dropping to 1440p with High or Medium settings will provide a far better experience. The data indicates that the best overall experience for this combo is 1080p with High settings, offering 103 FPS and a balance of quality and speed. Alternatively, 1440p with Medium settings at 87 FPS is a strong option for those who prefer higher resolution over maximum frame rates.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a high-end processor, but its role in Outriders is largely secondary to the GPU. The CPU features 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. It is built on the Zen 5 architecture with a 4 nm process and has a substantial 128 MB L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 47737 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 6739 in single-core, indicating exceptional multi-threaded and single-threaded performance. The Geekbench multicore score is 22884, and the single-core score is 3041. These numbers place it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54762. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, is only 0.6% faster, which is within margin of error.

However, in this game, the CPU’s power does not translate into higher frame rates because the GPU is the limiting factor. The measured FPS data shows that even at 1080p with Low settings, the average is 189 FPS, which is high but not indicative of CPU-bound performance. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar frame rates across different settings at the same resolution, as the CPU’s workload would be the constraint. Instead, we see a clear drop from 189 FPS at Low to 74 FPS at Ultra, demonstrating that the GPU is handling the increased graphical load. The CPU’s high core count and clock speeds are more than sufficient to feed the RTX 2060, but the GPU cannot render frames fast enough to utilize the CPU’s full potential.

The CPU’s 24 threads are unlikely to be fully utilized in Outriders, which is a game that typically relies on fewer cores. The single-thread performance, as evidenced by the 6739 Cinebench R23 score, is excellent, ensuring that the game’s main thread is not a bottleneck. The 128 MB L3 cache also helps with data access, but these advantages are moot when the GPU’s frame rate ceiling is around 189 FPS at best. In this pairing, the CPU’s role is to provide a stable foundation, eliminating any chance of CPU-related stuttering or frame drops. The data shows that the CPU is never the limiting component; even at 1080p Low, where the CPU would be most likely to bottleneck, the frame rate is high, but it scales with GPU settings, confirming the GPU-bound nature of the system. For users considering an upgrade, replacing the RTX 2060 would yield significant FPS gains, while upgrading the CPU would have minimal impact on Outriders performance.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling data reveals how the system’s performance degrades as pixel count increases, and it clearly indicates a GPU-bound scenario. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 189 at 1080p to 119 at 1440p, a drop of 70 FPS or 37%. From 1440p to 4K, the average drops from 119 to 62, a further 57 FPS or 48% reduction. This steep decline is characteristic of a GPU that is struggling with the increased pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth demands. At Medium settings, the averages are 137 FPS at 1080p, 87 FPS at 1440p, and 45 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 50 FPS (36.5%), and from 1440p to 4K is 42 FPS (48.3%). The consistent percentage drops across settings suggest that the GPU’s scaling is predictable and tied to resolution.

At High settings, the averages are 103 FPS at 1080p, 65 FPS at 1440p, and 34 FPS at 4K. This represents a 38 FPS drop (36.9%) from 1080p to 1440p, and a 31 FPS drop (47.7%) from 1440p to 4K. The Ultra preset shows 74 FPS at 1080p, 47 FPS at 1440p, and 24 FPS at 4K, with drops of 27 FPS (36.5%) and 23 FPS (48.9%) respectively. The pattern is clear: the frame rate decreases by roughly 37% when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and then by another 48% when moving to 4K. This non-linear scaling is due to the GPU’s memory bandwidth and processing power being overwhelmed by the quad-pixel increase from 1080p to 4K.

The data also shows that the limiting component is the GPU, not the CPU. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see smaller FPS differences between resolutions, as the CPU would be the same regardless of pixel count. Instead, the large drops in FPS at higher resolutions directly correlate with the GPU’s workload. The RTX 2060’s 336.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 6 GB of VRAM are insufficient for 4K textures and frame buffers, leading to the low averages observed. The CPU’s performance, while excellent, has no bearing on these resolution scaling trends. The conclusion is that for this combo, resolution is the primary factor determining playability, and users should target 1080p or 1440p to achieve smooth frame rates. At 4K, the system is not viable for anything beyond Low settings, and even then, the 62 FPS average is not ideal for a game that requires quick reactions. The scaling analysis reinforces the notion that the RTX 2060 is the definitive bottleneck, and the Ryzen 9 9900X3D’s capabilities are left untapped at higher resolutions.