Palworld

Palworld’s measured performance on the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 reveals a system that scales predictably with resolution, but the data suggests a nuanced balance between the CPU and GPU depending on the settings preset. This combination ranks 910th out of 2944 tested combos, placing it in the upper third of all configurations, a position that reflects its ability to handle the game’s demands at 1440p and 1080p comfortably. The benchmark results indicate a hardware pairing that is more than capable for high-refresh-rate play, yet the 4K Ultra data exposes a clear ceiling that separates this setup from the top-tier performers.

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

The FPS data across the three tested resolutions shows a steep decline as pixel count increases, which is typical for a survival game with open-world rendering. At High settings, the average frame rate drops from 142 FPS at 1920x1080 to 94 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of approximately 34%. Moving further up to 3840x2160, the average falls to 52 FPS, which is a 63% decrease from the 1080p baseline. This scaling pattern strongly suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions; the RTX 4080’s workload increases significantly with each pixel, and the data shows it cannot maintain the same headroom.

The Low settings preset reinforces this interpretation. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 228 FPS, but this drops to 150 FPS at 1440p and 83 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is about 34%, identical to the High preset’s scaling, which indicates a consistent GPU-bound behavior. However, the 4K Low result of 83 FPS is still relatively high, suggesting that even with reduced graphical load, the GPU is doing the heavy lifting. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a plateau in FPS at lower resolutions, where the GPU is less stressed, but the data shows a monotonic decrease across all settings, implying that the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU at every tested point.

The Medium settings, which include min and max FPS data, provide additional insight. At 1080p Medium, the average is 185 FPS with a minimum of 157 and a maximum of 212. At 1440p Medium, the average is 122 FPS with a range of 103 to 140. At 4K Medium, the average is 67 FPS with a range of 57 to 78. The relative consistency of these ranges suggests that frame pacing is stable, and the limiting component shifts more toward the GPU as resolution increases. The fact that the 4K Medium average (67 FPS) is only slightly above the 4K High average (52 FPS) indicates that the GPU is nearing its limits, and further graphical enhancements have a diminishing return on frame rate.

What does this imply for the system’s balance? At 1080p, the CPU’s 16 cores and 16 threads are likely sufficient to keep up with the RTX 4080’s output, but the GPU is still the dominant constraint. The data shows that lowering settings from High to Low at 1080p yields a 60% FPS increase, from 142 to 228, which is a GPU-driven gain. At 4K, the same settings change yields a 60% increase, from 52 to 83 FPS, again pointing to the GPU as the main bottleneck. The CPU role is less visible in this scaling, but it does not appear to be holding the system back at any resolution, as the FPS consistently responds to GPU load changes.

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

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a mobile processor with 16 cores and 16 threads, a configuration that lacks hyper-threading but provides a high core count for multi-threaded workloads. Its base clock is 2.00 GHz, with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, and it has a 25 W TDP, which is notably low for a high-core-count CPU, suggesting it is designed for power efficiency in a mobile form factor. The L3 cache is 18 MB shared, and the L2 cache is 2.5 MB per core, which contributes to its single-thread performance. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU scores 28221 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3984 in single-core, indicating strong multi-threaded capability relative to its power envelope.

In Palworld, the CPU’s role is primarily to handle game logic, entity updates, and world simulation, which can be demanding in a survival game with many interactive elements. The benchmark results show that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 228 FPS, which is a high frame rate that would require a capable CPU to avoid bottlenecking the GPU. The data suggests the CPU is up to the task, as the FPS scales down consistently with resolution, indicating no sudden CPU-imposed limit. However, the single-thread score of 3984 in Cinebench R23 is modest compared to some desktop parts, but the boost clock of 5.00 GHz helps in scenarios that rely on single-thread performance.

Comparing to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra X7 368H has an average benchmark score of 40518, which is 0.1% lower than the Intel Core 7 253PE and 0.2% lower than the Intel Core 5 223PE, but it is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H and the Intel Xeon 6507P. These deltaPct values are negligible, meaning the CPU’s performance is effectively on par with these alternatives. This suggests that in Palworld, any differences in frame rates between these CPUs would be minimal, and the GPU is the more significant factor in the measured results.

The CPU’s 16 threads are fully utilized in multi-threaded benchmarks like Cinebench R15 multi-core (2844) and Passmark multi-thread (32956), which indicates it can handle parallel tasks well. In Palworld, this translates to stable frame times in complex scenes, as the data shows no severe FPS drops in the Medium settings’ min values. For instance, at 1440p Medium, the min FPS is 103, which is 84% of the average, showing good consistency. The CPU’s architecture, Panther Lake on a 3 nm process, is modern and efficient, but its mobile positioning means it may not sustain peak clocks indefinitely, though the data does not indicate thermal throttling as a factor.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is a high-end desktop GPU with 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. Its base clock is 2205 MHz with a boost clock of 2505 MHz, and it has 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The GPU’s memory clock is 1400 MHz, with an effective data rate of 22.4 Gbps. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 34457 in Passmark G3D and 6567 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 54247, which is 0.1% higher than the RTX 4080 SUPER, but 1.1% lower than the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X and 2.6% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB.

In Palworld, the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM is a significant asset, as the game can use substantial memory at high resolutions and settings. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra is 39 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play, indicating that the GPU is the limiting factor at this extreme setting. The 4K Medium average of 67 FPS is more playable, and the 4K Low average of 83 FPS shows that reducing settings can yield playable frame rates even at 4K. The GPU’s boost clock of 2505 MHz allows for strong performance in rasterization, but the data shows that Palworld’s demands at 4K Ultra exceed what this GPU can deliver at a high frame rate.

The GPU’s VRAM capacity is likely not the bottleneck, as even at 4K Ultra, the game would not typically exceed 16 GB, but the raw compute power is insufficient for the highest settings at that resolution. The RTX 4080’s performance in Palworld relative to its rivals is not directly measured, but the data shows that it ranks in the 86th percentile, which is solid. The GPU’s 320 W TDP and triple-slot design indicate it is a power-hungry part, but the benchmark results show it delivers consistent performance across settings. The fact that the FPS drops from 1080p to 4K at High settings (from 142 to 52) tracks closely with the pixel count increase (from 2.07 million to 8.29 million pixels, a 4x difference), but the FPS only drops by 63%, not 75%, suggesting some headroom in the GPU’s scaling.

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

At 1920x1080, the system delivers an average of 228 FPS on Low settings, which is the highest measured result in the entire dataset. This drops to 185 FPS on Medium, with a minimum of 157 and a maximum of 212, indicating a stable frame rate. High settings yield 142 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 108 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 53% reduction in FPS, from 228 to 108, which is expected as graphical fidelity increases. The 1080p results are all well above 100 FPS, making this resolution ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS on Low is 150, which is still very high. Medium settings average 122 FPS, with a range of 103 to 140, showing a slightly wider variance than at 1080p. High settings average 94 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 71 FPS. The 1440p results indicate that the system can handle high-refresh-rate gaming at this resolution on Medium or High, but Ultra settings will require a 60 Hz monitor to avoid screen tearing. The drop from 1080p to 1440p on Low settings is from 228 to 150 FPS, a 34% decrease, which is proportional to the resolution change.

At 3840x2160, the data shows a significant performance hit. Low settings average 83 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for high-refresh-rate displays. Medium settings average 67 FPS, with a minimum of 57 and a maximum of 78, indicating that frame rates can dip below 60 in demanding scenes. High settings average 52 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target. Ultra settings average 39 FPS, which is not smooth and would be noticeable to most players. The 4K results clearly show that this combination is not suited for ultra-high-definition gaming at maximum settings, but it can manage 4K on Low settings for a playable experience.

The Medium settings rows are the only ones with min and max FPS data, providing insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p, the range is 157 to 212, a 55 FPS spread. At 1440p, the range is 103 to 140, a 37 FPS spread. At 4K, the range is 57 to 78, a 21 FPS spread. This decreasing spread as resolution increases suggests that the GPU becomes more consistently loaded at higher resolutions, reducing the variability caused by scene complexity. It also implies that the CPU is not causing frame spikes, as the min FPS values are close to the averages.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Palworld?

A: The highest average FPS is 228, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the peak performance measured in the dataset.

Q: Can this system run Palworld at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, but only on lower settings. At 3840x2160, Low settings average 83 FPS, and Medium settings average 67 FPS, which are playable. High settings drop to 52 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 39 FPS, which are not ideal for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the CPU’s multi-threaded performance compare to its rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has an average benchmark score of 40518, which is 0.1% lower than the Intel Core 7 253PE and 0.2% lower than the Intel Core 5 223PE, but it is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H and the Intel Xeon 6507P. The differences are negligible.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the limiting factor in Palworld at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the GPU is the primary limiting factor, as lowering settings from High to Low at 1080p increases FPS from 142 to 228, a 60% gain. If the CPU were the bottleneck, this settings change would not yield such a large increase.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded in the dataset?

A: The minimum FPS recorded is 57, observed at 3840x2160 with Medium settings. This is the only resolution/settings combination with a min FPS below 100, indicating that 4K Medium can have occasional frame dips.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations in Palworld?

A: This combo ranks 910th out of 2944 tested combos, placing it in the upper 31% of all configurations. This indicates it performs better than the majority of systems tested.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings preset depends on the user’s resolution and refresh rate priorities. For 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers a strong balance, with an average of 185 FPS and a minimum of 157 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay on any monitor up to 144 Hz. High settings at 1080p still deliver 142 FPS, which is excellent, but the jump to Ultra yields 108 FPS, which is still high but may not justify the visual gains for all players. For the best experience at 1080p, the data suggests that High settings provide a high frame rate without sacrificing much visual quality, but Medium is safer for those with 165 Hz or higher refresh rate displays.

At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 94 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold but below 100 FPS, making it suitable for 60 Hz to 100 Hz monitors. Medium settings average 122 FPS, which is ideal for 120 Hz or 144 Hz displays, and the minimum of 103 FPS ensures no major dips. Ultra settings at 1440p average 71 FPS, which is playable but may not be smooth on high-refresh-rate screens. The recommendation for 1440p is to use Medium settings for the best combination of frame rate and visual fidelity, as the data shows it provides a comfortable margin above 100 FPS.

For 3840x2160, the options are more limited. Low settings average 83 FPS, which is playable, but Medium settings average 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 FPS, which can dip below 60 FPS in demanding scenes. High and Ultra settings are not recommended for 4K, as they average 52 FPS and 39 FPS respectively, which would result in a subpar experience. If 4K is a priority, the data shows that Low settings are the only preset that consistently stays above 80 FPS, but Medium is acceptable if the user can tolerate occasional frame drops. The best experience for this combo is at 1440p on Medium, where the system delivers a high average FPS with good consistency.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 ranks 910th out of 2944 tested combos in Palworld, which places it in the 69th percentile of all configurations. This is a strong showing, indicating that this system outperforms the majority of tested hardware. The ranking suggests that while this combo is not at the very top tier, it is well above average and can handle the game at high settings with good frame rates. The data shows that the combo’s performance is consistent with its component specifications, as both the CPU and GPU rank in the 86th and 87th percentiles respectively, and the combo rank is slightly lower, reflecting the game’s specific demands.

The GPU’s position relative to its rivals is close, with the RTX 4080 being 0.1% faster than the RTX 4080 SUPER in average benchmark score, but 1.1% slower than the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X. This indicates that in Palworld, the RTX 4080’s performance is comparable to its immediate competitors, and the combo’s rank is more influenced by the CPU’s performance. The CPU’s nearest rivals show deltaPct values of -0.1%, -0.2%, 0.2%, and 0.2%, meaning that swapping in any of these CPUs would result in negligible FPS changes. Therefore, the combo’s 910th rank is likely a reflection of the GPU’s tier rather than any bottleneck, and users can expect similar results with slightly different CPU choices. Overall, the data indicates that this combo is a solid mid-to-high-range performer in Palworld, capable of delivering excellent 1080p and 1440p experiences, with 4K reserved for lower settings.