Red Dead Redemption 2

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 delivers a high-refresh-rate experience in Red Dead Redemption 2, but the data reveals that this combination is far from the top of the charts. Sitting at rank 112 out of 2902 tested combos, this pairing places itself in the top 4% of all configurations, a position that reflects the raw power of the RTX 4090 more than the contribution of the Ultra 5 245. The combo’s ranking is impressive on paper, yet the measured frame rates show a system that is heavily GPU-bound at higher resolutions, while the CPU begins to show its limits only at the lowest settings and highest frame rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame field places this specific CPU-GPU pairing at 112th overall out of 2902 tested combinations. That is a strong showing, placing it comfortably ahead of the vast majority of systems tested. However, it is not a chart-topping result; the data indicates that there are 111 other combinations that deliver higher average frame rates in this specific title. The ranking suggests that while the RTX 4090 is a top-tier GPU, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245, with its 14 cores and 14 threads, is not the absolute best CPU for pushing this game to its absolute limits. The 90th percentile standing of the CPU against all processors, combined with the GPU’s 88th percentile ranking, points to a system that is balanced but not optimized for the absolute peak.

The delta between this combo and the top 111 is not provided in the data, but the percentile fields for the individual components offer context. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 48995 places it within 0.8% of the Intel Core i5-14600K, which is a notable rival. The data shows the Ultra 5 245 is 0.4% slower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G and 0.5% slower than the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, while being 0.6% faster than the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H. These are marginal differences, indicating that the CPU is a solid mid-to-high-range performer, but it does not have the top-end multi-core muscle of some competitors. In the context of Red Dead Redemption 2, a game that scales well with both CPU and GPU, this ranking suggests that users with higher-end CPUs could see slightly better results, but the difference is likely small given the GPU’s dominance.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is the undisputed star of this combination. Its 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus provides a memory bandwidth of 1.01 TB/s, which is more than sufficient for Red Dead Redemption 2’s large open world and high-resolution textures. The GPU’s base clock of 2235 MHz and boost clock of 2520 MHz, combined with 16384 shading units, deliver immense compute power. The measured data shows that this GPU is capable of pushing frame rates well above 60 FPS at 4K resolution with High settings, and it only struggles at the Ultra preset, where the average drops to 48 FPS.

The 24 GB VRAM capacity is a key factor here. Red Dead Redemption 2 is known for its heavy VRAM usage at high resolutions and ultra textures, and the RTX 4090’s large frame buffer ensures that there are no memory-related bottlenecks. The data shows that at 4K Medium settings, the average frame rate is 79 FPS, with a minimum of 67 FPS and a maximum of 91 FPS. This indicates that the GPU has headroom, and the limiting factor is not memory capacity but rather the computational load of the game’s rendering pipeline. The GPU’s 82.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 1,290.2 GTexel/s texture rate are more than enough to handle the game’s draw calls and shader complexity. The RTX 4090’s percentile ranking of 88th against all GPUs is interesting; it is not the absolute top GPU, but its nearest rivals in the benchmark list include the Intel Arc Pro A60 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, which are professional workstation cards. The data shows the RTX 4090 is effectively tied with the Arc Pro A60, with a delta of 0%, and is 0.3% faster than the Radeon Pro Vega 48. This suggests that in synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 4090 is not far ahead of some professional cards, but in actual gaming performance, its driver optimizations and gaming-specific features make it a much stronger choice.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a 24 MB shared L3 cache. In Red Dead Redemption 2, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and draw call submissions. The game is not particularly CPU-intensive compared to modern titles, but it does benefit from strong single-thread performance. The Ultra 5 245’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4648 and multi-core score of 32924 indicate that it is a capable processor, but it is not a flagship. Its average benchmark score of 48995 places it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, which is respectable, but the nearest rivals show that it is not a clear leader.

The data reveals that the CPU’s performance is sufficient to avoid bottlenecking the GPU at most settings. For instance, at 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 214 FPS, which is a very high frame rate. At 1440p Low, it hits 160 FPS, and at 4K Low, it reaches 106 FPS. These numbers suggest that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough data to maintain high frame rates, even at lower resolutions where the CPU load is relatively higher. However, the CPU’s 14 threads (without hyper-threading) may be a limiting factor in heavily threaded scenarios, but Red Dead Redemption 2 is not a game that scales perfectly across many cores. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 13828 and single-core score of 1952 are solid, but the CPU’s lack of a higher thread count compared to some rivals could be a minor issue in very CPU-bound scenarios. The PassMark multithread score of 38706 and single-thread score of 4394 reinforce this, showing that the CPU is a strong mid-range performer but not a top-tier enthusiast chip. In this game, the CPU’s performance is adequate, but the data indicates that the GPU is the primary driver of frame rates in most scenarios.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how this combo performs across different resolutions and settings. Starting at 1080p, the lowest resolution tested, the system delivers impressive numbers. At Low settings, the average FPS is 214, which is exceptionally high and indicates that the CPU is not a bottleneck at this level. Moving to Medium, the average drops to 161 FPS, with a minimum of 136 and a maximum of 185. High settings yield an average of 134 FPS, and Ultra drops to 96 FPS. These numbers show a clear scaling pattern: as settings increase, the frame rate decreases, but the drops are not linear. The jump from Low to Medium is 53 FPS, while the jump from Medium to High is 27 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 38 FPS. This suggests that the Ultra preset introduces a significant load increase, likely due to higher draw distances and more detailed shadows.

At 1440p, the frame rates are still very high but show a more pronounced impact from the GPU load. Low settings produce an average of 160 FPS, which is 54 FPS lower than at 1080p Low. Medium settings average 120 FPS, with a minimum of 102 and a maximum of 138. High settings average 100 FPS, and Ultra drops to 72 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is roughly a 25% reduction in frame rate for each settings level, which is expected given the increased pixel count. The Ultra preset at 1440p, at 72 FPS, is still playable but not as smooth as the lower settings. The data shows that the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor at this resolution, but the CPU is still keeping up.

At 4K, the highest resolution tested, the frame rates are still respectable but show the true demands of the game. Low settings produce 106 FPS, which is a solid result for 4K. Medium settings average 79 FPS, with a minimum of 67 and a maximum of 91. High settings average 66 FPS, and Ultra drops to 48 FPS. The 4K resolution is where the RTX 4090’s raw power is tested, and the results are good but not overwhelming. The Ultra preset at 48 FPS is below the 60 FPS target that many gamers prefer, indicating that this setting is too demanding even for the RTX 4090. The data shows a clear trade-off between visual fidelity and frame rate, and the measured numbers provide a solid basis for recommendations.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the bottleneck characteristics of this combo. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 214 FPS, which is a very high frame rate that is likely CPU-limited. The CPU’s 14 cores and boost clock of 5.10 GHz are sufficient to handle the game’s logic at this frame rate, but the GPU is not being fully utilized. As resolution increases, the frame rate drops, and the GPU becomes the primary limiter. At 1440p Low, the frame rate is 160 FPS, a 25% drop from 1080p. At 4K Low, it drops to 106 FPS, another 34% reduction. This pattern is typical for a GPU-bound scenario, where the increased pixel count directly impacts the GPU’s workload.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K for each settings level shows that the GPU is the limiting component in most cases. For High settings, the frame rates are 134 FPS at 1080p, 100 FPS at 1440p, and 66 FPS at 4K. This is a 50% reduction from 1080p to 4K, which aligns with the 4x increase in pixel count. For Ultra settings, the frame rates are 96 FPS at 1080p, 72 FPS at 1440p, and 48 FPS at 4K, a 50% drop as well. The consistent scaling suggests that the GPU is the bottleneck, and the CPU’s performance is sufficient to avoid limiting the system at these resolutions. However, the 1080p Low case, where the frame rate hits 214 FPS, indicates that the CPU has a ceiling. The data suggests that if a higher-performing CPU were paired with the RTX 4090, the 1080p Low frame rate could be even higher, but the gains would be minimal at higher resolutions. The min and max FPS values for Medium settings across all resolutions show a consistent spread, indicating that the frame pacing is stable and there are no major stutters or drops.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience depends on the user’s display resolution and preference for frame rate versus visual quality. For 1080p users, the High preset at 134 FPS offers an excellent balance of visual quality and performance. It is noticeably more detailed than Medium, which averages 161 FPS, but the 27 FPS difference is not worth the visual downgrade for most users. The Ultra preset at 96 FPS is still very smooth and provides the best visual quality, but the jump from High to Ultra may not be noticeable enough to justify the 38 FPS drop. For competitive players who prioritize frame rate above all, the Low preset at 214 FPS is an option, but the visual sacrifices are significant. The Medium preset, at 161 FPS with a minimum of 136, is a strong middle ground for those who want high frame rates with better visuals.

For 1440p users, the High preset at 100 FPS is the recommended choice. It provides a smooth experience on most high-refresh-rate monitors, and the visual quality is high. The Medium preset at 120 FPS is also excellent, but High offers a meaningful improvement in detail for a 20 FPS cost. The Ultra preset at 72 FPS is playable but may not feel as fluid, especially on a 144Hz monitor. The Low preset at 160 FPS is for those who want maximum frame rates, but the visual downgrade is steep. The data shows that High at 1440p is the sweet spot, offering a 100 FPS average that is close to the 120 FPS target for smooth gameplay.

For 4K users, the situation is more nuanced. The High preset at 66 FPS is just above the 60 FPS threshold, making it the best option for a smooth experience with high visual quality. The Medium preset at 79 FPS offers a higher frame rate and is also a strong choice, especially for those who prefer a higher margin above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 48 FPS is not recommended, as it falls below the playable threshold for many users. The Low preset at 106 FPS provides the highest frame rate but sacrifices significant visual quality. For 4K, the data suggests that Medium is the best balance, offering 79 FPS with minimal visual impact compared to High. The measured min FPS of 67 at 4K Medium indicates that there are no major dips, providing a stable experience. The Ultra preset should be avoided at 4K unless the user is willing to accept a sub-60 FPS experience. Overall, the data points to High settings at 1080p and 1440p, and Medium settings at 4K, as the best choices for this combo.