Ready Or Not

Ready Or Not, the tactical shooter known for dense indoor environments and AI-driven firefights, presents an interesting case study for the Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600. The measured data reveals a configuration that scales predictably with resolution, but the relationship between its 6-core CPU and 8 GB GPU dictates where this system feels most at home. This analysis breaks down the benchmark results from the FACT PACK to interpret what the numbers mean for this specific hardware pairing.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS progression across resolutions shows a clear pattern of GPU dependency that becomes more pronounced as pixel count increases. At 1080p with High settings, the combo delivers 163 FPS, but stepping up to 1440p drops that to 103 FPS, a reduction of roughly 37%. Moving further to 4K, the High preset yields only 54 FPS, which is about a 67% decline from the 1080p figure. This steep curve indicates that the limiting component shifts decisively toward the GPU as resolution climbs.

Examining the Low preset tells a similar story with even higher absolute numbers. The system hits 205 FPS at 1080p Low, falls to 130 FPS at 1440p Low, and bottoms out at 68 FPS for 4K Low. The fact that even the lowest settings at 4K cannot maintain 70 FPS suggests the Radeon RX 6600’s memory bandwidth and shading throughput are the primary constraints in that regime. The data implies that at 1080p, the CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU, but by 4K, the GPU is fully saturated and becomes the definitive bottleneck.

The gap between the 1440p and 4K results is particularly telling. At Medium settings, the average FPS goes from 113 at 1440p to 59 at 4K, a halving of performance. This nonlinear drop aligns with the 2.25x pixel increase between those resolutions, confirming that the scaling is driven by fill-rate and pixel-processing limits rather than any CPU-side constraint. For users targeting high refresh rates, the data suggests 1080p is the sweet spot, while 4K requires substantial settings compromises to remain playable.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6600 is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with a Navi 23 chip, featuring 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. The memory clock runs at 1750 MHz, translating to 14 Gbps effective, which yields a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s. These specifications are modest by modern standards, and the benchmark results reflect that limitation, especially at higher resolutions where memory capacity and bandwidth become critical.

The GPU’s boost clock of 2491 MHz and game clock of 2044 MHz provide the raw compute for the measured frames. With 1792 shading units and 64 ROPs, the card achieves a pixel rate of 159.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 279.0 GTexel/s. These figures explain why 4K Medium produces a min FPS of 50 and a max of 68, as the 8 GB frame buffer fills quickly with the larger render targets typical of 2160p.

Comparing the GPU to its nearest rivals, the RX 6600’s average benchmark score of 19036 places it statistically tied with the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19030, deltaPct 0) and just 0.1% behind the RTX 4050 Mobile (19049). This indicates that while the card is not a performance outlier, it sits in a well-populated tier where slight variations in driver optimization or thermal headroom can tip results. The 63rd percentile ranking versus all GPUs reinforces that this is a mid-range part, and the Ready Or Not data shows it performing accordingly—strong at 1080p, adequate at 1440p, and struggling at 4K.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F provides 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Rocket Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. This configuration is typical for a mid-range desktop processor, and its benchmark scores suggest it has ample headroom for this game. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 14340 and single-core score of 2024 indicate solid throughput, which is relevant because Ready Or Not’s AI and physics simulations can be thread-hungry.

At 1080p, the CPU appears to be the less limiting factor. The jump from High (163 FPS) to Low (205 FPS) settings shows that lowering graphical load increases frame rate significantly, implying the GPU is still the constraint even at this resolution. Had the CPU been the bottleneck, the FPS difference between settings would be smaller, as the render thread would cap performance regardless of graphics quality. The data points to a system where the 11400F can keep up with the RX 6600’s output without becoming a drag.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score include the AMD EPYC 7H12 (17120, deltaPct 0.3) and the Intel Core i5-12450H (17239, deltaPct -0.4). These close margins suggest that the 11400F’s performance is well within the expected range for its class, and nothing in the Ready Or Not results indicates a CPU-induced frame cap. The 71st percentile ranking versus all CPUs further confirms that this processor is not a weak link in this combo, particularly when paired with a GPU that has clear resolution-based limits.

How This Combo Ranks

The combined system ranks 2886 out of 3714 tested combinations in Ready Or Not, placing it in the lower-middle tier of all hardware pairings. This position is consistent with the individual components’ percentiles—the CPU at 71 and the GPU at 63—but the overall rank suggests that the synergy is not exceptional. A higher rank would require either a faster GPU or a CPU with more cores, as the game appears to scale with both to a degree.

Looking at the measured FPS, this combo outperforms many systems at 1080p, where the 163 FPS High average puts it in the upper quartile of results. However, at 4K, the 54 FPS High average is below the median for tested combos, reflecting the GPU’s memory and bandwidth constraints. The rank of 2886 is therefore a composite of strong 1080p performance and weaker 4K performance, which nets out to a mid-pack overall standing.

The deltaPct values for both components’ rivals show that minor score differences of less than 1% can shift rankings, so the 2886 rank is not a fixed outcome but rather a snapshot of this specific configuration. Users with similar hardware—such as a Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G or an RTX 4050 Mobile—would likely see comparable results, with variations of only a few frames per second in practice.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its strongest performance. Low settings produce an average of 205 FPS, Medium hits 179 FPS with a min of 152 and max of 206, High reaches 163 FPS, and Ultra drops to 114 FPS. These numbers indicate that even at Ultra, the frame rate remains well above 100 FPS, making 1080p the most versatile resolution for this combo.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages fall but remain playable. Low yields 130 FPS, Medium produces 113 FPS with a min of 96 and max of 130, High manages 103 FPS, and Ultra drops to 72 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 58 FPS, which shows that settings have a substantial impact at this resolution, but the minimums stay above 70 FPS for most presets.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low settings average 68 FPS, Medium averages 59 FPS with a min of 50 and max of 68, High drops to 54 FPS, and Ultra falls to 38 FPS. The Ultra result is notably below the 60 FPS threshold, suggesting that 4K gaming is only viable with reduced settings, and even then, the frame pacing may suffer in intense firefights.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain 60+ FPS?

A: Based on the measured data, 1440p is the highest resolution that consistently stays above 60 FPS, with High settings averaging 103 FPS and Ultra averaging 72 FPS. At 4K, only Low settings (68 FPS) exceed 60 FPS, while Medium and High fall below that mark.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F has an average benchmark score of 17177, which is 0.3% higher than the AMD EPYC 7H12 (17120) and 0.4% lower than the Intel Core i5-12450H (17239). This places it in a tight performance band where no single rival has a decisive advantage.

Q: Does the GPU bottleneck at 4K?

A: Yes, the data strongly suggests the Radeon RX 6600 is the limiting factor at 3840x2160. The FPS drops by roughly half from 1440p Medium (113 FPS) to 4K Medium (59 FPS), which aligns with the pixel count increase and indicates the GPU’s 8 GB memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for smooth 4K gameplay.

Q: What is the expected FPS at 1080p Ultra?

A: The measured average is 114 FPS, with no min or max values provided in the data. This is the lowest average at 1080p but remains comfortably above 100 FPS, indicating that Ultra settings are fully playable at this resolution.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems?

A: It ranks 2886 out of 3714 combinations, placing it in the lower 22% of all tested hardware pairings for Ready Or Not. This rank is influenced by strong 1080p performance but weaker 4K results.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low averages 130 FPS while Ultra averages 72 FPS, a difference of 58 FPS. This indicates that graphical settings have a significant impact on performance at this resolution, giving users a wide range of trade-offs between visual quality and frame rate.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, the 1080p High preset (163 FPS) is the standout choice. It provides a high frame rate that exceeds the refresh rate of most monitors while maintaining decent graphical quality, and the 1440p High preset (103 FPS) is a strong alternative for users with higher-resolution displays who still want smooth gameplay.

If prioritizing competitive advantage and maximum frame rates, 1080p Low (205 FPS) or Medium (179 FPS) are the optimal rows, as they push the system to its limits and reduce input latency. Conversely, the 4K Ultra preset (38 FPS) should be avoided, as the frame rate falls below playable thresholds for a tactical shooter where reaction time matters. For 4K users, the Low preset (68 FPS) is the only viable option, though the experience will still be less fluid than at lower resolutions.

The data suggests that this combo is best utilized at 1080p or 1440p, with Medium or High settings providing the most consistent experience. The 1440p Medium preset (113 FPS, min 96) offers a particularly good compromise, as it maintains a minimum frame rate above 90 FPS while delivering higher detail than Low. Ultimately, users should prioritize resolution and settings based on their display’s native resolution and their tolerance for frame rate fluctuations.