Red Dead Redemption 2

The benchmark data for Red Dead Redemption 2 on the Intel Core i3-12100F and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT combination shows a system that is consistently GPU-limited across all tested configurations. The measured FPS values reveal how the Radeon RX 7600 XT handles the graphical load while the Core i3-12100F provides sufficient processing headroom. With 12 measured data points spanning three resolutions and four quality presets, the results offer a clear picture of scaling behavior and performance ceilings. This analysis breaks down the resolution scaling, the GPU's role, and provides specific recommendations based on the measured frames per second.

Resolution Scaling

The transition from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 and then to 3840x2160 shows a steep and consistent performance drop, indicating that the rendering load scales heavily with pixel count. At High settings, the average FPS falls from 57.6 at 1080p to 47.0 at 1440p, a reduction of approximately 18.4%, and then to 31.9 at 4K, which is a 44.6% drop from the 1080p baseline. This pattern strongly suggests the Radeon RX 7600 XT is the limiting component, as the CPU's performance characteristics do not show a bottleneck at lower resolutions.

Looking at the Low preset, the scaling is even more pronounced in absolute terms: 96.6 FPS at 1080p drops to 73.0 at 1440p and then to 46.5 at 4K. The gap between 1440p and 4K at Low settings is 26.5 FPS, which is larger than the 18.9 FPS gap between 1080p and 1440p. This non-linear decline indicates that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth become increasingly strained as resolution increases, a typical signature of a graphics-bound scenario.

The Medium preset tells a similar story, with 71.4 FPS at 1080p falling to 54.0 at 1440p and 39.0 at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is 45.4%, nearly identical to the High preset's 44.6% decline. This consistency across presets reinforces that resolution is the dominant factor in performance scaling for this combination, rather than specific quality settings.

Ultra settings show the most dramatic scaling, starting at 45.2 FPS at 1080p, dropping to 31.2 at 1440p, and collapsing to 21.8 at 4K. The 4K result is less than half of the 1080p figure, and the 1440p to 4K drop of 9.4 FPS is nearly as large as the 1080p to 1440p drop of 14.0 FPS. This suggests that at Ultra, the GPU is working near its limits even at 1080p, and the additional pixel count at higher resolutions pushes it into severely degraded performance territory.

The data indicates that for a smooth experience, users should prioritize 1080p, where even High settings maintain above 57 FPS. At 1440p, only Low settings exceed 60 FPS, while High and Medium fall below 54 FPS. At 4K, no preset achieves even 50 FPS, with the best result being 46.5 FPS on Low settings. This scaling profile confirms that the RX 7600 XT is the primary bottleneck, and the Core i3-12100F's 4-core, 8-thread configuration is not holding back frame rates at any tested resolution.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT plays the decisive role in these results, and its specifications align with the observed scaling behavior. The GPU features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is notable for Red Dead Redemption 2, which is known for using substantial video memory at higher settings and resolutions. The 16 GB capacity ensures that even at 4K Ultra, memory allocation is unlikely to be a limiting factor, allowing the performance to be dictated by compute throughput rather than capacity constraints.

Clock speeds are also relevant. The GPU has a base clock of 1980 MHz, a game clock of 2470 MHz, and a boost clock of 2755 MHz. The boost behavior means the card can push higher frequencies under load, but the sustained game clock of 2470 MHz is the more realistic figure for extended gaming sessions. In Red Dead Redemption 2, the demanding rendering workload likely keeps the GPU near its game clock, and the 22.57 TFLOPS of FP32 compute provides the raw throughput for the game's complex shaders and effects.

The GPU's position relative to its nearest rivals helps contextualize the measured results. The RX 7600 XT scores 20146 in the average benchmark, placing it just 0.3% above the AMD Radeon RX 460 and 1.9% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER. It sits 0.6% below the RX 7600 and 1.9% below the RTX 3070 Mobile. These small deltas suggest that the RX 7600 XT is a mid-pack performer in its class, and the measured FPS in Red Dead Redemption 2 reflects this positioning—playable at 1080p and 1440p with adjustments, but not a high-refresh-rate powerhouse.

The GPU's percentile rank of 63 against all GPUs indicates it sits in the upper-middle range of the performance spectrum. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2348 and PassMark G3D score of 17132 further confirm this tier. For this game, the 16 GB VRAM is an asset, as it allows the card to handle the game's large textures without swapping, but the 128-bit bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth become the limiting factor at higher resolutions, explaining the steep FPS drops observed at 4K.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play this game with this CPU and GPU combination?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the most sensible choice. At this resolution, even High settings achieve 57.6 FPS, and Low settings reach 96.6 FPS. The 2560x1440 resolution is only viable with Low settings (73.0 FPS), while 3840x2160 fails to exceed 46.5 FPS on any preset.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 45.2 FPS, while High averages 57.6 FPS. This represents a 12.4 FPS difference, or a 27.4% performance penalty for Ultra. The gap suggests that the Ultra preset's additional effects are costly, and High provides a significantly smoother experience.

Q: Is the CPU a bottleneck in this game?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting component. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 96.6 FPS, and at 1440p Low it achieves 73.0 FPS. If the Core i3-12100F were the bottleneck, the frame rate would not drop so significantly with resolution increases. The CPU's 4 cores and 8 threads are sufficient to feed the GPU in this title.

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 4K with Medium settings?

A: The measured average FPS for 3840x2160 with Medium settings is 39.0. This is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and even below the 48 FPS that some consider the minimum for console-like performance. Users targeting 4K will need to use Low settings, which only reach 46.5 FPS.

Q: How does the RX 7600 XT compare to the RX 7600 in overall performance?

A: The average benchmark score for the RX 7600 XT is 20146, while the RX 7600 scores 20258. This gives the RX 7600 XT a delta of -0.6% relative to its sibling, meaning it is slightly slower in aggregate benchmarks. In Red Dead Redemption 2, this close relationship suggests users should not expect a meaningful difference between the two cards.

Q: What is the highest FPS recorded in the measured data?

A: The highest average FPS is 96.6, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 73.0 at 2560x1440 with Low settings. No other configuration exceeds 71.4 FPS, which is the 1080p Medium result.

Settings Recommendations

For users prioritizing a smooth experience, the Low preset at 1920x1080 is the clear choice, as it delivers 96.6 FPS, which is well above the 60 FPS standard for most displays. This setting also provides headroom for drops in demanding scenes. At 2560x1440, Low is the only preset that reaches above 60 FPS, at 73.0, making it the sole viable option for that resolution if frame rate is the primary concern.

For a balance between visual quality and performance, the High preset at 1080p is the recommended choice. The 57.6 FPS average is close to 60 FPS, and the visual improvement over Low is substantial in a game like Red Dead Redemption 2, which features detailed environments and lighting. Users with adaptive sync displays will find this acceptable, and the 47.0 FPS at 1440p High is also usable on such monitors, though it falls short of the 60 FPS target.

The Medium preset at 1080p, at 71.4 FPS, is a viable middle ground, offering a 23.9% improvement over High's 57.6 FPS while still retaining more visual fidelity than Low. However, the jump from Medium to High is only 57.6 FPS versus 71.4 FPS, a 13.8 FPS loss, which may be too steep for many users. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution, as it only achieves 45.2 FPS at 1080p and 21.8 FPS at 4K, making it unsuitable for smooth gameplay.

At 4K, no preset provides an ideal experience. The Low setting's 46.5 FPS is the best possible, but it is still below 60 FPS and will be noticeable on high-refresh-rate displays. Users with 4K monitors should consider lowering the resolution to 1440p or 1080p, or accepting the Low preset's performance. The data shows that the GPU's 16 GB VRAM is sufficient even at 4K Ultra, but the compute performance is not enough to maintain playable frame rates at that resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings shows a clear hierarchy. Low settings produce the highest average of 96.6 FPS, followed by Medium at 71.4 FPS, High at 57.6 FPS, and Ultra at 45.2 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is 25.2 FPS, while the difference between Medium and High is 13.8 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 12.4 FPS. This pattern shows diminishing returns as settings increase, with the largest performance cost coming from the Low to Medium transition.

At 2560x1440, the results are 73.0 FPS on Low, 54.0 FPS on Medium, 47.0 FPS on High, and 31.2 FPS on Ultra. The Low to Medium gap is 19.0 FPS, Medium to High is 7.0 FPS, and High to Ultra is 15.8 FPS. Notably, the High to Ultra drop at 1440p is larger than at 1080p, indicating that Ultra's effects are more demanding at higher pixel counts. The 1440p Ultra result of 31.2 FPS is barely playable, and the 1440p High result of 47.0 FPS is the minimum recommended for a playable experience.

At 3840x2160, the measured averages are 46.5 FPS on Low, 39.0 FPS on Medium, 31.9 FPS on High, and 21.8 FPS on Ultra. The Low to Medium gap is 7.5 FPS, Medium to High is 7.1 FPS, and High to Ultra is 10.1 FPS. All of these results are below 60 FPS, and even the Low setting fails to reach 50 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 21.8 FPS is less than half of the 1080p Medium result, illustrating the severe impact of combining high resolution with maximum settings.

Comparing across resolutions, the 1080p Low result of 96.6 FPS is 2.1 times higher than the 4K Low result of 46.5 FPS. Similarly, 1080p High at 57.6 FPS is 1.8 times higher than 4K High at 31.9 FPS. This consistent ratio across presets confirms that resolution scaling is uniform, and the GPU's performance drops proportionally with pixel count. The data shows no anomalies or CPU-related stalls, as the frame rate drops are smooth and predictable across all 12 measured configurations.