Red Dead Redemption 2

The Intel Core i3-12100F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination delivers the lowest tier of playable performance in Red Dead Redemption 2, ranking 1613th out of 1687 tested combos. The data shows a system firmly at the entry-level, where playable frame rates are achievable only at 1080p with reduced settings, and 4K resolution remains entirely out of reach for smooth gameplay.

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

The Intel Core i3-12100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, with a 12 MB shared L3 cache. The processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel memory bus, and its 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide the interface for the GPU.

In Red Dead Redemption 2, the CPU's role is secondary to the GPU's bottleneck, but its capabilities still matter. The 3DMark benchmark scores show a single-thread score of 893 and a 4-thread score of 2859, with 8-thread and max-thread scores of 4026 and 4023 respectively. This near-flat scaling from 4 to 8 threads suggests the game's engine utilization is limited, but the processor's strong single-core performance (Geekbench single-core score of 2224) helps maintain minimum frame pacing.

The processor's percentile rank of 72 among all CPUs places it above the median, and its average benchmark score of 13516 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13534, deltaPct -0.1) and slightly ahead of the Intel Core i7-1250U (13462, deltaPct 0.4). The i3-12100F also edges out the Intel Core i3-10105 by 0.6% and the Intel Core i7-7700K by 1.8% in overall CPU benchmarks. In practice, this means the CPU is unlikely to be the primary constraint at lower resolutions and settings, but the 4-core design could limit performance in scenes with heavy NPC counts or physics calculations.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture card built on TSMC's 12 nm process, with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU runs at a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, with memory clocked at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective). It features 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, delivering a theoretical FP32 performance of 2.984 TFLOPS.

The 4 GB VRAM capacity is a critical limitation in Red Dead Redemption 2, a game known for large open-world textures. Benchmark results indicate the GPU's average score of 8713 places it at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals show close performance: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 8746 (deltaPct -0.4), the AMD Radeon 550X scores 8749 (deltaPct -0.4), and the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 8671 (deltaPct 0.5). The GTX 1650 trails the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 by 0.5%.

The GPU's 75 W TDP and lack of external power connectors make it a low-power solution, but the data shows it struggles with the game's demands. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 44.8, which is the only measured configuration that approaches smooth gameplay. The 4 GB VRAM likely forces texture streaming at higher settings, contributing to the dramatic FPS drops observed when moving from Low to Medium settings.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core i3-12100F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 1613th out of 1687 tested combos in Red Dead Redemption 2, placing it in the bottom 4.4% of all configurations. This rank reflects the GPU's limitations more than the CPU's, as the processor's benchmark scores are respectable but the graphics card's performance is the primary bottleneck.

The rank data shows that nearly all other tested combinations deliver better frame rates in this game. The combo's position suggests it is outclassed by systems with more powerful GPUs or better-balanced pairings. The CPU's 72nd percentile ranking does little to compensate for the GPU's 43rd percentile standing, resulting in a combined outcome that lands in the lowest tier of playable configurations.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive picture across three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the results are: Low settings yield 44.8 FPS, Medium produces 32.2 FPS, High drops to 28.4 FPS, and Ultra falls to 20 FPS. Only the Low setting exceeds the 30 FPS threshold, and even that is marginal.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance degrades significantly. Low settings deliver 33.7 FPS, Medium drops to 26 FPS, High produces 21.9 FPS, and Ultra yields 13 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 7.7 FPS, indicating a substantial hit from increased settings. At 3840x2160, the results are largely unplayable: Low produces 23.7 FPS, Medium 19.2 FPS, High 13.8 FPS, and Ultra 8.5 FPS.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: each resolution step up reduces performance by roughly 25-30% at the same settings, and each settings tier costs a similar percentage at the same resolution. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 24.8 FPS, while at 4K it narrows to 15.2 FPS, showing diminishing absolute returns as the GPU becomes the absolute bottleneck.

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

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K clearly identifies the GPU as the limiting component. At Low settings, the transition from 1920x1080 (44.8 FPS) to 2560x1440 (33.7 FPS) represents a 24.8% drop, and further to 3840x2160 (23.7 FPS) is another 29.7% drop from the 1440p figure. This near-linear scaling with pixel count indicates the GPU's fill rate and bandwidth are saturated.

At High settings, the drops are more severe in relative terms: from 28.4 FPS at 1080p to 21.9 FPS at 1440p (22.9% drop), then to 13.8 FPS at 4K (37% drop from 1440p). The Ultra setting shows the most dramatic collapse, falling from 20 FPS at 1080p to 13 FPS at 1440p and finally to 8.5 FPS at 4K. The increasing percentage drops at higher settings suggest the 4 GB VRAM is being exceeded, forcing the GPU to swap textures.

The CPU's role in this scaling is minimal. If the processor were the bottleneck, we would expect relatively flat FPS across resolutions at the same settings. Instead, the data shows consistent drops as resolution increases, confirming that the GTX 1650's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth are the constraining factors. The i3-12100F's strong single-thread performance (893 in 3DMark single-thread) is sufficient to feed the GPU at these frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the best settings configuration for this combo in Red Dead Redemption 2?

A: The data shows 1080p Low settings produce 44.8 FPS, which is the only measured configuration that exceeds 40 FPS. Medium settings at 1080p drop to 32.2 FPS, still playable but noticeably less smooth.

Q: Is 4K gaming feasible with this hardware combination?

A: No. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only achieve 23.7 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 8.5 FPS. All 4K configurations fall below the 30 FPS playability threshold.

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

A: The i3-12100F's average benchmark score of 13516 is 0.1% below the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13534), 0.4% above the Intel Core i7-1250U (13462), and 1.8% above the Intel Core i7-7700K (13280).

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

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings yield 33.7 FPS while Ultra produces 13 FPS, a difference of 20.7 FPS. Medium settings provide 26 FPS and High settings deliver 21.9 FPS.

Q: How does the GPU's performance rank among all GPUs?

A: The GTX 1650 ranks at the 43rd percentile with an average benchmark score of 8713. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, scores 8746, a delta of -0.4%.

Q: What is the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K at Medium settings?

A: At Medium settings, the average FPS falls from 32.2 at 1920x1080 to 26 at 2560x1440 and finally to 19.2 at 3840x2160. This represents a total drop of 13 FPS from 1080p to 4K.