Red Dead Redemption 2

Red Dead Redemption 2 presents a demanding workload for the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the Intel Arc B570. The measured frame rates across the three primary resolutions reveal a configuration that is consistently bound by the graphics subsystem, with the CPU showing it has ample headroom even at lower settings. The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy where resolution scaling has a dramatic impact on playability, and the GPU's architectural characteristics define the experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data for this combo shows a steep decline as resolution increases, which is a classic indicator of a GPU-limited scenario. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average frame rate is 79 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same Low preset drops the average to 59 FPS, a reduction of 20 FPS. The leap to 3840x2160 at Low settings further reduces the average to 39 FPS. This progression demonstrates that the Intel Arc B570 is the primary bottleneck, as the workload scales directly with pixel count. The performance cost of moving from 1080p to 1440p is substantial, and the cost of moving to 4K is even more severe, suggesting that the GPU's 160-bit memory bus and 10 GB of VRAM are being saturated.

The impact of resolution is even more pronounced at higher settings. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 49 FPS at 1080p to 37 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 24 FPS at 4K. This 25 FPS difference between the lowest and highest tested resolutions at High settings indicates that the game's visual fidelity settings compound the pixel-count burden. The data implies that the limiting component is unambiguously the graphics card; the CPU's performance is not the constraining factor in these tests. The scaling pattern is consistent across all settings, reinforcing that the Arc B570's rendering throughput and memory bandwidth are the determining factors for this game.

When examining the Medium preset, the FPS drops from 59 at 1080p to 44 at 1440p and 29 at 4K. The Ultra preset shows the most severe scaling, with averages of 36, 27, and 18 FPS respectively. This consistent pattern of roughly 30-40% performance loss with each resolution step-up points to a GPU that is simply overwhelmed by the increasing pixel load. The data suggests that for a smooth experience, users must be willing to compromise on either resolution or settings, as the combination of high resolution and high settings is not viable with this hardware.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS achievable at 1080p with this combo?

A: The highest measured average at 1920x1080 is 79 FPS, which is achieved with the Low settings preset.

Q: How does the 4K performance compare to 1080p performance at Medium settings?

A: At 3840x2160, the Medium preset yields an average of 29 FPS, while at 1920x1080, the same preset yields 59 FPS. This represents a 30 FPS drop, indicating a significant performance penalty for the higher resolution.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 or the Intel Arc B570 the limiting factor in this game?

A: The benchmark results indicate the GPU is the limiting factor. The FPS scales dramatically with resolution changes, which is a hallmark of graphics-bound performance. The CPU's capabilities, such as its 14 cores and 14 threads with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, are not reflected in a performance plateau across resolutions, confirming the GPU as the bottleneck.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded in the entire test suite?

A: The lowest average frame rate is 18 FPS, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with the Ultra settings preset.

Q: Are there any settings where the combo achieves over 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: No. The highest average FPS recorded at 2560x1440 is 59 FPS, which is achieved with the Low settings preset. No tested setting at this resolution breaks the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the frame time variance like at 1080p Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 59, with a minimum of 50 and a maximum of 68. This 18 FPS spread suggests some frame pacing inconsistency, but it is not as severe as the variance seen at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570 is clearly the dominant factor in Red Dead Redemption 2's performance for this combo. Its specifications, including 2304 shading units and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, are tasked with rendering the game's vast open world. The GPU's memory configuration is particularly relevant: 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 380.0 GB/s. This bandwidth is likely a critical constraint at higher resolutions and settings, where the demand for texture data and geometry increases. The data shows a sharp performance cliff between 1440p and 4K, which is consistent with the memory system being saturated.

The GPU's pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s are theoretical maximums that the game does not consistently achieve. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (18 FPS average) versus 1080p Low (79 FPS average) shows a 61 FPS difference, highlighting how the fill-rate requirements of 4K overwhelm the card. The benchmark scores for the GPU, such as a Passmark G3D score of 14195, place it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, which is a modest ranking. Its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the Intel Arc A750 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, with performance deltas of -0.1% and 0.1% respectively, indicating the B570 sits in a specific performance tier that struggles with the most demanding titles at high resolutions.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) is a positive for modern game compatibility, but the raw performance data suggests it is not sufficient for high-fidelity 4K gaming in this title. The 18 ray tracing cores are present, but the frame rates at 4K suggest they are not being leveraged for playable performance. The fact that the FPS at 4K High is 24 and at 4K Medium is 29 shows that even reducing settings cannot compensate for the pixel-count burden, cementing the GPU's role as the performance ceiling. The 150 W TDP and dual-slot design indicate a mid-range card, and the data confirms that it delivers mid-range performance, which is inadequate for the most demanding settings in Red Dead Redemption 2.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and Intel Arc B570 ranks 2335 out of 2902 tested combos for Red Dead Redemption 2. This places the combo in the lower 20% of all configurations tested, indicating that it is not a high-performance pairing for this specific game. This ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU's limitations, as the CPU is a relatively strong performer in other contexts. The combo's rank suggests that most other tested systems, likely with more powerful GPUs, are able to achieve higher frame rates.

The low rank is particularly telling when considering the CPU's individual performance. The Core Ultra 5 235 has a percentile rank of 89 among all CPUs, indicating it is a high-performing processor. This disparity between the CPU's strong standing and the combo's weak ranking reinforces the conclusion that the GPU is the bottleneck. The combo is being held back by the Arc B570, which has a percentile rank of only 65 among all GPUs. In a game like Red Dead Redemption 2, which is known for its demanding graphics, the GPU's lower percentile ranking is a significant disadvantage.

This ranking data implies that for users seeking better performance in this game, upgrading the GPU would be the most effective change. The CPU has the headroom to support a more powerful graphics card, as evidenced by its high benchmark scores and 89th percentile ranking. The combo's placement at 2335 of 2902 indicates that while it can run the game, it does so at a level that is below the median experience of the tested population. The data suggests that the system is not optimized for this title, and the user experience will be defined by visual compromises to achieve acceptable frame rates.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 plays a supporting role in this configuration, providing ample processing power that is not fully utilized in Red Dead Redemption 2. The CPU features 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its 24 MB of shared L3 cache and support for DDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth provide a robust foundation for game logic and asset streaming. However, the measured FPS data shows no signs of CPU limitation, as the frame rates are consistently low and scale directly with GPU load.

The CPU's synthetic benchmark scores are strong, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14769 and a single-core score of 2085. Its Passmark multi-thread score is 37816, and its average benchmark score is 46062, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. This performance level is comparable to rivals like the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and Intel Core i9-13900HX, with delta percentages of 0.1% and -0.1% respectively. These scores indicate that the CPU is capable of handling complex simulations and physics calculations, but in this game, the GPU is unable to keep up with the CPU's output.

The data shows that the CPU is not the bottleneck, as frame rates do not improve when settings are lowered to reduce CPU load. For instance, at 1080p, the average FPS increases from 49 at High to 79 at Low, a change that is entirely attributable to the GPU's reduced workload. If the CPU were the limiting factor, these scores would be closer together. The CPU's role here is to feed the GPU with data, and it does so effectively. The 14 threads are sufficient to handle the game's draw calls and physics, leaving the GPU as the sole determinant of performance. This suggests that for users with this CPU, any upgrade path for this game must focus on the graphics card.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the combo's performance across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 79 FPS, which is the only setting to approach high refresh rates. The Medium preset averages 59 FPS, with a minimum of 50 and a maximum of 68 FPS, indicating playable but not perfectly smooth performance. The High preset averages 49 FPS, while the Ultra preset drops to an average of 36 FPS, showing a significant cost for the highest visual quality.

At 2560x1440, the performance decreases across the board. The Low preset averages 59 FPS, which is the same as the 1080p Medium result, highlighting the resolution's cost. The Medium preset averages 44 FPS, with a minimum of 38 and a maximum of 51. The High preset averages 37 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 27 FPS. None of the 1440p settings achieve a consistently smooth 60 FPS, making this resolution a compromise for the hardware.

At 3840x2160, the performance is marginal. The Low preset averages 39 FPS, which is the only setting above 30 FPS. The Medium preset averages 29 FPS, with a minimum of 25 and a maximum of 34. The High preset averages 24 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 18 FPS. These frame rates are generally not suitable for a smooth gaming experience, except for the Low preset which is borderline playable. The data shows a clear pattern: the combo is only viable for 1080p gaming at Medium or Low settings, or 1440p at Low settings, if a 60 FPS target is desired.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the user's target resolution and performance expectations. For a 60 FPS target at 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only option, delivering an average of 79 FPS with no reported minimum FPS below 60. The Medium preset at 1080p is also viable for a 60 FPS experience, as its average is 59 FPS with a minimum of 50 FPS, but it may experience occasional dips. For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, the High preset at 1080p offers an average of 49 FPS, which is playable if a 60 FPS cap is not required.

For users with a 2560x1440 monitor, the data suggests that the Low preset is the only way to approach a 60 FPS experience, averaging 59 FPS. The Medium preset is a reasonable compromise for visual quality, averaging 44 FPS, which is a playable frame rate for a story-driven title like Red Dead Redemption 2. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p are not recommended, as their averages of 37 and 27 FPS respectively would result in a noticeably stuttery experience.

At 3840x2160, the data indicates that this combo is not suitable for high-fidelity gaming. The Low preset, with an average of 39 FPS, is the only setting that approaches playability, but it will still feel less smooth than 60 FPS. The Medium, High, and Ultra presets at 4K all average below 30 FPS, making them unsuitable for a responsive experience. The best experience for this hardware is to play at 1080p with the Medium preset, which balances visual quality with a frame rate that is mostly smooth, or to use the Low preset at 1440p for a higher resolution with similar performance. The data shows that the Ultra preset should be avoided at all resolutions, as it incurs a significant performance penalty for minimal visual gains in this game.