Ready Or Not

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound performance as resolution increases. At 1080p High settings, this combo produces 198.5 FPS, but stepping up to 1440p drops that to 124.9 FPS — a 37% reduction. Pushing further to 4K High yields 67.5 FPS, which is 66% below the 1080p result. This steep scaling curve is characteristic of a system where the graphics card becomes the primary constraint at higher pixel counts, rather than the processor.

The Low settings row amplifies this interpretation. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 247.2 FPS, while 1440p Low delivers 154.3 FPS, and 4K Low falls to 79.5 FPS. The consistent 60%+ drop from 1080p to 4K across all settings tiers suggests the RTX 2070 SUPER's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated by the 4K frame buffer demands. The GPU's 9.062 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 64 ROPs are likely the limiting factors at 4K, given that even Low settings cannot break past 80 FPS at that resolution.

Interestingly, the gap between High and Ultra at 4K is substantial — 67.5 FPS versus 45.8 FPS, a 47% performance penalty. This disproportionate drop indicates that Ultra settings introduce effects that heavily tax the Turing architecture's 40 RT cores and 320 tensor cores, likely through advanced lighting or shadow techniques. At 1440p, the High-to-Ultra gap narrows to 29% (124.9 vs 88.2), and at 1080p it shrinks to 29% as well (198.5 vs 140). The 4K Ultra result of 45.8 FPS is the only measured point below 60 FPS, suggesting that resolution and settings interact nonlinearly in this title.

The data implies that 1080p and 1440p are well within the GPU's comfort zone, with the CPU — an Intel Core i5-14600KF with 14 cores and 20 threads — having sufficient headroom to feed frames. At 4K, however, the GPU's 12 nm Turing architecture (die size 545 mm², 13,600 million transistors) is clearly the bottleneck, as evidenced by the dramatic FPS collapse regardless of quality preset.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This pairing of the Core i5-14600KF and RTX 2070 SUPER ranks 1064 out of 1748 tested combos in Ready Or Not. That places it in the 39th percentile of all configurations — solidly mid-pack, but not among the elite performers. The rank reflects the GPU's position in the broader hardware landscape: the RTX 2070 SUPER sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU is much stronger, ranking in the 93rd percentile among all processors.

The asymmetry between CPU and GPU percentiles is telling. The i5-14600KF's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the Intel Core i5-14600K (0.4% higher average score), AMD EPYC 4345P (0.5% lower), and AMD Ryzen 9 5950X (0.6% higher). This CPU is performing at the top of its class, yet the combo's in-game rank is dragged down by the GPU. For context, the RTX 2070 SUPER's nearest GPU rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A400 (0.5% lower score), GTX TITAN Z (0.9% higher), and RTX 4060 Mobile (2.3% higher) — all within a narrow band, indicating the GPU is a mid-tier component.

The 1064th rank suggests that many combos with weaker CPUs but stronger GPUs outpace this configuration in Ready Or Not. This is consistent with the resolution scaling analysis: the game becomes GPU-bound quickly, so the CPU's considerable headroom (Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,889) cannot compensate for the GPU's 4K limitations. At 1080p, however, the combo's high FPS numbers (up to 247.2 on Low) suggest it would rank much higher if the benchmark focused solely on lower resolutions.

The data implies that this combo is best suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming where the GPU can keep pace with the CPU's frame-feeding capability. At 4K, the rank would likely fall further, as the 45.8 FPS Ultra result indicates the GPU is out of its depth.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Examining the measured FPS across all settings tiers reveals a consistent hierarchy, but the optimal choice depends on resolution target. At 1080p, all presets exceed 140 FPS, with Low hitting 247.2, Medium at 215.3, High at 198.5, and Ultra at 140. The jump from High to Ultra costs 58.5 FPS (29%), which is a significant visual-to-performance trade-off. For competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors, Medium at 1080p delivers 215.3 FPS, which is 8.5% faster than High and still likely retains most visual fidelity improvements over Low.

At 1440p, the picture changes. High delivers 124.9 FPS, Medium 136.7 FPS, and Low 154.3 FPS. Ultra drops to 88.2 FPS, which is 29% below High. For a 1440p gaming experience, Medium appears to be the sweet spot: it provides 9.4% more FPS than High while presumably offering better visuals than Low. The 136.7 FPS result comfortably exceeds 60 FPS and approaches 144 Hz territory.

At 4K, the recommendations become more constrained. High produces 67.5 FPS, Medium 69.9 FPS, and Low 79.5 FPS, while Ultra falls to 45.8 FPS. The Medium setting is only 3.6% faster than High, suggesting diminishing returns from lowering quality. Low offers a 13.8% improvement over Medium, but the 79.5 FPS result is still modest. Ultra should be avoided entirely at 4K, as 45.8 FPS is below playable thresholds for most users.

The data suggests that Medium is the most balanced preset across all three resolutions, offering the best FPS-per-visual-fidelity trade-off. For 4K users, Low is the only preset that breaks 75 FPS, but the visual compromise may not justify the gain over Medium. The Ultra preset is only viable at 1080p, where 140 FPS remains fluid.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Ready Or Not?

A: Based on the measured FPS, 1440p High at 124.9 FPS offers a strong balance between visual quality and performance. At 1080p, all presets exceed 140 FPS, but 1440p provides a sharper image while still maintaining triple-digit frame rates. 4K is playable on Low (79.5 FPS) or Medium (69.9 FPS), but Ultra drops to 45.8 FPS.

Q: How much FPS does Ultra cost compared to High?

A: The penalty varies by resolution. At 1080p, Ultra is 29% slower than High (140 vs 198.5 FPS). At 1440p, the drop is 29% as well (88.2 vs 124.9 FPS). At 4K, the penalty is steeper at 32% (45.8 vs 67.5 FPS). This suggests Ultra's added effects tax the GPU progressively harder at higher resolutions.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is the clear limiter, especially at 4K. The i5-14600KF ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the RTX 2070 SUPER ranks in the 65th percentile among GPUs. The resolution scaling data confirms this: FPS drops by 60%+ from 1080p to 4K across all settings, which is a GPU-bound signature.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming?

A: Yes, but with caveats. At 4K Low, the combo achieves 79.5 FPS, and at Medium it reaches 69.9 FPS. High produces 67.5 FPS. Ultra is not recommended at 4K, as it falls to 45.8 FPS. For a smooth experience, 4K Medium at 69.9 FPS is the highest preset that stays above 60 FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested configurations?

A: It ranks 1064 out of 1748 combos, placing it in the 39th percentile. This is lower than the CPU's 93rd percentile rank suggests, indicating that the GPU holds back the system's overall performance in Ready Or Not. The RTX 2070 SUPER's mid-tier position (65th GPU percentile) is the primary driver of this ranking.

Q: What is the highest FPS this combo can achieve?

A: The maximum measured FPS is 247.2, achieved at 1080p Low settings. At 1080p Medium, it still hits 215.3 FPS, and at High it produces 198.5 FPS. The lowest measured result is 45.8 FPS at 4K Ultra.

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

The RTX 2070 SUPER's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is a defining characteristic for Ready Or Not's performance. At 4K, the frame buffer demands appear to exceed what this memory configuration can efficiently handle, explaining the steep FPS drop even at Low settings (79.5 FPS). The GPU's base clock of 1605 MHz and boost clock of 1770 MHz, combined with 2560 shading units and 160 TMUs, produce a pixel rate of 113.3 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 283.2 GTexel/s. These specifications suggest the GPU can process geometry and textures effectively at lower resolutions, but the 4K pixel workload overwhelms the 64 ROPs.

The Turing architecture's 40 RT cores and 320 tensor cores are relevant to this title's Ultra preset, which likely leverages ray-traced effects or DLSS-capable features. The 47% FPS drop from High to Ultra at 4K (67.5 to 45.8 FPS) indicates that these specialized cores are heavily taxed, despite the GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support. The 12 nm process node (die size 545 mm², 13,600 million transistors) means the GPU runs at a 215 W TDP, which is modest by modern standards but limits headroom for sustained high-clock operation under load.

The GPU's percentile rank of 65 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 22,206, places it just below the RTX 4060 Mobile (2.3% higher) and slightly above the GTX TITAN Z (0.9% lower). This mid-tier positioning explains why the combo ranks 1064th overall — the GPU cannot push the system into the upper echelon of performers in a game that becomes GPU-bound at higher resolutions. The measured FPS data confirms that the GPU's 9.062 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p but insufficient for 4K Ultra.

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

The Intel Core i5-14600KF brings substantial processing power to this combo, with 14 cores and 20 threads operating at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz. This Raptor Lake-R architecture (10 nm process, 257 mm² die size) delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,889 and single-core score of 4,643, placing it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs. The 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB L2 per core provide ample on-die storage for game data, which is crucial for maintaining high frame rates in tactical shooters that often involve complex AI and physics calculations.

The CPU's nearest rivals include the i5-14600K (0.4% higher average score), EPYC 4345P (0.5% lower), and Ryzen 9 5950X (0.6% higher), indicating that this processor is essentially at the top of its performance tier. In Ready Or Not, the CPU's role appears to be providing consistent frame delivery at lower resolutions — the 247.2 FPS at 1080p Low suggests the processor can feed frames much faster than the GPU can render them. However, the CPU's advantage diminishes as resolution increases because the GPU becomes the bottleneck.

The 125 W TDP and dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support (with ECC capability) make this a flexible desktop processor, but its performance in this game is constrained by the GPU pairing. At 1080p, the CPU's 5.30 GHz boost clock and 20 threads ensure that even the most demanding AI-driven scenarios in Ready Or Not maintain high frame rates. The Geekbench multi-core score of 15,636 and PassMark multithread score of 38,697 further underscore the CPU's capability, yet the combo's 39th percentile ranking in this game reflects that the GPU holds the system back from higher placements.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo's performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the results are uniformly high: Low produces 247.2 FPS, Medium 215.3 FPS, High 198.5 FPS, and Ultra 140 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 107.2 FPS, representing a 43% performance range. This resolution is clearly where the combo excels, with every preset delivering well above 60 FPS and even Ultra maintaining 140 FPS for high-refresh-rate displays.

At 2560x1440, the FPS drops are noticeable but manageable. Low delivers 154.3 FPS, Medium 136.7 FPS, High 124.9 FPS, and Ultra 88.2 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra spread narrows to 66.1 FPS (43% range), consistent with the 1080p scaling. The Ultra preset at 88.2 FPS is still comfortably above 60 FPS, making 1440p Ultra a viable option for users who prioritize visual fidelity. High at 124.9 FPS is ideal for 120 Hz monitors, while Medium at 136.7 FPS approaches 144 Hz territory.

At 3840x2160, performance drops significantly. Low achieves 79.5 FPS, Medium 69.9 FPS, High 67.5 FPS, and Ultra 45.8 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra spread is just 33.7 FPS (42% range), similar in proportional terms to lower resolutions, but the absolute values are much lower. This resolution exposes the GPU's limitations, with only Low breaking 75 FPS. Medium and High are within 3.6% of each other, suggesting that the GPU is bandwidth-limited rather than compute-limited at this pixel count. Ultra at 45.8 FPS is the only measured result below 60 FPS, making it unsuitable for smooth gameplay.

The data reveals that the combo maintains a consistent ~43% performance difference between Low and Ultra across all resolutions, indicating that the settings scaling is uniform. However, the absolute FPS values at 4K (ranging from 45.8 to 79.5) are dramatically lower than at 1080p (140 to 247.2), confirming that resolution is the dominant factor in performance degradation. The 1080p results suggest the CPU can sustain over 240 FPS when the GPU is not constrained, while the 4K results show the GPU's 8 GB memory and 448 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for high-quality 4K rendering.