Red Dead Redemption 2

The Intel Core i5-9400 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 occupies the 107th position out of 1,687 tested combinations in Red Dead Redemption 2. This places the pairing comfortably within the top 6.3% of all tested configurations, a strong result that reflects the GPU's dominance. While the i5-9400 is an older six-core part without hyper-threading, its Coffee Lake architecture provides enough throughput to avoid crippling the RTX 5090. The data indicates that this combo outperforms the vast majority of systems, though the substantial gap between the CPU's middling 50th percentile ranking among all processors and the GPU's 94th percentile ranking among all graphics cards highlights a notable imbalance that shapes the overall experience.

How This Combo Ranks

The rank of 107 out of 1,687 combos reflects the raw power of the RTX 5090. In aggregate benchmark scores, the GPU averages 84,306 points, placing it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs. This score is only 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D and 0.2% behind the RTX 5050 Mobile, while being 1.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 and 1.6% behind the NVIDIA CMP 40HX. The CPU, in contrast, holds a 50th percentile rank with an average score of 2,305, a figure that is nearly identical to its closest rivals: the Intel Core i3-10305 (2,300, 0.2% ahead), Intel Core i3-1125G4 (2,299, 0.2% ahead), Intel Xeon E-2134 (2,295, 0.4% ahead), and Intel Core i7-8809G (2,319, 0.6% behind). The combination's high overall rank is therefore almost entirely a function of the GPU's exceptional performance, with the CPU merely avoiding catastrophic bottlenecks. In a game like Red Dead Redemption 2, which is well-known for its scalability, this pairing still lands in the top tier, but the data suggests that the processor is the limiting factor preventing a higher placement.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is the undisputed star of this configuration, and its specifications explain why. It features 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering a staggering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. This memory capacity is far beyond what Red Dead Redemption 2 requires at any resolution, ensuring that texture streaming and high-resolution assets never cause a stutter. The GPU's clock speeds are equally formidable, with a base clock of 2017 MHz and a boost clock of 2407 MHz. These clocks, combined with 21,760 shading units, allow the card to achieve a pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput of 104.8 TFLOPS provides ample computational headroom for the game's complex lighting and physics calculations. In the context of this benchmark, the GPU is clearly capable of far more than the CPU can feed it, especially at lower resolutions. The measured FPS figures show that the RTX 5090 is the primary driver of performance, but its full potential is only realized when the resolution increases to 4K, where the load shifts more heavily onto the graphics card.

Resolution Scaling

The performance scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic CPU-bound scenario at lower resolutions. At 1920x1080 with Ultra settings, the combo achieves 100.6 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings, the frame rate drops to 72.9 FPS, a significant 27.5% decrease. At 3840x2160, the frame rate falls further to 50.9 FPS, another 30.2% drop from the 1440p figure. This pattern is consistent across all settings presets. For instance, at High settings, the frame rates are 120.2 FPS (1080p), 103.8 FPS (1440p), and 71.2 FPS (4K). The relative drop from 1440p to 4K is much steeper (31.4%) than from 1080p to 1440p (13.6%), which indicates that the system transitions from being CPU-limited at 1080p to becoming increasingly GPU-limited at 4K. At 1080p, the i5-9400's six threads struggle to keep up with the RTX 5090, capping performance. At 4K, the GPU's workload becomes so heavy that it finally becomes the limiting component, allowing the frame rate to scale more proportionally with resolution. The data suggests that the sweet spot for this pairing is at higher resolutions where the GPU's massive compute resources are more fully utilized.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed view of the combo's performance across resolutions and settings. At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are 50.9 FPS on Ultra, 71.2 FPS on High, 82 FPS on Medium, and 110.3 FPS on Low. The jump from Ultra to High is a substantial 40% improvement, while moving from High to Medium adds another 15.2%. The Low preset nearly doubles the Ultra performance, showing how much headroom is available when graphical fidelity is sacrificed. At 2560x1440, the frame rates are 72.9 FPS (Ultra), 103.8 FPS (High), 120.7 FPS (Medium), and 132.9 FPS (Low). The difference between Medium and High is 14%, while the gap between High and Ultra is 29.7%. At 1920x1080, the results are 100.6 FPS (Ultra), 120.2 FPS (High), 128.8 FPS (Medium), and 142.7 FPS (Low). Here, the scaling is more compressed, with only a 41.9% difference between the lowest and highest settings, compared to a 116.7% difference at 4K. This compression at 1080p is a clear sign of the CPU bottleneck, as the GPU is capable of rendering more frames but is held back by the processor. The Ultra preset at 1080p still manages to exceed 100 FPS, but the incremental gains from lowering settings diminish, indicating that the CPU is the ceiling.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution. For 3840x2160, the High preset at 71.2 FPS offers a balanced experience that is playable and visually rich. The Ultra preset at 50.9 FPS is borderline, and the data suggests that the 40% performance gain from dropping to High is well worth the minor visual trade-off. For players targeting 60 FPS at 4K, High is the clear choice. At 2560x1440, the High preset delivers 103.8 FPS, which is excellent for smooth gameplay. The Ultra preset at 72.9 FPS is still above the 60 FPS threshold, but the 29.7% improvement from dropping to High makes High the more sensible option for competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors. The Medium preset at 120.7 FPS offers diminishing returns, as the visual differences between Medium and High are less pronounced than the frame rate gains. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset at 100.6 FPS is fully playable and provides the best visual experience. Since the CPU bottleneck limits the potential frame rate, there is little benefit to lowering settings below High, as the gains are marginal. The High preset at 120.2 FPS is a solid choice for those who want a slight edge in frame rate, but the Ultra preset is recommended for the best image quality. Across all resolutions, the Low preset should only be used for maximum frame rate, as it provides a 54.9% boost over Ultra at 4K but at a significant visual cost. The data indicates that High is the most balanced preset for this pairing, offering a strong combination of visuals and performance at every resolution tested.