Palworld

Palworld is a survival game that stresses both the CPU and GPU, and the measured data for the Intel Core i5-14600KF with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 reveals a carefully balanced pairing that sits just above median performance among 3,711 tested combos. At 1080p, the duo produces up to 192 FPS on Low settings, while at 4K it falls to 33 FPS on Ultra. The numbers show a clear scaling pattern: the CPU delivers high core counts and boost clocks, and the GPU brings 8GB of GDDR7 memory, yet the system’s strengths are best expressed at 1440p Medium or 1080p Ultra. This page provides a breakdown of how the CPU and GPU contribute to the recorded results, how resolution scaling affects playability, and what settings deliver the most measured advantage.

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

The Intel Core i5-14600KF is a 14-core, 20-thread parts from the Raptor Lake refresh, built on the 10 nm node at Intel. In this configuration it boosts to 5.30 GHz (base 3.50 GHz), with a 125W TDP, and draws on a 24 MB shared L3 cache. These are not just irrelevant numbers—the CPU’s performance in Palworld’s survival world, where many objects and NPCs are processed, shows in the FPS data. At 1080p Low settings, the combo reaches 192 FPS, a figure that strongly implies the CPU is not the bottleneck at lower resolutions in this title. It is the CPU’s high single‑thread and multi‑thread throughput that enables such frame rates, and the benchmark scores confirm it. In Cinebench R23 the i5‑14600KF scores 32,544 for multi‑core and 4,594 for single‑core. In Geekbench, it records 17,085 multi‑core and 2,445 for single‑core. In PassMark multithread, the score is 38,697 and for single thread 4,273.

The CPU’s relative position compared with the nearest rivals contains nuance. Its average benchmark score is 49,394, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (which averages 49,228) and 0.4% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49,196). It is also 0.8% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 (at 48,995). However, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 (49,796) leads by 0.8% over this part. So the i5‑14600KF is essentially at parity with the fastest competing processors in its percentile, while posting a percentile vs. all CPUs of 90. That means it outperforms 90% of tested CPUs. This percentile, in turn, explains why the CPU does not significantly constrain the measured FPS at lower resolutions—the part has headroom to push relatively modest GPU load at 1080p.

The CPU is unlocked, supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and uses the Intel Socket 1700. It also has ECC memory support, but the Palworld benchmark utilizes memory for world simulation, which is well handled by these scores. The CPU’s 14 cores and 20 threads are more than enough for the threading that survival games can use, and the measured 126 FPS at 1440p Low from the GPU is still CPU‑limited only at the top end; the versus 1080p at 192 FPS shows the typical CPU ceiling. The CPU's position in the benchmark data confirms that it contributes the playability at 1080p and 1440p, but when 4K is used, the GPU becomes decisive.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 is a Blackwell‑architecture part, fabricated on a 5nm process at TSMC, with a 21,900 million transistor design on a 181mm² die. It carries 8 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128‑bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. Its boost clock is 2497 MHz, with a base of 2280 MHz, and it uses a 145 W TDP with a 300 W recommended PSU. The GPU’s role in Palworld is highlighted by its memory size: 8 GB is the bottleneck dominance at 4K, particularly at High and Ultra settings. The VRAM load is a direct factor in the difference between Low and Medium at 4K (70 vs 57 FPS) and more so between Medium and High (57 vs 44 FPS) because fewer texture and shadow data are demanded.

In isolation, the GPU’s benchmark score of 23,331 in Passmark G3D position it at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. In 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12) it scores 3,628. Passmark DirectX 9/10/11/12 scores range from 77 to 200, and the OpenCL and Vulkan scores reach 112,787 and 113,321, respectively. These are modest numbers for a mid‑range part. The nearest rivals show a broader spread: its score is within ±0.5% of the AMD Radeon 860M and the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, but it is ‑0.8% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT, and +1.2% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT. Therefore the RTX 5060 is placed not far above the middle of the high‑band.

The GPU’s effect in Palworld is clear when improving presets. At 1080p, Ultra produces 91 FPS, which is a decline of 61% from the Ultra setting compared with Low (192), showing the per‑frame cost of the graphics pipeline. At 4K, the GPU is the absolute limiter: the Ultra preset’s average FPS is 33, which is barely a third of the Low preset’s 70. The GPU's performance relative to its rivals (the 860M is a mobile part, but still included) means that for 4K Ultra, only the highest‑end combinations would exceed 60 FPS. For this combo, 8 GB VRAM also explains why 4K High (44 FPS) is far from 4K Low (70), emphasizing capacity‑driven drops. The GPU is a key bottleneck at 4K, while the CPU is the driving force at 1080p.

Resolution Scaling

The measured data set contains FPS at 3840×2160, 2560×1440, and 1920×1080, for Low, Medium, High, and Ultra settings. The most revealing pattern is the step‑down across settings. Take the Low preset: at 1080p it hits 192 FPS, at 1440p it drops to 126 FPS, and at 4K it falls to 70 FPS. That represents a 37% reduction from 1080P to 1440P and a 44% reduction from 1440P to 4K, but the absolute numbers suggest that all are still playable though 70 at 4K is marginal. For Ultra, the scaling is steeper: 1080p 91 FPS → 1440p 60 FRS → 4K 33 FPS. The IPC of the resolution is what demonstrates the GPU limit: at 4K Ultra, the movement of FPS is halved compared with 1080P (33 vs 91). The drop difference from 1440P Ultra (60) to 4K Ultra (33) is a 45% cut, while the drop from 1080P Ultra to 1440P Ultra is 34%.

The Medium setting has the only min‑max values: 1080p gives 156 average (min 132, max 179), 1440p 102 average (min 87, max 118), and 4K 57 average (min 48, max 65). These numbers reveal that even the mid‑range quality produces a broad frame variability, especially at 4K, while the min FPS at 4K drops below 50. The scaling pattern points to the GPU as the component that dominates once the resolution exceeds 2560×1440: the 5060’s 8GB VRAM and memory bus width 128‑bit are not mismatched for the resolution that uses less than 8 GB. At 1080P, the CPU clearly determines the top – it is almost certain that at 1080p the frame rates are CPU‑limited because the GPU is fast enough and the results show that going from 1080p to 1440p at Low results in a 66 FPS, but going from 1440 to 4K at Low reduces 56 FPS; that’s a similar delta (66 vs 56) that suggests a mixed boundary.

From these numbers, the limiting component shifts as the resolution increases. At 1080P, the CPU and GPU are both sufficient; at 1440P, the GPU starts load but still allows average 120 at High; at 4K, the GPU is heavily limiting, with even LOW only 70 FPS. The CPU’s role is most evident in the high FPS tiers, where it prevents the GPU from running away (i.e., the CPU isn’t the constraint).

How This Combo Ranks

Out of the graded database, the combination of the Core i5‑14600KF and the RTX 5060 achieved a combo rank of 1646 out of 3711 tested systems for Palworld. This rank places it just above the exact midpoint (3711 / 2 ≈ 1855). A rank higher than half means that only about 1,550 combinations perform better, while about 2,065 are worse. Given that the CPU alone places at the 90th percentile and GPU at the 72nd percentile, the combination is not a top‑ten overall, but it is at the upper end of the bulk of the tested units. The ranking reflects that Palworld’s workload is not purely GPU‑bound: a faster GPU would improve the 4K results, but a weaker CPU could bring the 1080p class down to that of a lower‑tier GPU.

This rank is also about balance. The CPU is about 2.0 RGB points above its nearest competitor, yet the GPU is actually slightly behind the nearest rivals and only 1.2% higher than the RX 6750 XT. The combo benefit is that the pairing does not waste performance at 1080p — where the CPU can easily ride at 192 FPS — nor does it completely starve the GPU interface at 4K. The measured data shows that the combination is in the top 44% of all combos, which is a reasonable position for a processor with a 90th percentileCPU and a GPU with a 72nd percentile GPU. The game’s PCM may be influenced by the CPU's memory and memory support, but the ranking is the hand‑slip of all such pairs.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS allows us to recommend a preset based on resolution. For 1920×1080, all four measured presets reach an average above 91 FPS, so the choice is made by quality. On Ultra, the combo records 91 FPS, which is still an excellent, smooth 60+ FPS experience. Because the minimum and maximum are not listed for 1080p Ultra, we don't know the frame variance, but the 91 average suggests that Ultra is the best setting between maximum visual quality and playability. The High preset, at 120 FPS, is also a strong choice for more computationally demanding scenes, but Ultra still delivers.

At 2560×1440, the Medium setting yields 102 FPS and additionally provides the only min/max values in the pack for that resolution (min 87, max 118). That means that Medium offers the most consistent frame, and its 87 FPS ensures it stays above 60, while Ultra drops to 60 FPS, which is also a playable threshold but the min figures— it would be safer to choose Ultra only if the user can tolerate occasional drops. The 1440p Ultra average 60 FPS meets the baseline, but given that Medium is 102 FPS, we recommend Medium as the most robust experience for 1440p if the user wants reliability. The 1440p High gives 79 FPS, barely.

At 3840×2160, only Low and Medium are above 60 FPS — Low at 70, Medium at 57. The 57 is below the common 60 FPS game target, and its minimum drops to 48. Therefore, for 4K, the best recommendation is Low, which keeps the 70 FPS average and avoids the 48–48 FPS with the Medium. Ultra at 4K is close to 33 FPS and is not suitable for real‑time play. In summary, Low is the top pick for 4K, Medium for 1440p, and Medium or Ultra for 1080p depending on preference.

Measured FPS Breakdown

| Resolution | Settings | avgFPS (min–max if available) |

|------------|----------|-------------------------------|

| 3840×2160 | Low | 70 FPS |

| | Medium | 70? Actually 57 (48–65) |

| | High | 44 FPS |

| | Ultra | 33 FPS |

| 2560×1440 | Low | 126 FPS |

| | Medium | 102 FPS (87–118) |

| | High | 79 FPS |

| | Ultra | 60 FPS |

| 1920×1080 | Low | 192 FPS |

| | Medium | 156 FPS (132–179) |

| | High | 120 FPS |

| | Ultra | 91 FPS |

The table above is directly from the measured data. Notice the 4K Medium’s 57 FPS comes with minimum 48 and maximum 65, illustrating some strong frame time spikes. The 1080p Medium 156 average with 132–179 range, and 1440p Media 102 with 87–118 range are the only intervals recorded, which increases our confidence in those two settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the CPU and GPU in this pair?

A: The Intel Core i5‑14600KF has a launch MSRP of $294, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 has a launch MSRP of 299 USD.

Q: Which resolution gives the best average frame rate for this combo?

A: At 1920×1080 Low, the combo reaches 192 FPS, which is the highest average measured in this data set. At 1080p Ultra it still achieves 91 FPS.

Q: Can this combination handle 4K gaming at high refresh rates?

A: According to the measured data, no. At 4K Low, the average is 70 FPS; Medium is 57; High is 44; and Ultra is down to 33 FPS. Only Low reaches above 60 FPS at 4K.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested builds in this game?

A: It ranks 1646th out of 3711 tested combinations. That puts it just above top‑median, meaning roughly 2,065 combos are slower and 1,645 are faster.

Q: For 2560x1440, which is the most consistent option based on the measured data?

A: Medium setting text with an average of 102 FPS and a measured minimum of 87 FPS, making it the only 1440p preset with a recorded min >60 FPS. Ultra peaks at exactly 60 average FPS, but its minimum is not measured/may not be that high.

Q: Is the CPU and GPU pair for 1080p more CPU‑ or GPU‑limited?

A: The data suggests a CPU‑limitation for 1080p. The i5‑14600KF at 5.3 GHz and its 14 cores give 24–192 FPS at Low, which is far beyond what the GPU can do at 4K. For instance, moving from 1080p Low to 1440p Low costs 66 FPS, but moving from 1440p to 4K Low costs 56 FPS, indicating that the GPU becomes the binding factor as resolution grows.