Overpower

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a combination that heavily favors the processor in raw compute potential, but the graphics card dictates the gaming experience. In Overpower, this pairing produces playable frame rates only at lower resolutions and settings, with the GTX 1650’s 4 GB VRAM and limited shader count acting as the primary constraint. The CPU, which sits in the 85th percentile of all tested processors, has ample headroom that the GPU simply cannot exploit in this action title. The measured performance data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases, frame rates collapse, confirming that this is a GPU-bound scenario across all tested settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Overpower reveals a steep performance drop when moving from 1080p to 4K. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 62 FPS at 1920x1080 to 55 FPS at 2560x1440, then to 47 FPS at 3840x2160. That is a 24% reduction from 1080p to 4K, but the more telling drop occurs at higher settings. At High settings, the average goes from 36 FPS at 1080p to 32 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 27 FPS at 4K — a 25% loss from the starting point. The Ultra preset shows a similar trend: 30 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 23 FPS at 4K. These numbers indicate that the GTX 1650 is the limiting component at every resolution, but the severity of the bottleneck intensifies as pixel count rises.

The scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that has only 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and a 128-bit memory bus. At 1080p, the card can keep average frame rates above 30 FPS for Low and Medium settings, but even the High preset dips to 36 FPS. Moving to 1440p, the Low preset remains playable at 55 FPS, but Medium drops to 34 FPS and High to 32 FPS. At 4K, no preset achieves 30 FPS — Low reaches 47 FPS, but Medium falls to 29 FPS and High to 27 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K is the worst case at 23 FPS. This resolution scaling behavior suggests that the GPU’s pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth are insufficient for 4K rendering, while the CPU’s 10 cores and 20 MB of L3 cache are never the bottleneck. The data shows that the frame rate differences between 1440p and 4K are smaller than those between 1080p and 1440p, indicating that the GPU is already saturated at 1440p and additional resolution only worsens the situation marginally.

For a practical builder, this means that 1080p is the only viable resolution for smooth gameplay, and even then, only Low or Medium settings deliver acceptable averages. The 62 FPS at 1080p Low is the only measured configuration that clears the 60 FPS threshold. All other 1080p presets fall below 40 FPS, which is suboptimal for an action game where reaction time matters. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with the best case being 47 FPS at Low — still below the standard 60 FPS target. The scaling data strongly indicates that the CPU’s 4.90 GHz boost clock and 3.30 GHz base clock are irrelevant to the outcome; the GTX 1650’s 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 performance is the ceiling.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture with a TU117 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process. Its specifications include 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The base clock runs at 1485 MHz, boosting to 1665 MHz, with memory clocked at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The 4 GB GDDR5 memory operates over a 128-bit bus, yielding 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. These figures place the card in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7472. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, deltaPct +0.3), the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441, +0.4), and the AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425, +0.6). The Intel Arc A310 scores 7550, which is 1% higher. This context shows that the GTX 1650 is a low-end discrete GPU, barely outpacing integrated graphics solutions.

In Overpower, the GPU’s role is decisive. The measured FPS data shows that the card’s 4 GB VRAM is insufficient for Ultra settings at any resolution, as the Ultra preset yields the lowest averages everywhere: 30 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 23 FPS at 4K. The High preset performs only slightly better, with 36, 32, and 27 FPS respectively. The Medium preset is the sweet spot for this card, delivering 39 FPS at 1080p, 34 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K. The Low preset is the only one that approaches playability at higher resolutions, reaching 62 FPS at 1080p, 55 FPS at 1440p, and 47 FPS at 4K. The difference between Low and Medium at 1080p is 23 FPS (62 vs. 39), which is a substantial jump, indicating that the Medium preset introduces significant shading and texture loads that the GPU cannot handle.

The card’s clock speeds are modest by modern standards, and the boost clock of 1665 MHz is not enough to offset the low shader count. The pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s are the hard limits for Overpower’s rendering demands. The memory bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s is also a constraint, particularly at 4K where the frame buffer pressure increases. The data shows that the GPU’s 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it a low-power solution, but that does not translate to higher performance. The card’s DirectX 12 support (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility are fine, but the raw hardware is simply outclassed by the game’s requirements at higher presets.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Overpower at 60 FPS?

A: Only at 1080p with Low settings, where the average FPS is 62. All other tested configurations fall below 60 FPS, with the next best being 55 FPS at 1440p Low.

Q: What is the best resolution for this pairing?

A: 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the average FPS stays above 30 for all presets. At 1440p, Low remains playable at 55 FPS, but Medium drops to 34 FPS. At 4K, even Low only reaches 47 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in this game?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447), 0.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441), and 0.6% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425). The Intel Arc A310 is 1% faster at 7550.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 the bottleneck in Overpower?

A: No. The CPU has an average benchmark score of 36938, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, scores 36945 (0% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D scores 37018 (-0.2%). The GPU’s 40th percentile score of 7472 is far lower, making it the limiting component.

Q: What settings should I use for the smoothest experience?

A: Low settings at 1080p provide the highest average FPS at 62. If you prefer Medium, expect 39 FPS at 1080p. For a balance of visual quality and performance, Medium at 1080p is the recommended preset, as it stays above 30 FPS.

Q: Does the 4 GB VRAM affect performance at 4K?

A: Yes. The 4K Ultra preset averages 23 FPS, and 4K High averages 27 FPS. The 4K Low preset reaches 47 FPS, but the card’s limited memory bandwidth and capacity prevent higher presets from achieving playable frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested processor and graphics card combinations for Overpower, this pairing ranks 2877 out of 2980 combos. That places it in the bottom 3.5% of all tested systems, which is consistent with the GTX 1650’s low-end positioning. The CPU, despite being in the 85th percentile, cannot compensate for the GPU’s 40th percentile standing. The combo rank reflects the overall system performance, not just the individual components. With only 103 combos ranked below it, this pairing is near the bottom of the performance ladder, meaning that most other tested configurations deliver higher frame rates in Overpower.

The rank is particularly telling when you consider the CPU’s capabilities. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25891 and a single-core score of 3655, which are strong numbers for a desktop processor. Its PassMark multi-thread score is 30459, and its data compression score is 302811. These benchmarks show that the CPU is more than capable of feeding a much faster GPU. However, the GTX 1650’s PassMark G3D score of 7880 and DirectX 12 score of 35 are the limiting factors. The combination’s rank of 2877 out of 2980 indicates that the GPU is dragging down the overall system performance, and the data suggests that upgrading the graphics card would yield significant gains.

For context, the CPU’s nearest rivals — the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945 avg score), AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018), AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 (37093), and Intel Core i9-12900T (37112) — all perform within 0.5% of the Ultra 5 225. This means the CPU is not a differentiator in this pairing; the GPU is. The combo rank is a direct consequence of the GPU’s low benchmark scores and the fact that Overpower is a graphics-intensive title. If you were to pair this CPU with a higher-tier GPU, the rank would improve dramatically, but as configured, it is a bottom-tier gaming system.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on your target frame rate. If you prioritize smoothness over visual fidelity, Low settings at 1080p are the clear choice, delivering 62 FPS on average. This is the only configuration that exceeds 60 FPS, making it suitable for fast-paced action sequences. At 1440p, Low still provides 55 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. At 4K, Low drops to 47 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold but still above 30 FPS.

If you want better image quality, the Medium preset at 1080p offers 39 FPS, which is playable but not smooth. The Medium preset at 1440p averages 34 FPS, and at 4K it falls to 29 FPS. The High preset is not recommended, as it only reaches 36 FPS at 1080p, 32 FPS at 1440p, and 27 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset is the worst option, with 30 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 23 FPS at 4K.

The data suggests that the Medium preset at 1080p is the best compromise between visual quality and performance. It provides 39 FPS, which is 7 FPS higher than High and 9 FPS higher than Ultra at the same resolution. The gap between Medium and Low at 1080p is 23 FPS, which is significant, but Medium still maintains a playable frame rate. For those with a 1440p monitor, Low is the only sensible choice, as Medium and High both fall below 35 FPS. At 4K, you should avoid this combo entirely, as the best case of 47 FPS at Low is still suboptimal for an action game.

The measured data includes minimum and maximum FPS for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 33 FPS and the maximum is 44 FPS, indicating a relatively stable frame time. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 29 FPS and the maximum is 40 FPS. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 25 FPS and the maximum is 34 FPS. These ranges show that the Medium preset maintains a consistent performance profile, which is preferable to the other presets where only average FPS is available.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low settings produce 62 FPS, Medium produces 39 FPS (with a minimum of 33 FPS and maximum of 44 FPS), High produces 36 FPS, and Ultra produces 30 FPS. This shows a clear hierarchy where Low is the only preset above 60 FPS, and the drop from Low to Medium is 23 FPS, which is the largest single-step reduction across all presets. Medium to High is a smaller 3 FPS drop, and High to Ultra is a 6 FPS drop. The 1080p results are the best this combo can offer, with the GPU being the limiting factor at every setting.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS values are: Low at 55 FPS, Medium at 34 FPS (minimum 29 FPS, maximum 40 FPS), High at 32 FPS, and Ultra at 27 FPS. The Low preset remains above 50 FPS, but Medium and High are nearly identical at 34 and 32 FPS respectively. Ultra falls to 27 FPS, which is below the playable threshold for most users. The difference between Low and Medium at 1440p is 21 FPS, slightly less than at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is still the bottleneck but the relative impact of settings is similar.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS values are: Low at 47 FPS, Medium at 29 FPS (minimum 25 FPS, maximum 34 FPS), High at 27 FPS, and Ultra at 23 FPS. The Low preset is the only one above 30 FPS, but it is still below 60 FPS. Medium and High are within 2 FPS of each other, and Ultra is 4 FPS below High. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth proving insufficient for the higher pixel count. The data shows that the frame rate drops by roughly 30% from 1080p to 4K at Low settings (62 to 47 FPS), and by 23% at High settings (36 to 27 FPS). This resolution scaling is consistent with a GPU that is operating at its limits even at 1080p.

The average FPS across all resolutions and settings provides a comprehensive picture. The highest average is 62 FPS at 1080p Low, and the lowest is 23 FPS at 4K Ultra. The median average across all 12 measured configurations is approximately 33 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target for competitive gaming. The CPU’s performance, as indicated by its Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 6317 and single-core score of 891, has no bearing on these results. The GPU’s 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 53.28 GPixel/s pixel rate are the hard limits. For any builder considering this combo, the measured data makes it clear that 1080p Low is the only configuration that delivers a smooth experience, and even then, the headroom for future game updates is minimal.