Overpower

# Overpower with Intel Core i5-9400 + AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT

This combination pairs a six-core Intel Core i5-9400 from the Coffee Lake generation with an AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT, a high-end RDNA 3.0 GPU with 20 GB of GDDR6 memory. The measured frame rates in Overpower show a system that delivers strong performance across all tested resolutions, though the CPU's position in the broader benchmark landscape suggests it may be the limiting factor in some scenarios. The data indicates this combo ranks 489th out of 1,744 tested combinations in this game, placing it in the upper portion of the field.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 489 out of 1,744 tested combinations places it comfortably within the top third of all systems tested for Overpower. This positioning reflects the substantial GPU contribution, given that the Radeon RX 7900 XT sits at the 82nd percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Intel Core i5-9400, by contrast, sits at exactly the 50th percentile among all CPUs, meaning half of all processors tested outperform it on average benchmark scores. The combination of a mid-tier CPU with a high-tier GPU creates an interesting dynamic: the GPU is clearly the dominant component, but the CPU's performance ceiling will eventually limit how much of that GPU power can be utilized.

In terms of CPU benchmark averages, the i5-9400 scores 2305 points, placing it within 0.2% of the Intel Core i3-10305 (2300 points) and the Intel Core i3-1125G4 (2299 points). It runs 0.4% ahead of the Intel Xeon E-2134 (2295 points) and 0.6% behind the Intel Core i7-8809G (2319 points). These are all very close scores, indicating that the i5-9400 performs similarly to several other mid-range processors from its era. The GPU's average benchmark score of 38358 places it essentially level with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile (38349 points, 0% delta) and 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 70HX (38225 points). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 by 0.4% (38494 points) and leads the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile by 0.6% (38135 points).

The practical implication for Overpower is that at lower resolutions and settings, the CPU becomes more relevant, while at higher resolutions and settings, the GPU workload dominates. The measured frame rates support this interpretation: the gap between the best and worst settings narrows as resolution increases, which is consistent with the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck at higher pixel counts.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is the centerpiece of this configuration, and its specifications explain why it drives such high frame rates in Overpower. The GPU is built on the Navi 31 chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture and a 5 nm process from TSMC. It contains 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 109.1 million per square millimeter. The memory subsystem provides 20 GB of GDDR6 across a 320-bit bus, delivering 800.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This large memory pool is particularly relevant for modern titles like Overpower, which was released in 2023 and can demand substantial video memory at high settings and resolutions.

The GPU's clock behavior shows a base clock of 1387 MHz, a game clock of 2025 MHz, and a boost clock of 2394 MHz. The memory operates at 2500 MHz, which translates to 20 Gbps effective. Compute resources include 5376 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 192 render output units, along with 84 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate is 459.6 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 804.4 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 51.48 TFLOPS and FP16 at 103.0 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio).

For Overpower specifically, the 20 GB VRAM capacity means the GPU will not hit memory limits even at 4K with Ultra settings, based on the measured data. The 101.1 FPS average at 4K High and 85.8 FPS at 4K Ultra demonstrate that the GPU has enough headroom to maintain playable frame rates at the most demanding configurations. The GPU's 82nd percentile ranking among all GPUs reinforces that this is a high-performance part, and its average benchmark score of 38358 places it in the company of other strong GPUs like the RTX 5080 Mobile and RTX 4080 Mobile.

FAQ

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations in Overpower?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 with AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT ranks 489th out of 1,744 tested combinations in Overpower, placing it in the top third of all systems tested.

Q: What is the best measured frame rate for this combo?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 159.5 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 152.9 FPS at 2560x1440 with Low settings, followed by 146.2 FPS at 3840x2160 with Low settings.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 scores 2305 in average benchmark tests, which is 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i3-10305 (2300), 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i3-1125G4 (2299), 0.4% ahead of the Intel Xeon E-2134 (2295), and 0.6% behind the Intel Core i7-8809G (2319).

Q: What GPU benchmark scores does the RX 7900 XT achieve?

A: The GPU scores 5623 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 169834 in Geekbench OpenCL, 160119 in Geekbench Vulkan, and 29009 in Passmark G3D. Its overall average benchmark score is 38358.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the Low setting produces 146.2 FPS average, while Ultra produces 85.8 FPS average. This represents a difference of 60.4 FPS between the two settings, with Low being approximately 70% faster than Ultra.

Q: How does the GPU compare to the nearest rival GPUs?

A: The RX 7900 XT's average score of 38358 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile (38349, 0% delta), 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 70HX (38225), 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38135), and 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 (38494).

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates for this combo span three resolutions and four quality settings each. At 1920x1080, the lowest tested resolution, the system achieves 159.5 FPS average on Low settings, 131.4 FPS on Medium, 127.6 FPS on High, and 109.0 FPS on Ultra. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 50.5 FPS drop, which is the largest relative decrease across all resolutions in percentage terms. The gap between Medium and High is relatively small at 3.8 FPS, suggesting that the High preset adds visual quality without a substantial performance penalty compared to Medium.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain strong. Low settings deliver 152.9 FPS average, Medium delivers 126.0 FPS, High delivers 119.4 FPS, and Ultra delivers 99.7 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra here is 53.2 FPS, and the gap between Medium and High narrows to 6.6 FPS. Compared to 1080p, the 1440p results show a modest decline: Low drops by 6.6 FPS, Medium by 5.4 FPS, High by 8.2 FPS, and Ultra by 9.3 FPS. These relatively small reductions indicate that the GPU has ample headroom at these resolutions.

At 3840x2160, the highest tested resolution, the system still maintains playable frame rates across all settings. Low settings average 146.2 FPS, Medium averages 110.1 FPS, High averages 101.1 FPS, and Ultra averages 85.8 FPS. The 60.4 FPS spread between Low and Ultra is the largest absolute difference observed across all resolutions. The step from Medium to High costs only 9.0 FPS, while the step from High to Ultra costs 15.3 FPS, making Ultra the most expensive setting in terms of performance per frame.

When comparing across resolutions at the same settings, the 4K results show the GPU scaling as expected. At High settings, 1080p produces 127.6 FPS, 1440p produces 119.4 FPS, and 4K produces 101.1 FPS. At Ultra settings, the figures are 109.0 FPS, 99.7 FPS, and 85.8 FPS respectively. The consistent pattern across all settings confirms that the GPU is the primary driver of performance, with the CPU providing sufficient support to avoid major bottlenecks.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data suggests that the High preset offers the most balanced experience across all three resolutions. At 1920x1080, High settings deliver 127.6 FPS average, which is only 3.8 FPS less than Medium but provides better visual quality. At 2560x1440, High produces 119.4 FPS, a 6.6 FPS reduction from Medium that is well worth the visual improvement. At 3840x2160, High achieves 101.1 FPS, which is above the 100 FPS threshold and represents a 9.0 FPS cost over Medium.

For users who prioritize maximum frame rates, Low settings are clearly the best choice, with 159.5 FPS at 1080p, 152.9 FPS at 1440p, and 146.2 FPS at 4K. The relative consistency of Low settings across resolutions suggests that the GPU is not fully utilized at this preset, and the CPU may be limiting performance. The jump from Low to Medium costs roughly 28.1 FPS at 1080p, 26.9 FPS at 1440p, and 36.1 FPS at 4K, which are substantial penalties for the visual upgrade.

Ultra settings, while visually demanding, still produce playable results even at 4K with 85.8 FPS average. However, the additional cost of moving from High to Ultra is steep: 18.6 FPS at 1080p, 19.7 FPS at 1440p, and 15.3 FPS at 4K. Given that High already provides strong visual fidelity, the Ultra preset's performance penalty is difficult to justify unless the user has a high refresh rate display and wants maximum quality at lower resolutions.

The ideal recommendation is the High preset at any resolution, as it consistently delivers frame rates well above 100 FPS. For competitive play where frame rate is paramount, Low settings at 1080p provide the highest possible performance. For immersive single-player experiences at 4K, High settings offer the best combination of visual quality and performance, with Ultra remaining viable for users who accept the frame rate trade-off.