Palworld

Resolution Scaling

Palworld shows a steep performance curve as resolution climbs, with the Intel Core i5-11400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER combination dropping from a comfortable 1080p experience to sub-30 territory at 4K Ultra. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the system delivers 95 FPS average, which drops to 62 FPS at 2560x1440 and then to 35 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a 63% reduction in frame rate from 1080p to 4K at High settings, indicating that the GPU is the primary scaling bottleneck.

The pattern is consistent across all quality presets. At Low settings, the system produces 152 FPS at 1080p, 100 FPS at 1440p, and 55 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K is particularly steep — a 45% decline — which suggests the memory bandwidth and pixel throughput of the RTX 2060 SUPER are being saturated at higher resolutions. Medium settings show a similar trajectory: 123 FPS at 1080p, 81 FPS at 1440p, and 45 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings are the most demanding, yielding 72 FPS at 1080p, 47 FPS at 1440p, and just 26 FPS at 4K.

The scaling behavior reveals that the RTX 2060 SUPER's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases. The frame rate drops between 1080p and 1440p are moderate (roughly 30-35%), but the jumps from 1440p to 4K are more severe (around 40-45%), a sign that the GPU's fillrate and memory subsystem are working near their limits. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, shows no signs of constraining performance at any resolution — the scaling pattern is entirely consistent with a GPU-bound workload.

Notably, the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens at higher resolutions. At 1080p, Ultra delivers 72 FPS versus 152 FPS on Low — a 111% difference. At 4K, Ultra produces 26 FPS versus 55 FPS on Low — a 112% difference. This near-constant ratio suggests that the settings presets scale uniformly in terms of GPU load, with no single setting causing a disproportionate hit.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is the dominant performance driver in this Palworld configuration. Based on the TU106 chip on TSMC's 12 nm process, this Turing-generation card packs 2,176 shading units, 136 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The 34 RT cores and 272 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for ray tracing and AI workloads, though Palworld's benchmark results suggest the game relies primarily on traditional rasterization.

The card's clock behavior — 1470 MHz base and 1650 MHz boost — combined with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) across a 256-bit interface yields 448.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. This bandwidth figure is critical for Palworld's open-world rendering, where large texture streams and draw calls demand rapid memory access. The measured frame rates indicate that at 1080p, the card has sufficient headroom, but at 4K Ultra, the 26 FPS average shows the GPU is thoroughly saturated.

In synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 2060 SUPER scores 16,462 in Passmark G3D and 6,721 in Passmark GPU Compute, placing it in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (0.4% faster), AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (0.5% faster), and AMD Radeon RX 460 (1.5% faster) — though the RX 460 comparison is surprising given the architectural differences. The data shows the RTX 2060 SUPER sits in a performance tier where Palworld at 1440p High (62 FPS) is the sweet spot, while 4K remains firmly out of reach for smooth gameplay.

The card's 175 W TDP and dual-slot cooler design are consistent with its mid-range positioning. The FP32 throughput of 7.181 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 105.6 GPixel/s suggest the card was designed for 1080p and 1440p gaming rather than 4K. At 4K, even Low settings only achieve 55 FPS, which indicates the memory bandwidth — not the compute units — is the primary constraint.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F provides ample processing power for Palworld, with its 6 cores and 12 threads running at a base clock of 2.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz. This Rocket Lake-S architecture chip, built on Intel's 14 nm process, offers a 12 MB shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The CPU's performance profile is strong enough that it never appears to bottleneck the GPU in the measured scenarios.

Synthetic benchmarks confirm the CPU's capability. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14,340 and single-core score of 2,024 indicate solid all-around performance. The Passmark multithread score of 16,908 and single-thread score of 2,981 place the chip in the 71st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7H12 (0.3% faster), Intel Core i5-12450H (0.4% slower), and AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G (0.6% slower) — all within a fraction of a percentage point, showing this chip is right at the average for its performance class.

In Palworld specifically, the CPU's role is secondary. The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K is consistent with a GPU-bound workload, and the fact that Low settings at 1080p reach 152 FPS without the CPU becoming a limiting factor suggests the 6-core/12-thread configuration handles the game's simulation and AI workloads efficiently. The 3DMark scores — 5,619 for 16 threads and 868 for single-thread — demonstrate balanced multi-threading capability that suits Palworld's survival mechanics, which often involve many simultaneous entities.

The CPU's 65 W TDP and LGA 1200 socket make it a mainstream part, but its performance is sufficient for this game. The Geekbench scores of 7,737 multi-core and 1,777 single-core further confirm that the CPU can feed the GPU at all tested resolutions. The 12 MB L3 cache is adequate for Palworld's data patterns, and the dual-channel memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s does not appear to create a bottleneck in the measured frame rates.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Palworld at 4K smoothly?

A: No. The best 4K result is 55 FPS at Low settings, dropping to 45 FPS at Medium Particular, 35 FPS at High, and 26 FPS at Ultra. For smooth 60 FPS gameplay at 4K, the system falls short at every preset.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combination?

A: 1920x1080 is the clear winner, with 152 FPS at Low, 123 FPS at Medium, 95 FPS at High, and 72 FPS at Ultra. The 1440p results are playable — 100 FPS at Low and 62 FPS at High — but 1080p maximizes frame rates.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 SUPER compare to its closest GPU rivals?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER scores 18,093 in average benchmark score, placing it just behind the RTX 3060 Mobile (18,159, 0.4% faster) and AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18,189, 0.5% faster). It scores slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 460 (18,373, 1.5% faster) and Intel Arc A770M (18,383, 1.6% faster).

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-11400F a bottleneck in Palworld?

A: The data does not indicate CPU bottlenecking. The frame rate scales consistently with resolution changes, and the CPU's nearest rivals (AMD EPYC 7H12, Intel Core i5-12450H, AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G) all have near-identical average scores, suggesting the CPU is not the limiting factor.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, Low settings produce 152 FPS average while Ultra produces 72 FPS average, a difference of 80 FPS or 111% more performance on Low. The Medium preset (123 FPS) and High preset (95 FPS) sit in between.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings?

A: At High settings, the frame rate drops from 95 FPS at 1080p to 62 FPS at 1440p, a 35% reduction. Moving from 1440p to 4K at High settings further drops to 35 FPS, another 44% reduction.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce 152 FPS average, making for an exceptionally smooth experience. Medium settings yield 123 FPS average with a minimum of 105 FPS and maximum of 142 FPS, showing tight frame pacing. High settings drop to 95 FPS average, still well above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra settings produce 72 FPS average, which remains playable but shows the performance cost of maximum quality.

At 2560x1440, performance remains solid but begins to show strain. Low settings achieve 100 FPS average, maintaining high refresh rate capability. Medium settings deliver 81 FPS average with a range of 69 to 93 FPS, which is good for 1440p gaming. High settings produce 62 FPS average, just above the 60 FPS mark. Ultra settings drop to 47 FPS average, which is below the smoothness threshold for most players.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings produce 55 FPS average, which is borderline acceptable. Medium settings yield 45 FPS average with a minimum of 38 FPS and maximum of 52 FPS, showing noticeable dips. High settings drop to 35 FPS average, which is choppy. Ultra settings bottom out at 26 FPS average, making the game effectively unplayable at this quality level.

The Medium settings rows are the only ones with complete min/max data: 105-142 FPS at 1080p, 69-93 FPS at 1440p, and 38-52 FPS at 4K. This data reveals that frame pacing is relatively consistent at 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K range of 14 FPS (38 to 52) indicates more variance under load.

Settings Recommendations

For players seeking the best balance of visual quality and performance, the Medium preset at 1920x1080 is the recommended starting point. The 123 FPS average with a 105 FPS minimum ensures consistent smoothness, while the 14 FPS variance between minimum and maximum shows stable frame delivery. This settings level provides a significant visual upgrade over Low while maintaining frame rates well above display refresh rates.

At 2560x1440, the High preset delivers 62 FPS average, which is adequate for most displays. However, players with 144 Hz monitors should consider Medium quality at 81 FPS average, as the visual difference between Medium and High in Palworld is less impactful than the frame rate gain. The 1440p Medium settings offer the best frame rate-to-quality ratio at this resolution, with the 69 FPS minimum ensuring that dips remain above the 60 FPS threshold.

For 4K displays, Low settings at 55 FPS are the only viable option for playable performance. The jump from Low to Medium costs 10 FPS (55 to 45), which is a substantial loss for modest visual gains. Given the 38 FPS minimum at 4K Medium, the game will experience noticeable stutters during busy scenes. Players prioritizing smoothness should stick to 1080p or 1440p rather than sacrificing quality at 4K.

The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution for this hardware combination. Even at 1080p, the 72 FPS average is only 24 FPS higher than at 4K, but the visual difference between High and Ultra rarely justifies the 24% performance loss. The data shows that High settings at 1440p (62 FPS) provide a better experience than Ultra at 1080p (72 FPS) for players with 1440p monitors, while 1080p users should favor High or Medium for maximum frame rate headroom.