Palworld

Palworld pairs the six-core Intel Core i5-12400F with the 4 GB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 in a combination that ranks near the bottom of the tested database, at position 1646 out of 1718 combos. The benchmark results show a system that is firmly GPU-limited at higher resolutions, yet surprisingly capable at 1080p Low, where it delivers a playable 75.7 FPS average. This is a legacy-oriented pairing that prioritizes CPU headroom over modern graphics features, and the measured data reflects that trade-off clearly.

FAQ

Q: What is the combo's overall ranking in Palworld?

A: The Intel Core i5-12400F + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination ranks 1646th out of 1718 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 5% of all systems tested for this game.

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

A: The Core i5-12400F scores an average benchmark of 19221, which is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-8700K (19210), 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-1335U (19167), and 0.7% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS (19364).

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 8713, which is 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (8746) and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8671).

Q: What is the best measured FPS result for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 75.7 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the measured data that exceeds 75 FPS.

Q: What is the worst measured FPS result for this combo?

A: The lowest average FPS is 13.6 FPS at 3840x2160 with High settings. This is the only configuration that falls below 15 FPS average.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU appear to be the limiting factor in Palworld?

A: The data indicates a strong GPU limit: dropping from 1080p to 4K at Low settings reduces FPS from 75.7 to 25.3, a 66.6% performance loss that far exceeds what a CPU-bound scenario would show.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the primary performance bottleneck in this pairing, as evidenced by the measured FPS scaling across resolutions. With 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth, the card is constrained by both capacity and throughput. The GPU's base clock of 1485 MHz and boost clock of 1665 MHz, combined with 896 shading units, yield a FP32 compute rate of 2.984 TFLOPS, which is modest by modern standards. The measured results show that at 1080p Low, the card produces 75.7 FPS, but this drops to 50.3 FPS at 1440p and 25.3 FPS at 4K, demonstrating how quickly the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth are overwhelmed as pixel count increases.

The GTX 1650's 32 ROPs and 56 TMUs provide a texture and pixel throughput that is adequate for 1080p gaming but insufficient for higher resolutions. At 1440p Ultra, the combo manages only 22.8 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it falls to 14.7 FPS, indicating that the card's 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit interface cannot sustain the asset loads and shading complexity of Palworld's higher presets. The GPU's DirectX 12 support (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility mean it can run the game's modern API paths, but the 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is a hard ceiling. The benchmark data shows that even at 1080p High, the card only reaches 46.9 FPS, which is 38.1% below the Low preset's result, highlighting how much performance is sacrificed for visual fidelity on this GPU.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F provides substantial computational headroom that the GTX 1650 cannot fully utilize in Palworld. With 6 cores and 12 threads running at a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, the CPU's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 16518 and single-core score of 2332 indicate strong gaming performance. The CPU's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support further enhance its capability to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU sits at the 77th percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 19221, placing it just 0.1% ahead of the older Intel Core i7-8700K.

The CPU's role becomes apparent when comparing FPS across settings at the same resolution. At 1080p, the jump from Low (75.7 FPS) to Medium (61.4 FPS) to High (46.9 FPS) shows that the CPU can maintain a playable frame rate even as GPU load increases, but the Ultra preset (32.9 FPS) reveals that the CPU cannot compensate for the GPU's inability to handle the highest settings. The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor: at 4K Low, the combo produces 25.3 FPS, which is 66.6% lower than 1080p Low, a drop that would be far smaller if the CPU were the bottleneck. The 3DMark single-thread score of 909 and passmark single-thread score of 3481 confirm that this CPU has sufficient per-core performance for Palworld's threaded workloads, but the GPU remains the constraining component in every measured configuration.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1646th out of 1718 tested combos in Palworld, placing it in the bottom 4.2% of all systems. This low ranking is primarily attributable to the GPU's position: the GTX 1650 sits at the 43rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8713, which is 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8671) but 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon 550X (8749). The CPU, by contrast, is a strong performer at the 77th percentile, with its nearest rival being the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS, which is 0.7% faster. This mismatch between a high-percentile CPU and a low-percentile GPU creates a system that is bottlenecked by graphics performance in Palworld.

The combo's rank of 1646 out of 1718 suggests that nearly all other tested combinations deliver better playability in this game. The measured FPS data supports this: the best result (75.7 FPS at 1080p Low) is only marginally above the 60 FPS threshold, and every other configuration falls below that mark. Even at 1080p Medium, the combo produces 61.4 FPS, which is playable but not smooth, and at 1440p, all settings produce results below 50.3 FPS. The rank reflects that this is a legacy or entry-level combination that struggles with Palworld's demanding world simulation and rendering, despite having a capable six-core CPU.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a GPU-bound system. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 75.7 at 1920x1080 to 50.3 at 2560x1440 (a 33.6% reduction) and then to 25.3 at 3840x2160 (a 66.6% reduction from 1080p). This steep decline is characteristic of a GPU that is overwhelmed by pixel count, not a CPU that is struggling with draw calls. At High settings, the drop is even more pronounced: 46.9 FPS at 1080p, 32.6 FPS at 1440p (30.5% lower), and 13.6 FPS at 4K (71.0% lower). The fact that the 4K High result (13.6 FPS) is the lowest in the entire dataset confirms that the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth cannot handle the combined load of high-resolution textures and shading.

The scaling pattern also shows that settings have a greater impact than resolution on this combo. At 1080p, the difference between Low (75.7 FPS) and Ultra (32.9 FPS) is 56.5%, while at 4K, the difference between Low (25.3 FPS) and Ultra (14.7 FPS) is 41.9%. This suggests that the GPU's compute and memory limitations are amplified by higher presets, as the card's 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance becomes the binding constraint. The data indicates that for this combo, resolution scaling is predictable and severe, with no configuration at 1440p or above reaching 60 FPS, and only the 1080p Low preset achieving a smooth frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results: Low settings produce an average of 75.7 FPS, Medium produces 61.4 FPS, High produces 46.9 FPS, and Ultra produces 32.9 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a linear degradation of roughly 15 FPS per preset step, with the difference between Low and Ultra being 42.8 FPS. At 2560x1440, the averages are 50.3 FPS on Low, 39.5 FPS on Medium, 32.6 FPS on High, and 22.8 FPS on Ultra. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is significant across all settings, with the Low preset losing 25.4 FPS and the Ultra preset losing 10.1 FPS. At 3840x2160, the results are consistently below playable thresholds: 25.3 FPS on Low, 19.1 FPS on Medium, 13.6 FPS on High, and 14.7 FPS on Ultra.

The 4K Ultra result (14.7 FPS) is notable because it is slightly higher than the 4K High result (13.6 FPS), which could indicate a measurement anomaly or that the Ultra preset's additional effects are not fully taxing the GPU due to memory constraints. However, both are below 15 FPS and are unusable for gameplay. The data shows a clear pattern: 1080p Low is the only configuration that exceeds 60 FPS, 1080p Medium is the only other configuration above 60 FPS, and all 1440p and 4K results are below 50.3 FPS. The 1440p Low result of 50.3 FPS is the highest for that resolution, indicating that even the lowest settings cannot overcome the GPU's resolution scaling penalty.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo are 1920x1080 with Low preset, which delivers an average of 75.7 FPS. This is the only configuration that provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold, making it the recommended choice for smooth gameplay in Palworld. The 1080p Medium preset, at 61.4 FPS, is also playable and offers improved visual quality, but the 18.9% drop from Low to Medium may not justify the modest visual gains for users who prioritize frame rate stability. For users who prefer higher visual fidelity, the 1080p High preset at 46.9 FPS is the highest quality option that remains above 30 FPS, though it requires accepting a 38.1% performance penalty compared to Low.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset at 50.3 FPS is the only option that approaches playability, but it still falls below 60 FPS, making it unsuitable for competitive or fast-paced gameplay. The 1440p Medium (39.5 FPS) and High (32.6 FPS) presets are playable but not smooth, and the Ultra preset at 22.8 FPS is not recommended. All 4K configurations produce results below 25.3 FPS, which are not viable for gameplay. The data suggests that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, with the Low preset providing the best balance of performance and playability. The Ultra preset at 1080p (32.9 FPS) is the most demanding setting that remains technically playable, but the 56.5% performance loss from Low makes it a poor trade-off. For a consistently smooth experience, the 1080p Low preset is the clear recommendation, with 1080p Medium as a secondary option for users willing to trade some frame rate for visual quality.