Road 96

Road 96 is a narrative-driven adventure where the Intel Core i3-12100F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination lands in the bottom 4% of tested configurations, ranking 3587th out of 3713 combos. This pairing is fundamentally constrained by the GPU, which sits at the 40th percentile among all graphics cards, and the data confirms that playable performance is limited to 1080p with reduced settings, as 4K Ultra dips to 13 FPS.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Road 96?

A: The only resolution where this system achieves a consistently playable experience is 1920x1080. At this resolution, the Low preset delivers an average of 81 FPS, and Medium produces 59 FPS, while 1440p and 4K results fall below the 60 FPS threshold across all settings.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, placing it 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 8850M and 0.4% ahead of the Intel UHD Graphics 750. It trails the Intel Arc A310 by 1% in average score.

Q: Is the Core i3-12100F a bottleneck for the GTX 1650?

A: The CPU data shows a strong processor, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11860 and a single-core score of 1674. Given the GPU's 40th percentile ranking versus the CPU's 68th percentile, the GTX 1650 is the limiting component in this configuration for Road 96.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Low preset averages 81 FPS, while Ultra averages only 37 FPS — a drop of 44 FPS (54%) when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings. Medium sits in between at 59 FPS.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Road 96?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the best result is 27 FPS on the Low preset, and Ultra drops to 13 FPS. Even the Medium preset, which has recorded minimums, only reaches 20 FPS average, making 4K unplayable for this game.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-threaded performance compare to its rivals?

A: The i3-12100F's average benchmark score of 13494 puts it essentially tied with the Intel Core 3 N355 (13492, 0% delta) and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-9500. It is 1.1% faster than the Intel Core i7-1250U.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the decisive component in this pairing, and its specifications explain the performance ceiling in Road 96. The card features 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. With a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, the GPU's 896 shading units produce a peak FP32 throughput of 2.984 TFLOPS. These figures place the GTX 1650 at the 40th percentile of all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 7472 is just 0.3% above the AMD Radeon HD 8850M.

The 4 GB VRAM capacity is the primary constraint at higher resolutions and settings. The measured FPS data shows a steep drop as resolution increases, which is consistent with the memory bandwidth and capacity being overwhelmed. At 1080p, the GPU can maintain 59 FPS on Medium, but at 1440p the same setting drops to 38 FPS, and at 4K it falls to 20 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K produces only 13 FPS, indicating that the card's rasterization throughput is insufficient for the increased pixel count.

The GPU's architecture, based on the TU117 chip on a 12 nm process, supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, which are relevant for Road 96's engine. However, the absence of ray tracing and tensor cores means the card relies entirely on traditional shading. The power delivery is modest at 75 W TDP with no external power connectors, but this is not a factor in the measured results. The data shows that the GTX 1650 is a capable 1080p card for this title, but its 4 GB frame buffer and 128-bit memory interface become bottlenecks beyond that resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 81 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 52 FPS, a 36% reduction, and 4K Low further reduces it to 27 FPS, a 67% reduction from the 1080p baseline. This scaling pattern indicates that the GTX 1650's pixel throughput is the limiting factor, as the CPU's 4 cores and 8 threads are more than capable of feeding the GPU at lower resolutions.

The Medium preset shows similar behavior: 59 FPS at 1080p, 38 FPS at 1440p (a 36% drop), and 20 FPS at 4K (a 66% drop). The consistency of these percentage reductions across settings suggests that resolution is the dominant variable, not the quality preset. This is a strong indicator that the GPU is saturating its fill rate and memory bandwidth well before the CPU becomes a constraint.

The data also shows the CPU's headroom indirectly. The i3-12100F's single-thread performance, measured at 1674 in Cinebench R23, is sufficient to maintain frame pacing at 1080p, where the GPU is the bottleneck. The fact that 4K Ultra produces only 13 FPS while 4K Low produces 27 FPS (a 108% improvement) reinforces that the GTX 1650's compute units are the limiting factor, not the game's CPU logic. For users targeting higher resolutions, the GPU must be upgraded, as the CPU has no further influence on these results.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core i3-12100F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 3587th out of 3713 tested combos in Road 96, placing it in the bottom 3.4% of all configurations. This low ranking is directly attributable to the GPU's position — the GTX 1650 sits at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are either integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 750) or older mobile parts (AMD Radeon HD 8850M). The CPU, by contrast, is a strong performer at the 68th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 13494 that ties it with the Intel Core 3 N355.

The ranking implies that most other combos tested in this game deliver higher frame rates. The gap between this combo and the top performers is not just about the GPU, however; the CPU's 4 cores and 8 threads, while adequate for this title, do not provide the multi-threaded headroom that higher-end CPUs offer. The i3-12100F's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11860 is respectable, but its 3dmark max-threads score of 4023 shows that scaling beyond 8 threads yields no additional performance, which is fine for Road 96's likely single-threaded rendering path.

For context, the GPU's average benchmark score of 7472 is 0.3% above the AMD Radeon HD 8850M and 0.4% above the Intel UHD Graphics 750, but 1% below the Intel Arc A310. This puts the GTX 1650 in the same performance tier as entry-level integrated solutions, which explains why the combo ranks so low. The data suggests that this pairing is only suitable for 1080p gaming at medium-to-low settings, and any other combo in the database with a more powerful GPU would outperform it.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combo in Road 96 are the Medium preset at 1920x1080. This configuration averages 59 FPS with a recorded minimum of 50 FPS and maximum of 68 FPS, providing a stable experience that remains above the 30 FPS playability threshold and close to the 60 FPS target. The Low preset at 1080p is the only other option that exceeds 60 FPS, averaging 81 FPS, but it does so at a visual quality cost that Medium mitigates with only a 22 FPS penalty.

The High preset at 1080p averages 48 FPS, which is playable but noticeably less smooth than Medium. The Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 37 FPS, which is borderline for an adventure game with slower pacing. At higher resolutions, no settings are recommended. At 1440p, even Low only averages 52 FPS, and at 4K, the best case is 27 FPS on Low, which is below the playability threshold for most users.

The data shows a clear trade-off: Medium at 1080p offers the best balance of frame rate and visual fidelity, with the minimum FPS of 50 ensuring that scene complexity doesn't cause stutters below the 30 FPS floor. For users who prioritize smoothness over visuals, Low at 1080p is the alternative, but the 59 FPS average on Medium is already sufficient for this genre. The 4 GB VRAM is likely the limiting factor at Medium, as the 128.1 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1080p but not for higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 81 FPS average. This is the highest score of any configuration tested, indicating the GPU has headroom at this resolution with minimal load.
• Medium: 59 FPS average, with a minimum of 50 FPS and maximum of 68 FPS. This is the sweet spot for a stable 60 FPS experience.
• High: 48 FPS average. A 19% drop from Medium, showing a significant cost for the increased texture and shadow quality.
• Ultra: 37 FPS average. A further 23% drop from High, making this setting only viable for slower scenes.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 52 FPS average. A 36% reduction from 1080p Low, confirming the GPU's pixel throughput limit.
• Medium: 38 FPS average, with a minimum of 32 FPS and maximum of 43 FPS. The minimum dips close to the 30 FPS threshold.
• High: 30 FPS average. This is exactly at the playability floor, with no margin for demanding scenes.
• Ultra: 24 FPS average. Below the playable threshold, indicating the GPU cannot handle the higher resolution with max settings.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 27 FPS average. This is the only 4K result above 20 FPS, but it remains unplayable for a smooth experience.
• Medium: 20 FPS average, with a minimum of 17 FPS and maximum of 23 FPS. The minimum shows severe drops during complex scenes.
• High: 16 FPS average. A slideshow-like experience that is not recommended.
• Ultra: 13 FPS average. The worst result, showing the GTX 1650 is completely overwhelmed at 4K with maximum settings.

The progression across resolutions is consistent: each step from 1080p to 1440p to 4K reduces FPS by roughly 35-40% for the same settings. The Medium preset at 1080p is the only configuration that offers both a playable frame rate and a reasonable visual quality, making it the clear recommendation for this hardware pairing.