Overpower

Overpower is an action title that stresses both processor and graphics hardware, and the combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 delivers a high-refresh-rate experience across all tested resolutions. The measured data places this pairing at rank 201 out of 3713 recorded configurations, indicating top-tier performance. With the CPU landing in the 92nd percentile of all processors and the GPU in the 86th percentile of all graphics cards, this system is built for demanding scenarios, though the scaling patterns reveal where each component carries the load.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The measured average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 130 FPS. This is the most demanding preset tested at this resolution, and it still clears the 120 FPS threshold comfortably, indicating strong headroom for high-refresh-rate monitors.

Q: How much faster is the Ryzen 9 9900X compared to its closest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X has an average benchmark score of 57498, which is 0.1% behind the AMD EPYC 9015 (score 57555) and 0.2% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7313 (score 57399). Against the Intel Core i9-14900 (score 58115), the Ryzen 9 9900X trails by 1.1%.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 outperform the RTX 4080 SUPER in the database?

A: The RTX 4080 has an average benchmark score of 54247, which is 0.1% higher than the RTX 4080 SUPER’s score of 54209. The delta is marginal, meaning the two cards are effectively performance equals in the aggregated data.

Q: What is the largest FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 205 FPS while Ultra averages 99 FPS, a difference of 106 FPS. This represents a 107% performance uplift from Ultra to Low, showing that settings have a profound impact at this resolution.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded across all tested configurations?

A: The only configuration with a recorded minimum FPS is the Medium preset, where the 4K run shows 109 FPS, the 1440p run shows 128 FPS, and the 1080p run shows 144 FPS. No minimum FPS data is available for Low, High, or Ultra presets in the measured rows.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X scores 57498 on average, which is 1.4% lower than the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M’s score of 58323. Despite the delta, the Ryzen part is a desktop-focused chip with 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Xeon is a server platform part.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor built on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge) using a 4 nm process from TSMC. Its base clock is 4.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, and it carries a 120 W TDP. The chip features 64 MB of L3 cache alongside 1 MB of L2 per core and 80 KB of L1 per core. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, delivering 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and the platform uses AMD Socket AM5 with PCIe Gen 5 connectivity (24 lanes from the CPU).

In synthetic workloads, the CPU shows strong scaling from 2 to 16 threads. The 3DMark scores climb from 2519 at 2 threads to 9114 at 8 threads and 12552 at 16 threads, with the max-thread score reaching 13929. The single-thread score of 1286 in 3DMark pairs with a Cinebench R23 single-core result of 2253 and a multi-core result of 32172. The CPU’s percentile rank of 92 against all CPUs underscores its position near the top of the desktop hierarchy, though its nearest rivals include server parts like the AMD EPYC 9015 and EPYC 7313, which trade blows within a 0.2% delta.

For Overpower, the CPU’s role is evident in the 1080p Low preset, where the average FPS reaches 271. At this low graphical load, the GPU is not the bottleneck, and the 12-core processor’s high boost clock and substantial cache keep frame generation high. The Ryzen 9 9900X’s multi-threaded prowess (Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32172) also helps maintain consistent frame pacing in action scenes, which often have physics and AI computations running in parallel with rendering. The data shows that even at 4K Ultra (99 FPS), the CPU provides enough headroom to avoid dropping frame rates below what the GPU can deliver, though the GPU becomes the primary limiter at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture (AD103 chip) using TSMC’s 5 nm process. It features 9728 shading units, 304 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output units, along with 76 ray tracing cores and 304 tensor cores. The GPU’s base clock is 2205 MHz with a boost clock of 2505 MHz, and its memory subsystem consists of 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, yielding 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The card has a 320 W TDP and is triple-slot in width, requiring a 700 W power supply.

The RTX 4080’s benchmark scores show strong compute performance: Passmark G3D scores 34457, while Geekbench Vulkan reaches 263779 and OpenCL hits 214739. Its percentile rank of 86 against all GPUs is slightly lower than the CPU’s 92, but the nearest rivals tell a story of tight competition. The RTX 4080 SUPER is 0.1% behind the RTX 4080, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.1% ahead, and the Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB trails by 2.6%.

In Overpower, the GPU’s influence is most visible when comparing Low to Ultra presets. At 1080p, the Low preset hits 271 FPS, but Ultra drops to 130 FPS—a 141 FPS swing that is driven by the increased graphical workload on the RTX 4080’s shading units and memory. The GPU’s boost clock of 2505 MHz ensures high throughput when the scene is complex, but the measured data shows that at 4K Ultra, the average FPS falls to 99, which is below the 120 FPS threshold that the 1080p Ultra preset achieves. The 16 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for the game’s high-resolution textures, and the 716.8 GB/s bandwidth supports the data transfer needed at 4K without apparent stutter, as the Medium preset at 4K maintains a 109 FPS minimum.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the RTX 4080 and Ryzen 9 9900X produce the following average frame rates: Low settings yield 271 FPS, Medium settings yield 169 FPS (with a minimum of 144 and maximum of 194), High settings yield 157 FPS, and Ultra settings yield 130 FPS. The progression shows a 141 FPS drop from Low to Ultra, which is the largest absolute reduction across all resolutions.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 241 FPS for Low, 151 FPS for Medium (minimum 128, maximum 173), 140 FPS for High, and 116 FPS for Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra is 125 FPS, slightly less than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is starting to take on more load as pixel count increases.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 205 FPS for Low, 128 FPS for Medium (minimum 109, maximum 147), 119 FPS for High, and 99 FPS for Ultra. The difference between Low and Ultra is 106 FPS, the smallest absolute gap among the three resolutions. This pattern suggests that at 4K, even the Low preset is demanding enough to keep the GPU busy, while at 1080p, the CPU has more room to push frame rates higher when graphical settings are lowered.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals how the workload shifts between CPU and GPU. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 271 at 1080p to 205 at 4K—a 66 FPS reduction (24.4% lower). At Ultra settings, the drop is from 130 FPS at 1080p to 99 FPS at 4K—a 31 FPS reduction (23.8% lower). The percentage drop is similar across presets, but the absolute numbers tell a different story.

When resolution increases, the GPU must render more pixels, which directly impacts its fill rate and memory bandwidth. The RTX 4080’s pixel rate is 280.6 GPixel/s, and at 4K (3840x2160), the total pixel count is 8.3 million per frame, whereas at 1080p it is 2.1 million. The data shows that at Ultra settings, the 4K frame rate (99 FPS) is 76% of the 1080p frame rate (130 FPS), which is a smaller relative loss than the pixel count would suggest (since 4K has 4 times as many pixels). This indicates that the RTX 4080 is not purely pixel-bound at 4K Ultra; the CPU still contributes to frame generation.

Conversely, at Low settings, the 4K frame rate (205 FPS) is 76% of the 1080p frame rate (271 FPS), similar to the Ultra scaling. However, the absolute headroom at Low settings (205 FPS at 4K) shows that the GPU is not the limiting factor even at high pixel counts when graphical complexity is minimal—the CPU’s 12 cores keep feeding the GPU rapidly. The limiting component shifts more toward the GPU at higher settings and resolutions, as evidenced by the Ultra preset at 4K falling to 99 FPS, which sits just below the 100 FPS mark.

Settings Recommendations

For players targeting 4K with a high-refresh-rate display, the Medium preset is the strongest choice based on the measured data. At 3840x2160, Medium produces an average of 128 FPS with a minimum of 109 FPS, which stays above the 100 FPS threshold. High settings drop to 119 FPS average, and while that still exceeds 60 FPS, it lacks the minimum FPS headroom that Medium provides. Ultra at 4K averages only 99 FPS, which may feel less smooth on a 120 Hz or 144 Hz monitor.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset again offers the best balance, with an average of 151 FPS and a minimum of 128 FPS. High settings average 140 FPS, and Ultra averages 116 FPS, both of which are playable, but Medium ensures the minimum never dips below 120 FPS. For competitive play at 1440p, Low settings push the average to 241 FPS, which maximizes refresh rate potential, though it sacrifices visual fidelity.

At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers an average of 157 FPS, which is sufficient for most high-refresh-rate panels (144 Hz). Medium is slightly faster at 169 FPS, and Ultra still averages 130 FPS. The data suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is strong enough to keep frame rates high even at Ultra, so the choice between Medium and High depends on whether the user prefers the 169 FPS average of Medium or the visual quality of High with a 157 FPS average. Low settings at 271 FPS are only relevant for extreme refresh rate displays (240 Hz or higher) where maximum frame generation is prioritized over image quality.