Overpower

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 combination in Overpower delivers a solid, if not spectacular, performance profile. The measured data places this system at rank 911 out of 2980 tested combos, indicating a strong upper-midrange position. This analysis breaks down the CPU and GPU contributions, resolution scaling, and provides specific settings recommendations based solely on the measured FPS data.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread mobile processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process node. Its base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, and it carries a 25 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This CPU supports LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus, offering a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. For connectivity, it uses PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only) and includes integrated Arc B390 graphics.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 18,911 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,200.5 in single-core. Its Passmark multi-thread score is 36,811, with a single-thread score of 4,280. The average benchmark score across all tests is 44,466, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (avg score 44,573, delta -0.2%), the Intel Core i9-13950HX (avg score 44,342, delta +0.3%), the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (avg score 44,309, delta +0.4%), and the Intel Core i5-13600 (avg score 44,240, delta +0.5%). This shows the Ultra X9 388H is statistically equivalent to these competitors, with performance deltas well within 1%.

For Overpower, an action game, the CPU's 16 threads and 5.10 GHz boost clock provide ample headroom for game logic, physics, and AI calculations. The single-core performance, which is often critical for game engine frame pacing, is competitive with the nearest rivals, as evidenced by the sub-1% deltas. The multi-core performance, while not the absolute top, ensures that background tasks and modern game threads are handled without bottlenecking the GPU. The data suggests that in this pairing, the CPU is not the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions, but at 1080p with Low settings, its performance ceiling can be approached.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 ranks 911th out of 2,980 tested combinations in Overpower. This places it in the top 30.6% of all systems tested, which is a respectable showing. The rank is influenced by both components, but given the GPU's high-end nature, the CPU's mid-to-high tier standing is what pulls the overall combo down slightly from the top 10%.

To contextualize this rank, consider that the CPU itself is in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. The combo rank of 911/2980 is lower than what either component's individual percentile might suggest. This discrepancy indicates that Overpower is sensitive to the balance between CPU and GPU. The data implies that while each part is strong, the pairing does not achieve the synergy seen in top-tier combos. The system is capable of high frame rates, but it is not among the elite configurations, likely due to the CPU's mobile-oriented design (25 W TDP) potentially limiting sustained performance in CPU-heavy scenes.

The nearest rivals for the GPU (as shown later) are within a 2.7% performance band, and the CPU rivals are within 0.5%. This suggests that swapping either component for a direct rival would not significantly alter the combo's rank. Instead, moving up in rank would require a more substantial CPU upgrade or a better-balanced pairing.

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

The measured FPS data reveals clear scaling patterns across resolutions. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 194 at 1080p to 173 at 1440p, and further to 147 at 4K. This represents a 10.8% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 24.2% drop from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, the averages drop from 121 at 1080p to 108 at 1440p, and 92 at 4K, which is a 10.7% drop and a 24.0% drop, respectively. At High settings, the averages drop from 113 at 1080p to 100 at 1440p, and 85 at 4K, showing a 11.5% drop and a 24.8% drop. At Ultra settings, the averages drop from 93 at 1080p to 83 at 1440p, and 71 at 4K, which is a 10.8% drop and a 23.7% drop.

The consistent percentage drops across all settings indicate that the performance scaling is resolution-bound rather than settings-bound. The GPU is the dominant factor in this scaling. The RTX 4080, with its 16 GB of GDDR6X memory and 716.8 GB/s bandwidth, is well-equipped to handle the increased pixel count and texture data at higher resolutions. The fact that the FPS drops are nearly uniform (around 10-11% for 1080p to 1440p, and 23-25% for 1080p to 4K) suggests that the GPU is the primary bottleneck as resolution increases.

However, the absolute FPS at 1080p Low (194 FPS) is high enough that the CPU's single-thread performance (boost clock 5.10 GHz) is keeping pace. If the CPU were severely limiting, we would expect the 1080p-to-1440p drop to be smaller than the 1440p-to-4K drop, but the data shows linear scaling. This indicates that the CPU is sufficient to feed the GPU at 1080p Low, but as resolution increases, the GPU's workload grows, and the frame rate drops accordingly. The limiting component shifts from a balanced CPU/GPU load at 1080p Low to a GPU-bound scenario at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following data is derived directly from the measured FPS rows. Note that min and max FPS are only provided for Medium settings at each resolution.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: Average 194 FPS.
• Medium: Average 121 FPS, with a minimum of 103 and maximum of 140 FPS.
• High: Average 113 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 93 FPS.

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: Average 173 FPS.
• Medium: Average 108 FPS, with a minimum of 92 and maximum of 124 FPS.
• High: Average 100 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 83 FPS.

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: Average 147 FPS.
• Medium: Average 92 FPS, with a minimum of 78 and maximum of 106 FPS.
• High: Average 85 FPS.
• Ultra: Average 71 FPS.

The data shows a clear hierarchy: higher settings reduce FPS, and higher resolutions reduce FPS. The Medium settings rows provide the only frame time variance data. At 1080p Medium, the spread between min and max is 37 FPS (103 to 140), which indicates some frame pacing variability. At 1440p Medium, the spread narrows to 32 FPS (92 to 124), and at 4K Medium, it narrows further to 28 FPS (78 to 106). This suggests that as the GPU becomes more loaded, the frame delivery becomes more consistent, likely due to the CPU having more time to process commands between frames.

The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p is significant: from 194 to 121 FPS, a 37.6% decrease. This indicates that Medium settings introduce a substantial increase in GPU workload, likely due to more complex shading and post-processing effects. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p is smaller (121 to 113 FPS, a 6.6% decrease), and from High to Ultra is also modest (113 to 93 FPS, a 17.7% decrease). This pattern is consistent across all resolutions, with the Low-to-Medium transition being the most costly.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Overpower with this combo to achieve over 100 FPS on High settings?*

A: At 2560x1440 with High settings, the combo averages 100 FPS. At 1920x1080 with High settings, it averages 113 FPS. To guarantee over 100 FPS on High, 1080p is the safer choice, as 1440p is exactly at the 100 FPS mark.

Q: Is the RTX 4080 in this combo better than the RTX 4080 SUPER?

A: The average benchmark score for the RTX 4080 is 54,247, while the RTX 4080 SUPER has an average score of 54,209. The delta is 0.1%, meaning the RTX 4080 is effectively equal to the SUPER in overall performance, with a negligible 0.1% advantage.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H compare to the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D in CPU benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has an average benchmark score of 44,466, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D has an average score of 44,573. The delta is -0.2%, meaning the Ryzen 5 7500X3D is 0.2% faster, which is a statistically insignificant difference.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo at 4K Medium settings?

A: The minimum FPS recorded at 3840x2160 with Medium settings is 78 FPS, with an average of 92 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS.

Q: Does the combo achieve playable frame rates at 4K Ultra settings?

A: Yes, the average FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 71 FPS. This is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, though it leaves less headroom for demanding scenes.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 1080p Low settings?

A: The data shows 194 FPS at 1080p Low. Given that the GPU is a high-end RTX 4080 and the CPU's 16 threads provide a strong baseline, the bottleneck is likely a balance, but the high frame rate suggests the GPU is not fully saturated. The CPU's boost clock of 5.10 GHz supports this, indicating the CPU is keeping up but may limit further frame rate increases.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, using the AD103 chip manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm process. It has 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, with a transistor density of 121.1M per mm². The GPU has 9,728 shading units, 304 texture mapping units, and 112 ROPs. It features 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores. The base clock is 2205 MHz, with a boost clock of 2505 MHz. The memory clock runs at 1400 MHz, with an effective speed of 22.4 Gbps.

The memory subsystem consists of 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. The GPU delivers a pixel rate of 280.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 761.5 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 48.74 TFLOPS, with matching FP16 performance. The TDP is 320 W, requiring a 700 W suggested PSU, and it uses a triple-slot cooler with a 16-pin power connector. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

In benchmark tests, the RTX 4080 scores 6,567 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 214,739 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 263,779 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its Passmark G3D score is 34,457, with a GPU compute score of 20,671. The average benchmark score is 54,247, placing it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the RTX 4080 SUPER (avg score 54,209, delta +0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (avg score 54,828, delta -1.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (avg score 55,698, delta -2.6%), and the AMD Radeon 8060S (avg score 55,757, delta -2.7%). This shows the RTX 4080 is essentially tied with the SUPER, but trails the AMD cards by 1.1% to 2.7%.

For Overpower, the GPU's 16 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for 4K textures, and its 716.8 GB/s bandwidth ensures high texture throughput. The boost clock of 2505 MHz, combined with 48.74 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, drives the high frame rates seen in the measured data. The GPU is the primary scaling component, as evidenced by the resolution-based FPS drops. At 4K Ultra, the average of 71 FPS shows the GPU is being heavily utilized, while at 1080p Low, the 194 FPS average indicates the GPU has headroom, and the CPU becomes a more significant factor.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target refresh rate and resolution. The goal is to maintain a stable frame rate above 60 FPS, with 100+ FPS being ideal for a smooth action game experience.

For 1080p displays: The High preset (113 FPS) is the best balance. It offers a 20 FPS improvement over Ultra (93 FPS) while maintaining a 113 FPS average, which is well above 100 FPS. The Medium preset (121 FPS) is only 8 FPS faster than High, so the visual upgrade to High is worth the minor FPS cost. Low settings (194 FPS) are unnecessary unless chasing the absolute maximum frame rate for competitive play, but the visual degradation is substantial.

For 1440p displays: The Medium preset (108 FPS) is the recommended choice. It provides the only measured min/max data at this resolution (92 min, 124 max), showing a stable frame time experience. High settings (100 FPS) are still viable, but the 8 FPS difference between Medium and High is smaller than the 17 FPS difference between Low and Medium. Medium offers a good compromise, ensuring the frame rate stays well above 60 FPS even in demanding scenes. Ultra (83 FPS) is playable but leaves less headroom.

For 4K displays: The High preset (85 FPS) is the best experience. It maintains an average above 60 FPS with room to spare, while Ultra (71 FPS) dips closer to the 60 FPS threshold. Medium (92 FPS) is also an option, but High provides a better visual experience at a cost of only 7 FPS. Low settings (147 FPS) are overkill at 4K, as the visual quality loss is not justified by the frame rate increase.

In summary, the data suggests that High settings are the sweet spot for 1080p and 4K, while Medium is optimal for 1440p. The frame time data for Medium settings shows consistent performance across all resolutions, but the visual quality of High is often worth the small FPS trade-off. For players prioritizing maximum smoothness, the Medium preset at any resolution provides the most consistent frame delivery, as evidenced by the min/max data.