Ready Or Not

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for Ready Or Not with the Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D reveals a clear pattern of diminishing returns as resolution climbs, but with an unusual twist: the CPU becomes the bottleneck sooner than expected. At 1080p High, the combo delivers 351 FPS average, while at 1440p High it drops to 284 FPS, a 19% reduction. Moving to 4K High, the average falls to 148 FPS, which is a 48% drop from 1440p and a 58% drop from 1080p. This scaling curve shows that the 4K results are heavily GPU-limited, as the RTX 5090 D's massive shading unit count of 21,760 and 176 ROPs are being pushed to their limits with the game's tactical-shooter rendering loads.

The gap between Low and Ultra settings widens dramatically at higher resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low (381 FPS) and Ultra (308 FPS) is 73 FPS, or 19%. At 1440p, that spread grows to 128 FPS between Low (327 FPS) and Ultra (199 FPS). At 4K, the spread becomes 83 FPS between Low (187 FPS) and Ultra (104 FPS). The data indicates that the 4K Ultra setting (104 FPS) is the only configuration in the entire measured set that dips below the 144 FPS threshold, suggesting that this is where the GPU's raw compute capacity—104.8 TFLOPS FP32—meets its match.

Interestingly, the 1080p results show a compression in performance across settings. The delta between 1080p Low (381 FPS) and 1080p Ultra (308 FPS) is only 19%, whereas at 1440p the delta between Low and Ultra is 39%. This non-linear behavior points to the CPU's 6-core, 12-thread configuration with a 4.30 GHz boost clock becoming a limiting factor at lower resolutions where the GPU could otherwise push even higher frame rates. The 1080p Medium result of 363 FPS with a minimum of 309 FPS shows that even at this modest resolution, the frame time consistency is maintained, but the ceiling is capped by the processor's capability.

The 4K Low result of 187 FPS versus 4K High at 148 FPS demonstrates that the game's visual complexity at Ultra settings imposes a significant computational cost. The RTX 5090 D's 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth is not the constraint here; rather, the pixel throughput of 423.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s are being fully exercised. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at High settings (351 to 148 FPS, a 58% reduction) is steeper than the 1080p to 1440p transition (351 to 284 FPS, a 19% reduction), indicating that the 4K resolution's 8.3 million pixels are the dominant factor in the performance drop.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D is the clear performance driver in this combo, and its specifications align with the measured results. The GPU's boost clock of 2407 MHz, combined with its 92,200 million transistors on a 5 nm TSMC process, provides the computational muscle for Ready Or Not's high frame rates. The 32 GB VRAM capacity is far beyond what this game requires at any tested setting, meaning memory capacity is never a limiting factor. The GDDR7 memory operating at 1750 MHz with an effective 28 Gbps speed delivers 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth, which supports the high texture throughput observed in the 4K results.

The benchmark data shows the RTX 5090 D scoring 44,065 in Passmark G3D and 14,326 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. These synthetic scores place it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 77,712 is within 2% of rivals like the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78,940) and NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79,605). However, in Ready Or Not specifically, the RTX 5090 D's real-world performance exceeds what these synthetic averages might predict, particularly at 1080p where the 381 FPS Low result shows the GPU is capable of far more than the CPU can feed it.

The GPU's 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores are relevant for Ready Or Not's use of DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) features. The game's tactical environments with dynamic lighting and reflections benefit from the ray tracing capabilities, though the measured FPS values suggest that rasterization performance is the primary driver. The pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s are the specifications that most directly correlate with the 4K Ultra result of 104 FPS, as these metrics determine how quickly the GPU can fill the screen with detailed textures and effects.

The GPU's 575 W TDP and dual-slot design with a 1x 16-pin power connector indicate a high-power component, but the benchmark results show that this power budget translates into sustained performance. The Passmark DirectX 11 score of 371 and DirectX 12 score of 219 illustrate the GPU's API efficiency, with the DX12 path being the relevant one for this game. The 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is the headline compute figure, and it explains why the 4K High setting can maintain 148 FPS while the CPU struggles to keep up at lower resolutions.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution. At 1080p, the High preset at 351 FPS offers the best balance of visual quality and performance, as the jump to Ultra only costs 43 FPS (308 FPS) but provides marginal visual improvements for a tactical shooter where clarity matters. The Medium preset at 363 FPS is nearly identical to High in performance, so High is the recommended choice for its superior visual fidelity without a meaningful FPS penalty.

At 1440p, the High preset at 284 FPS is the clear winner. The Medium preset at 312 FPS offers a 10% performance boost but sacrifices visual detail, while Ultra at 199 FPS represents a 30% reduction from High. For a game like Ready Or Not where spotting enemies in dark environments is critical, the High preset's balance of shadow quality and texture detail at 284 FPS is superior to the Ultra preset's 199 FPS, which could introduce motion blur in fast-paced firefights. The 1440p Medium result with a minimum FPS of 265 and maximum of 358 shows good frame time consistency, but the High preset's average of 284 FPS is still well above any competitive threshold.

At 4K, the High preset at 148 FPS is the only sensible choice. The Medium preset at 163 FPS with a minimum of 139 FPS offers a slight edge in frame rates, but the High preset provides better visual fidelity for long-range engagements. The Ultra preset at 104 FPS is too demanding for the GPU at this resolution, and the Low preset at 187 FPS sacrifices too much visual information for a tactical shooter where environmental details are crucial for situational awareness. The 4K High result of 148 FPS demonstrates that this combo can handle 4K gaming with high settings, but the 104 FPS Ultra result shows the limits of even this flagship GPU.

The data suggests that the Low preset is only viable at 1080p where the 381 FPS result is overkill for any display refresh rate. At 1440p and 4K, the Low preset's performance gains (327 FPS and 187 FPS respectively) come at too great a cost to visual clarity. The Medium preset serves as a fallback for 4K if the user prefers higher frame rates over visual fidelity, but the 24 FPS difference between Medium (163 FPS) and High (148 FPS) at 4K is not worth the visual downgrade in this game.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-10400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D combination ranks 176th out of 2,947 tested combos in Ready Or Not, placing it in the top 6% of all configurations. This ranking reflects the GPU's dominance in the pairing, as the RTX 5090 D's 92nd percentile performance rating far exceeds the CPU's 68th percentile rating. The combo's position in the rankings is primarily driven by the GPU's ability to maintain high frame rates at 1440p and 4K, where the CPU's limitations are less pronounced.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT with an average score of 76,904 (1.1% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT at 78,940 (1.6% higher), and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB at 79,605 (2.4% higher). These close margins in synthetic benchmarks suggest that the RTX 5090 D is not a class leader in raw compute, but its game-specific performance in Ready Or Not benefits from its architectural advantages in rasterization and memory bandwidth.

The CPU's nearest rivals tell a different story. The Intel Xeon 6756E (14,163 avg score, 0.2% higher), Intel Core 7 160UL (14,232, 0.3% higher), AMD EPYC 7552 (14,115, 0.5% lower), and AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14,277, 0.6% higher) all cluster within 1% of the i5-10400F's average score of 14,185. This tight grouping indicates that the CPU is performing at the expected level for its specifications, but it is not a standout component in this pairing.

The rank of 176 out of 2,947 combos is notable because it shows that the GPU's power can partially compensate for the CPU's modest standing. In games that are more GPU-bound, this combo would likely rank higher, but Ready Or Not's CPU demands at lower resolutions pull the overall ranking down. The fact that this combo achieves the 176th spot despite the CPU's 68th percentile rating suggests that the RTX 5090 D is carrying the load in most scenarios.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F's role in this combo is best characterized as a supporting actor that occasionally becomes the bottleneck. With 6 cores and 12 threads running at a base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.30 GHz, the CPU provides sufficient throughput for Ready Or Not's game logic and AI systems, but its single-thread performance limits the maximum achievable frame rates. The 3DMark single-thread score of 688 and Passmark single-thread score of 2,541 indicate modest single-core performance, which is critical for a game that relies on a primary game thread.

The CPU's Cinebench R23 scores of 10,283 multi-core and 1,451 single-core show a 7:1 ratio between multi and single-thread performance, which is typical for a 6-core part but lower than modern CPUs with higher IPC. In Ready Or Not, the 1080p results show this limitation clearly: the 381 FPS Low result is only 8% higher than the 351 FPS High result, and the 308 FPS Ultra result is 13% lower than High. This compression suggests that the CPU is the limiting factor at 1080p, as the GPU could theoretically push higher frame rates if the CPU could feed it more draw calls.

The CPU's 12 MB of shared L3 cache and 256 KB L2 cache per core provide adequate cache hierarchy for the game's data sets, but the 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth on dual-channel DDR4 is a potential constraint. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 4,748 and max-thread score of 4,735 show that the CPU scales well with additional threads, but the 2-thread score of 1,350 and 4-thread score of 2,560 reveal that performance per thread is not exceptional. The Passmark physics score of 696 and floating-point math score of 25,956 indicate that the CPU handles the game's physics calculations without issue, but these are not the primary bottleneck.

The CPU's 68th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 14,185, places it in the mid-range of desktop processors. The nearest rivals' scores within 1% of this figure show that the i5-10400F is performing exactly as expected for its architecture and generation. The CPU's 65 W TDP and Intel Socket 1200 compatibility with Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node are relevant for system builders, but the benchmark data shows that the CPU's performance is adequate for Ready Or Not at 1440p and 4K, where the GPU is the primary bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS dataset for this combo in Ready Or Not spans three resolutions and four settings, providing a comprehensive picture of performance. At 1920x1080, the results are: Low at 381 FPS average, Medium at 363 FPS average with a minimum of 309 FPS and maximum of 418 FPS, High at 351 FPS average, and Ultra at 308 FPS average. The 1080p results show a tight grouping with only 73 FPS separating the lowest (Ultra) from the highest (Low), indicating that the CPU is the primary constraint at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the performance spread widens considerably: Low at 327 FPS average, Medium at 312 FPS average with a minimum of 265 FPS and maximum of 358 FPS, High at 284 FPS average, and Ultra at 199 FPS average. The 128 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p shows that the GPU's workload is increasing, but the CPU still has headroom. The Medium setting's minimum FPS of 265 is the lowest recorded at this resolution, suggesting that occasional frame drops occur in complex scenes, but the average remains high.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low at 187 FPS average, Medium at 163 FPS average with a minimum of 139 FPS and maximum of 187 FPS, High at 148 FPS average, and Ultra at 104 FPS average. The 4K results show the GPU becoming the definitive bottleneck, with the 83 FPS spread between Low and Ultra representing a 44% performance range. The 4K Ultra result of 104 FPS is the only measurement below 139 FPS in the entire dataset, and the 4K Medium minimum of 139 FPS shows that even at medium settings, the GPU can occasionally dip below the 144 FPS threshold.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K at each setting reveals the GPU's capabilities: Low scales from 381 to 187 FPS (51% reduction), Medium from 363 to 163 FPS (55% reduction), High from 351 to 148 FPS (58% reduction), and Ultra from 308 to 104 FPS (66% reduction). The increasing percentage reduction at higher settings indicates that the GPU's workload grows disproportionately with visual complexity. The 4K Medium maximum of 187 FPS matches the 4K Low average exactly, showing that Medium settings can occasionally hit the same performance as Low, but with better visuals. The 1440p Medium minimum of 265 FPS exceeds the 4K Low average of 187 FPS, demonstrating that resolution has a more significant impact on performance than settings at this GPU's capability level.