Overpower

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Overpower shows a clear and consistent pattern as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 129 FPS at 1080p to 115 FPS at 1440p, then further to 98 FPS at 4K. This progression represents a 24% reduction from 1080p to 4K for the Low preset. The relatively modest decline suggests that at Low settings, the system is not overwhelmingly bound by the GPU's pixel throughput.

Moving to Medium settings, the measured averages are 81 FPS at 1080p, 72 FPS at 1440p, and 61 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K here is approximately 25%, very similar to the Low preset's scaling. This consistency across Low and Medium indicates that the rendering workload scales predictably with pixel count when the quality settings are not pushing the GPU to its limits.

High settings tell a slightly different story. The frame rates are 75 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p, and 57 FPS at 4K. The reduction from 1080p to 4K is 24%, again in line with the other presets. However, the absolute values are lower, which means the GPU is working harder at each resolution step.

Ultra settings exhibit the steepest absolute decline. Starting at 62 FPS at 1080p, the average drops to 56 FPS at 1440p and finally to 47 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the only measured configuration that falls below 50 FPS, underscoring that this preset combination is the most demanding. The scaling from 1080p to 4K across all presets is remarkably uniform, hovering around 24-25%. This uniformity suggests that the frame rate drop is primarily driven by the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth, rather than any CPU-side bottleneck that would manifest differently at lower resolutions.

The limiting component becomes evident when examining the 1080p Low result of 129 FPS versus the 4K Ultra result of 47 FPS. If the CPU were the primary constraint, the 1080p Low frame rate would be capped at a level far below what the GPU could theoretically deliver. Instead, the data shows a wide spread of frame rates across settings at the same resolution, which points to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER as the dominant performance limiter in this configuration. The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, provides ample headroom for the GPU to operate at its full potential.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER achieves a combo rank of 2100 out of 2980 tested combos in Overpower. This places the system in the lower third of all tested configurations, which is consistent with the GPU being an older, end-of-life product relative to the CPU's newer status.

The CPU alone performs well in synthetic benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 58386 and a percentile rank of 92 against all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M at 58323 (0.1% ahead), the Intel Xeon w5-2545 at 58504 (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core i9-14900 at 58115 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 at 58826 (0.7% ahead). These deltas are negligible, indicating that the Ryzen 7 9850X3D sits in a tightly contested performance band among top-tier processors.

The GPU, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 18093 and a percentile rank of 62 against all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile at 18159 (0.4% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 at 18189 (0.5% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 460 at 18373 (1.5% ahead), and the Intel Arc A770M at 18383 (1.6% ahead). The GPU's mid-pack percentile ranking explains why the total combo lands at position 2100: a strong CPU paired with a mid-range GPU produces a system that is well above the bottom tier but far from the top.

The disparity between the CPU's 92nd percentile and the GPU's 62nd percentile means that in Overpower, the combo's ranking is dragged down by the graphics card. The data shows that the CPU is capable of far more than the GPU can feed it in this game. However, the combo rank of 2100 out of 2980 is not a poor result in absolute terms; it places the system ahead of roughly 30% of tested configurations, which is respectable given the GPU's age and market position.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance on which settings preset offers the best experience for this combination. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 81 FPS average with a minimum of 69 FPS and a maximum of 93 FPS. This is a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and the minimum frame rate indicates that dips are relatively rare and mild.

The High preset at 1080p produces 75 FPS average, which is also playable but offers less headroom above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 62 FPS average, which is right at the edge of smoothness and could result in noticeable stutter during intense action sequences. The Low preset at 1080p achieves 129 FPS, but the visual quality trade-off is substantial and unnecessary given the Medium results.

At 2560x1440, Medium again appears to be the sweet spot. The 72 FPS average with a 61 FPS minimum keeps the experience above 60 FPS in most scenarios. High at 1440p yields 67 FPS average, while Ultra falls to 56 FPS, which is below the ideal threshold. Low at 1440p reaches 115 FPS, but the visual compromise is steep.

For 3840x2160, the situation changes. Medium produces 61 FPS average with a 52 FPS minimum, which means the experience will dip below 60 FPS at times. High at 4K is 57 FPS average, and Ultra is 47 FPS. Low at 4K achieves 98 FPS, providing a smooth experience but with significant visual downgrades. For 4K, the best balance is Medium if the user can tolerate occasional drops below 60 FPS, or Low if consistent smoothness is the priority.

The data strongly favors Medium settings at 1080p and 1440p as the optimal choice. At 1080p, Medium provides a 25% improvement over High while maintaining visual quality that is still far better than Low. At 1440p, Medium offers the only preset besides Low that consistently stays above 60 FPS. For 4K, users must choose between the 61 FPS average of Medium or the 98 FPS of Low, depending on their tolerance for visual compromises.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured frame rates span a wide range across settings. Low averages 129 FPS, Medium averages 81 FPS with a minimum of 69 FPS and maximum of 93 FPS, High averages 75 FPS, and Ultra averages 62 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 67 FPS, which is more than double the Ultra frame rate. The Medium preset's documented range of 69-93 FPS shows that the system maintains a relatively stable frame delivery at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 115 FPS, Medium averages 72 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS and maximum of 83 FPS, High averages 67 FPS, and Ultra averages 56 FPS. The Medium range at 1440p is tighter than at 1080p, with a 22 FPS spread between minimum and maximum. The step from Medium to High at 1440p is only 5 FPS, while the step from High to Ultra is 11 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset imposes a disproportionately heavy load on the GPU.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 98 FPS, Medium averages 61 FPS with a minimum of 52 FPS and maximum of 70 FPS, High averages 57 FPS, and Ultra averages 47 FPS. The Medium range at 4K has an 18 FPS spread, which is the smallest of all resolutions for that preset. The scaling from 1080p Low to 4K Low is a 31 FPS drop, while the scaling from 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra is a 15 FPS drop. This indicates that the Ultra preset is already so demanding at 1080p that the additional pixel count at 4K has a proportionally smaller impact.

The complete data set shows that at every resolution, the Low preset provides frame rates that are roughly 60-70% higher than the Ultra preset. The Medium preset consistently delivers frame rates that are 10-15 FPS below High at each resolution, while Ultra is 13-19 FPS below High. The measured minimum and maximum values for Medium at each resolution provide the only documented variance data, with 1080p showing the widest range at 24 FPS, 1440p at 22 FPS, and 4K at 18 FPS.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture using the TU106 chip fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 10,800 million transistors on a die size of 445 mm², with a transistor density of 24.3M per mm². The GPU operates at a base clock of 1470 MHz and a boost clock of 1650 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz or 14 Gbps effective.

The memory subsystem consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is directly relevant to Overpower's performance at high resolutions. The 4K Medium result of 61 FPS and the 4K Ultra result of 47 FPS indicate that the GPU is being pushed hard at this resolution, and the 8 GB frame buffer is sufficient for the tested settings but does not allow for much headroom beyond the Ultra preset.

The GPU's compute resources include 2176 shading units, 136 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. It also features 34 ray tracing cores and 272 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 105.6 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 224.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 7.181 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 14.36 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio.

The GPU's benchmark scores show a Passmark G3D score of 16462 and a Passmark GPU compute score of 6721. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2011, while Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 76957 and 77402 respectively. The Passmark DirectX scores are notably lower, with DirectX 11 at 130, DirectX 12 at 61, and DirectX 9 at 218.

The GPU's percentile rank of 62 against all GPUs places it in the upper-middle range, but its nearest rivals include mobile and older desktop parts. The RTX 3060 Mobile is 0.4% ahead, the Radeon Pro 5700 is 0.5% ahead, and the Radeon RX 460 is 1.5% ahead. This clustering suggests that the RTX 2060 SUPER is at the edge of its performance class, which is consistent with its end-of-life production status.

The 175 W TDP and dual-slot design with a single 8-pin power connector indicate that this GPU is not designed for extreme overclocking or sustained high-power operation. The suggested PSU of 450 W is modest, and the PCIe 3.0 x16 interface provides adequate bandwidth for the GPU's needs.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 60+ FPS?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium averages 81 FPS with a 69 FPS minimum, and High averages 75 FPS. At 2560x1440, Medium averages 72 FPS with a 61 FPS minimum. At 3840x2160, only Low (98 FPS) and Medium (61 FPS average, 52 FPS minimum) are viable, with Medium dipping below 60 FPS at times.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested systems in Overpower?

A: The combo ranks 2100 out of 2980 tested combinations. The CPU alone is in the 92nd percentile, while the GPU is in the 62nd percentile, and the total combo's ranking reflects the GPU's mid-pack position dragging down the strong CPU performance.

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

A: Low averages 129 FPS at 1920x1080, while Ultra averages 62 FPS. This represents a 67 FPS difference, meaning Low provides more than double the frame rate of Ultra at the same resolution.

Q: Does the CPU bottleneck the GPU in this game?

A: The data suggests no CPU bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 129 FPS, which would be limited if the CPU were the constraint. The wide frame rate spread across settings at each resolution indicates the GPU is the primary limiter.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values for Medium settings at each resolution?

A: At 1920x1080, the minimum is 69 FPS. At 2560x1440, the minimum is 61 FPS. At 3840x2160, the minimum is 52 FPS. These are the only documented minimum values in the measured data.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 SUPER compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 18093. Its nearest rivals are the RTX 3060 Mobile at 18159 (0.4% ahead), Radeon Pro 5700 at 18189 (0.5% ahead), Radeon RX 460 at 18373 (1.5% ahead), and Arc A770M at 18383 (1.6% ahead).

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is a desktop processor from the 9000 series, built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename. It uses a 4 nm process at TSMC with 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die. The CPU features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz.

The cache hierarchy is substantial: 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 96 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 cache is a defining characteristic of the X3D series and provides significant benefits in games that are sensitive to cache capacity. The CPU supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, along with ECC memory support.

The CPU's benchmark results are strong across the board. In Cinebench R15, it scores 3551 in multicore and 343 in single-core. Cinebench R23 results are 22807 in multicore and 2228 in single-core. Passmark scores include 41318 in multithread, 4704 in single-thread, 123140 in integer math, and 81998 in floating point math. The data compression score is 474501 and data encryption is 22856.

The CPU's average benchmark score is 58386, with a percentile rank of 92 against all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M with a delta of 0.1%, the Intel Xeon w5-2545 with a delta of -0.2%, the Intel Core i9-14900 with a delta of 0.5%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 with a delta of -0.7%. These deltas are all under 1%, indicating that the 9850X3D is performance-equivalent to several high-end server and desktop processors.

In the context of Overpower, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with data and maintain consistent frame pacing. The measured FPS values show that at 1080p Low, the system reaches 129 FPS, which requires the CPU to handle game logic, physics, and draw calls at a high rate. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration with the large 96 MB L3 cache is well-suited to this task. The CPU's 5.60 GHz boost clock provides strong single-thread performance, as evidenced by the 2228 Cinebench R23 single-core score and the 4704 Passmark single-thread score.

The CPU's 120 W TDP and unlockable multiplier make it a versatile part for various workloads, though the game's performance is not limited by CPU capability in this configuration. The data shows that the RTX 2060 SUPER is the component that determines the frame rate ceilings at each settings and resolution combination. The CPU's 92nd percentile ranking versus the GPU's 62nd percentile creates a significant imbalance, but this imbalance does not cause any measurable CPU bottleneck in the tested configurations.