Overpower

Overpower, an action title released in 2023, presents a demanding workload that clearly separates hardware combinations. The pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with the Intel Arc B390 produces a distinctive performance profile across resolutions and settings, with the data revealing a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics subsystem. The measured frames per second (FPS) across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K resolutions show a consistent pattern where the Intel Arc B390, an integrated graphics processor, is the primary bottleneck, while the Ryzen 5 2600’s six-core, twelve-thread configuration appears sufficient to feed the GPU at most settings.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data from 1080p to 4K shows a predictable and steep decline, characteristic of a GPU-limited scenario. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 72 FPS at 1920x1080 to 64 FPS at 2560x1440, a drop of 8 FPS, and then further to 54 FPS at 3840x2160. This progression from 1080p to 1440p represents an 11.1% reduction in average FPS, while moving from 1440p to 4K results in a 15.6% reduction. The overall decline from 1080p Low to 4K Low is 25%, indicating that the rendering load scales significantly with pixel count, a clear sign that the graphics processor is working at its limits.

The pattern is even more pronounced at higher settings. At Medium settings, the average FPS drops from 45 at 1080p to 40 at 1440p, and then to 34 at 4K. This represents a 24.4% decrease from 1080p to 4K. For High settings, the averages are 42 FPS at 1080p, 37 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K, a cumulative drop of 23.8%. Ultra settings show the lowest performance, starting at 35 FPS in 1080p, falling to 31 FPS in 1440p, and bottoming out at 26 FPS in 4K, a 25.7% reduction across the resolution range.

These numbers imply that the limiting component is the GPU. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a much smaller performance delta between 1080p and 4K, as the CPU workload remains relatively constant while the GPU workload increases with resolution. The consistent 23-26% drop in FPS from 1080p to 4K across all settings suggests that the Intel Arc B390 is saturated at even 1080p, and the additional pixel count at higher resolutions directly translates to lower frame rates. The data shows no evidence of CPU limitation at any resolution, as the FPS scales inversely with resolution in a linear fashion.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor with a 3 nm process node and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. Its memory is system shared, meaning its bandwidth is system dependent, which is a critical factor for gaming performance. The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units. Its theoretical pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 7.680 TFLOPS.

The benchmark data for this GPU is sparse, with only a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. This score places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, indicating that it performs worse than 91% of the graphics cards in the database. Its nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, which scores 1463, and the NVIDIA GeForce 800M, which scores 1460. The Arc B390 is 1.3% faster than the GT 520MX and 1.5% faster than the GeForce 800M. These are all entry-level, low-performance parts, which aligns with the measured FPS in Overpower.

The GPU’s role as the primary bottleneck is evident in the measured FPS. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 72 FPS, which is playable, but the frame rate drops sharply as settings increase. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 37 FPS (from 72 to 35), a 51.4% reduction in performance purely from increasing graphical fidelity. This indicates that the Arc B390 lacks the raw compute and memory bandwidth to handle the increased shader complexity and texture loads of higher presets. The system shared memory, with its dependence on system RAM bandwidth, likely exacerbates this issue, as higher settings demand more memory traffic. The GPU’s relatively low pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s further limits its ability to fill pixels at higher resolutions, which is consistent with the observed FPS drops.

The 3DMark score of 1482, while a synthetic test, corroborates the gaming results. The GPU’s performance class, as defined by its 9th percentile ranking and its proximity to legacy NVIDIA parts like the GT 710 (which scores 1443, with the B390 being 2.7% faster), suggests that it is only suitable for light gaming at lower resolutions and settings. In Overpower, the data shows that the GPU is the limiting component at every resolution and preset, with the CPU rarely, if ever, becoming the constraining factor.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 2018-era desktop processor based on the Zen+ architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 16 MB of L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. Its TDP is 65 watts.

In CPU benchmarks, the Ryzen 5 2600 shows a mixed profile. Its average benchmark score is 21484, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs, which is a solid mid-range result. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, which scores 21440, and the Intel Core i9-11900H, which scores 21367, with the Ryzen 5 2600 being 0.2% and 0.5% faster, respectively. It also sits near the AMD EPYC 9454, which scores 21223, with the Ryzen 5 2600 being 1.2% faster, and the Intel Xeon D-1746TER, which scores 21635, where the Ryzen is 0.7% slower. These comparisons show that the Ryzen 5 2600’s overall compute performance is competitive with much newer and more expensive parts, despite its age.

However, its single-threaded performance is more modest. In Geekbench single-core, it scores 1154, and in Passmark single-thread, it scores 2239. These scores, while not exceptional, are sufficient for gaming, as most games do not rely heavily on single-core performance. In Overpower, the CPU’s role appears to be secondary to the GPU. The FPS data shows no indication of CPU bottlenecking. For instance, at 1080p Low, the system achieves 72 FPS, but this is likely the maximum the GPU can output, not the CPU. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect the FPS to remain similar across different resolutions at the same settings, which is not the case.

The CPU’s 12 threads and 16 MB of L3 cache are likely more than enough for Overpower’s threading model. The game’s genre, Action, typically benefits from multiple cores, but the Ryzen 5 2600’s six physical cores provide a solid foundation. The fact that the FPS scales linearly with resolution suggests that the CPU is not the constraining factor. The processor’s 75th percentile ranking and its benchmark scores, which are on par with modern mid-range CPUs, indicate that it has ample headroom to support a more powerful GPU. In this combo, the CPU is leaving performance on the table because the GPU cannot keep up.

FAQ

Q: Why does the FPS drop so much from 1080p to 4K?

A: The FPS drops by about 25% from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 at all settings. This linear decline is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. The Intel Arc B390’s pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and system shared memory limit its ability to render higher resolutions, so the frame rate falls proportionally with the increased pixel count.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 2600 holding back the Intel Arc B390?

A: No. The data shows no evidence of CPU limitation. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would stay roughly constant across resolutions, but it drops consistently from 1080p to 4K. The Ryzen 5 2600, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, appears sufficient to feed the GPU, which is the limiting component.

Q: What is the best settings preset for this combo?

A: Based on the measured FPS, the Low preset is the only one that provides a consistently playable experience. At 1080p Low, the system averages 72 FPS. At 1440p Low, it averages 64 FPS, and at 4K Low, it averages 54 FPS. Other presets fall below 45 FPS at 1080p, which is less smooth.

Q: How does this GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B390 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. This is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and 1.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce 800M. It is also 2.5% faster than the GeForce GT 625 OEM and 2.7% faster than the GeForce GT 710. These are all low-end parts, confirming the B390’s entry-level position.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 2600 has an average benchmark score of 21484. This is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (21440) and 0.5% higher than the Intel Core i9-11900H (21367). It is 1.2% higher than the AMD EPYC 9454 (21223) and 0.7% lower than the Intel Xeon D-1746TER (21635).

Q: Is this combo better or worse than most tested combos in Overpower?

A: This combo ranks 2638 out of 2980 tested combinations in Overpower, placing it in the bottom 11.5% of all combos. This is consistent with the GPU’s low 9th percentile ranking among all GPUs, which drags down the overall combo performance.

How This Combo Ranks

In Overpower, this specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2638 out of 2980 tested combos. This places it in the 11.5th percentile of all configurations, meaning that 88.5% of tested combos deliver higher performance in this game. The ranking is heavily influenced by the GPU, which sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs based on its 3DMark score. The CPU, in contrast, is in the 75th percentile of all CPUs, indicating a significant mismatch in capability.

The combo’s rank of 2638 suggests that it is suited only for low-demand gaming scenarios. The data implies that the CPU is not the limiting factor; rather, the Intel Arc B390’s performance is what holds the system back. The GPU’s nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and GeForce 800M, are also entry-level parts, and the B390’s performance is only marginally better (1.3% and 1.5% higher, respectively). This puts the entire combo in the lower echelon of gaming systems.

The ranking also reflects the lack of a strong GPU benchmark profile. With only one 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482, the GPU’s performance envelope is narrow. The measured FPS in Overpower, ranging from 26 FPS at 4K Ultra to 72 FPS at 1080p Low, confirms that this combo is best used for older or less demanding titles, or for Overpower at the lowest settings. The CPU’s strong relative performance (75th percentile) is wasted in this configuration, as the GPU cannot translate that compute power into higher frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured FPS data, the only settings preset that delivers a consistently smooth experience is Low. At 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS is 72, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for fluid gameplay. At 2560x1440 Low, the average is 64 FPS, still playable, and at 3840x2160 Low, it drops to 54 FPS, which is borderline but acceptable for slower-paced action.

The Medium preset is not recommended for competitive play. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 45, which is below the 60 FPS target. The minimum FPS for this setting is 38 FPS, which could cause noticeable stutters. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 40 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it falls to 34 FPS, with a minimum of 29 FPS. These frame rates are too low for a smooth experience in an action game.

High and Ultra presets are only viable for those who prioritize visual quality over frame rate. At 1080p High, the average is 42 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra, it is 35 FPS. The 4K Ultra preset yields only 26 FPS, which is nearly unplayable. The data suggests that the GPU’s system shared memory and limited compute resources cannot handle the increased shader and texture demands of these presets without a significant performance penalty.

Therefore, the best experience for this combo is to play at Low settings, preferably at 1920x1080 resolution, where the system can maintain an average of 72 FPS. If a higher resolution is desired, 2560x1440 Low still provides an average of 64 FPS, which is adequate. The Low preset effectively reduces the GPU load, allowing the system to achieve the highest frame rates possible.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS across settings is as follows: Low yields 72 FPS, High yields 42 FPS, Medium yields 45 FPS, and Ultra yields 35 FPS. For Medium, the minimum FPS is 38 and the maximum is 52. The data shows a 37 FPS difference between Low and Ultra, highlighting the GPU’s sensitivity to settings.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS is 64 for Low, 37 for High, 40 for Medium, and 31 for Ultra. The Medium preset has a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 8 FPS (from 72 to 64), and at Ultra, the drop is 4 FPS (from 35 to 31).

At 3840x2160, the average FPS is 54 for Low, 32 for High, 34 for Medium, and 26 for Ultra. The Medium preset shows a minimum of 29 FPS and a maximum of 39 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 26 FPS is the lowest measured frame rate for this combo, indicating that this resolution is not viable for anything beyond Low settings.

The complete dataset reveals a clear hierarchy: Low settings always provide the highest FPS, followed by Medium, then High, and finally Ultra. Across all resolutions, the difference between Low and Ultra is substantial, with a 51.4% reduction at 1080p, a 51.6% reduction at 1440p, and a 51.9% reduction at 4K. This consistent percentage drop suggests that the GPU’s performance scaling is predictable, and the limiting factor is its raw processing power and memory bandwidth, which are system dependent. The measured data provides a comprehensive picture of a GPU-limited system where the CPU has ample headroom, but the integrated graphics cannot deliver high frame rates at demanding settings.