Overpower

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured frame rates for this Intel Core i7-13700K + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination reveal a predictable but steep drop as resolution climbs. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 62.4 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 52.8 FPS, a decline of roughly 15%. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 44.9 FPS, which is about 28% below the 1080p figure. The scaling from 1440p to 4K is less severe than the jump from 1080p to 1440p, suggesting the GPU is already near its practical ceiling at the lower resolution.

The High preset tells a similar story but with lower absolute numbers. At 1080p High, the combo averages 35.8 FPS. At 1440p High, it drops to 30.1 FPS, and at 4K High it reaches only 28.4 FPS. Interestingly, the gap between 1440p and 4K High is just 1.7 FPS, while the gap between 1080p and 1440p is 5.7 FPS. This compression of frame rates at higher resolutions indicates that the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory bus are overwhelmed early, and further resolution increases yield diminishing returns because the GPU is already saturated.

The data implies that the GTX 1650 is the primary limiting component at every resolution tested. The Core i7-13700K, with its 16 cores and boost clock of 5.40 GHz, is far more capable than what this GPU can feed. At 1080p Low, the 62.4 FPS result might hint at some CPU headroom remaining, but even there, the GPU's 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 93.24 GTexel/s texture rate are modest figures that cap performance. The pattern across all four settings — Low, Medium, High, Ultra — shows that raising quality settings costs more frames than lowering resolution does, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo if I prioritize smooth gameplay over visuals?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 with Low settings delivers the highest average FPS at 62.4. This is the only configuration in the entire dataset that exceeds 60 FPS, making it the sole option for fluid motion in fast-paced action.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: At Low settings, the drop is from 62.4 FPS at 1080p to 44.9 FPS at 4K, a reduction of 17.5 FPS. At High settings, the loss is smaller in absolute terms, going from 35.8 FPS to 28.4 FPS, a difference of 7.4 FPS.

Q: Does the Ultra preset ever become playable at any resolution?

A: The Ultra preset produces 27.8 FPS at 1080p, 27.1 FPS at 1440p, and 23.7 FPS at 4K. None of these figures reach 30 FPS, so the data suggests Ultra is not a viable option for this combination at any measured resolution.

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

A: The combo ranks 1702 out of 1744 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 2.4% of all systems evaluated for this game. This indicates that the pairing is significantly underpowered relative to the broader test pool.

Q: Is there a meaningful difference between Medium and High settings at the same resolution?

A: At 1080p, Medium averages 36.5 FPS while High averages 35.8 FPS, a difference of just 0.7 FPS. At 1440p, the gap widens slightly to 2.5 FPS (32.6 vs 30.1), and at 4K it narrows again to 2.9 FPS (31.3 vs 28.4). The data shows Medium and High are nearly interchangeable in terms of frame rate cost.

Q: What does the percentile ranking for the CPU and GPU suggest about this pairing?

A: The Core i7-13700K sits in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the GTX 1650 sits in the 43rd percentile among all GPUs. This stark contrast in relative standing confirms that the GPU is the bottleneck, as the processor's high percentile is wasted on a graphics card that ranks below average.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear hierarchy for playability. For users targeting 60 FPS, the only option is 1080p Low at 62.4 FPS. No other preset at any resolution reaches that threshold. If 30 FPS is the minimum acceptable bar, then several configurations qualify: 1080p Medium (36.5), 1080p High (35.8), 1440p Medium (32.6), 1440p High (30.1), 4K Medium (31.3), and 1440p Low (52.8). The 4K Low setting at 44.9 FPS also clears 30 FPS but sacrifices resolution for quality.

Given the data, the best experience balances frame rate and visual fidelity. The 1440p Medium setting at 32.6 FPS offers a higher resolution than 1080p while still maintaining playable frame rates. However, the jump from 1080p Low to 1440p Low (62.4 to 52.8 FPS) is a smaller frame rate penalty than the jump from 1080p Low to 1080p Medium (62.4 to 36.5 FPS). This suggests that users should first lower resolution to 1080p if they want to enable higher quality presets, as the GPU handles resolution scaling better than it handles increased shading complexity.

For the most consistent experience, 1080p Low is the recommended preset. It is the only configuration that provides headroom above 60 FPS, and the large drop to 36.5 FPS at Medium indicates that the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM is likely spilling over when texture quality increases. The 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth is insufficient for higher presets, so staying at Low avoids VRAM-related stutters that the average FPS figures would not capture.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the combo delivers 44.9 FPS on Low, 31.3 FPS on Medium, 28.4 FPS on High, and 23.7 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 21.2 FPS, with the largest single drop occurring between Low and Medium (13.6 FPS). The gap between Medium and High is 2.9 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 4.7 FPS. This non-linear pattern suggests that the Low to Medium transition introduces a significant rendering cost, likely related to texture and shadow quality, while further preset escalations add progressively less overhead.

At 2560x1440, the results are 52.8 FPS on Low, 32.6 FPS on Medium, 30.1 FPS on High, and 27.1 FPS on Ultra. The Low to Medium drop here is 20.2 FPS, which is even steeper than at 4K. Interesting, the Medium to High gap narrows to 2.5 FPS, and High to Ultra is 3.0 FPS. The 1440p Low result is the second-highest frame rate in the entire dataset, trailing only 1080p Low.

At 1920x1080, the combo produces 62.4 FPS on Low, 36.5 FPS on Medium, 35.8 FPS on High, and 27.8 FPS on Ultra. The Low to Medium drop is 25.9 FPS, the largest single transition in the dataset. Medium and High are nearly identical, with a delta of just 0.7 FPS. The High to Ultra drop is 8.0 FPS. Across all resolutions, the Low preset consistently offers the highest frame rates, and the Medium preset offers the best compromise between quality and performance, as High adds almost no visual benefit for a measurable cost at 1080p.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 1702 out of 1744 tested combinations in Overpower, placing it in the bottom 42 positions of the entire database. This ranking puts it in the lowest 2.4% of all systems tested for this game. The poor standing is unsurprising given the GPU's percentile of 43, which means over half of all GPUs outperform it. The CPU's percentile of 93 is exceptionally high, but the pairing with a GTX 1650 means the processor's capabilities are largely untapped in this action title.

The rank suggests that this combo is suited for low-resolution, low-preset gaming only. The measured FPS data confirms that the system cannot maintain 60 FPS at any preset above Low, and even 1080p Low barely clears that threshold. The delta between this combo and the top-performing systems is not directly measured in the pack, but the rank of 1702 out of 1744 implies a substantial performance gap. This is a case where the CPU is holding up its end of the bargain — the Core i7-13700K's 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 16 cores provide ample compute headroom — but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 2.984 TFLOPS are simply inadequate for modern action game demands at higher settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-13700K is a 16-core, 24-thread processor based on Raptor Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process. Its base clock is 3.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, and it scores 39000 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 5505 in single-core. The 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms its high-end positioning. In Overpower, the data shows that this processor is not the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 62.4 FPS, but that figure is capped by the GPU, not the CPU.

The CPU's 3DMark scores — 12412 at max threads and 1136 at single thread — indicate strong multi-threaded and single-threaded performance. Action games like Overpower typically benefit from high single-core clocks, and the 5.40 GHz boost clock is well-suited to such workloads. However, the measured FPS data shows no scenario where the CPU becomes the bottleneck. Even at 4K Low (44.9 FPS), the frame rate is still limited by the GPU's pixel throughput of 53.28 GPixel/s. The CPU's 16 cores and 24 threads are more than sufficient to feed the GTX 1650, meaning any performance upgrades would need to come from the GPU side.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture GPU built on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It features 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. The 4 GB GDDR5 memory runs on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. Its 43rd percentile ranking places it below average among all GPUs, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305 is a clear indicator of limited modern rendering capability.

In Overpower, the GPU is the definitive bottleneck. The measured FPS data shows that increasing resolution from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings costs 9.6 FPS, while increasing from 1440p to 4K costs 7.9 FPS. This pattern aligns with the GPU's memory bandwidth limitations — the 128.1 GB/s is insufficient for high-resolution texture streaming. The 4 GB VRAM is also a concern, as the steep drop from Low to Medium settings at every resolution (25.9 FPS at 1080p, 20.2 FPS at 1440p, 13.6 FPS at 4K) suggests that Medium presets exceed the VRAM capacity, causing the GPU to thrash. The GTX 1650's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors indicate a modest design, and the data shows that this modesty translates directly into sub-30 FPS performance at Ultra settings across all resolutions.