Road 96

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 delivers a remarkably consistent experience in Road 96, but the data reveals a clear hierarchy in how the hardware scales across resolutions and settings. This is not a demanding title by modern standards, but the combination of a high-core-count CPU and a flagship GPU produces frame rates that range from playable at 4K Ultra to extraordinarily high at 1080p Low. The key takeaway from the measured rows is that this combo is far more limited by the game’s engine and rendering path than by the raw capabilities of either component.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep but predictable, and it shows a shift in bottleneck behavior. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces 372.7 FPS, which is a massive figure that indicates the GPU is nowhere near its limits. Moving to 2560x1440 at Low, the score falls to 236.3 FPS, a reduction of roughly 37% from the 1080p result. At 3840x2160 Low, the average is 128.2 FPS, which is a further drop of about 46% from the 1440p figure. This scaling pattern is typical: the CPU is the primary driver at low resolutions, and the GPU’s workload grows disproportionately as pixel count increases.

The gap between 1080p and 4K becomes smaller when settings are raised. With High settings, the 1080p result is 221.5 FPS, the 1440p result is 138.8 FPS, and the 4K result is 76.1 FPS. The percentage drop from 1080p to 4K is about 66%, which is more severe than the Low setting’s 66% drop from 1080p to 4K (from 372.7 to 128.2, which is also a 66% reduction). This suggests that at High settings, the GPU is starting to become the limiting factor, especially at 4K where the 76.1 FPS figure is still very playable but far from the triple-digit numbers seen at lower resolutions.

Ultra settings exacerbate the resolution scaling further. At 4K Ultra, the combo only manages 58.2 FPS, which is a 51% drop from the 1440p Ultra result of 110.6 FPS, and a 66% drop from the 1080p Ultra result of 171.7 FPS. The data indicates that the game’s Ultra preset imposes a significant shading cost that scales poorly with resolution, and the RTX 5080’s raw throughput is not enough to overcome this at 4K. The limiting component at 4K Ultra is clearly the GPU, while at 1080p Low, the CPU’s single-thread performance is likely the main constraint, given the 372.7 FPS ceiling.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture part built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, and it brings substantial memory resources to the table. The 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than sufficient for Road 96’s relatively modest texture and geometry requirements. The GPU’s clock speeds are also notable: a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2617 MHz, with memory running at 30 Gbps effective. These numbers explain why the card can push such high frame rates at lower resolutions, but they also highlight that the game does not fully utilize the card’s capabilities.

The RTX 5080’s benchmark scores reinforce its position. It has a percentile ranking of 89 against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 59188. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Arc A570M (58239, deltaPct 1.6) and the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60326, deltaPct -1.9). The deltaPct values are small, meaning the RTX 5080 is within a few percent of these parts in synthetic tests, but the real-world game data shows a different story. In Road 96, the GPU’s 56.28 TFLOPS FP32 compute and 879.3 GTexel/s texture rate are more than enough to handle the game’s visual effects, but the Ultra preset’s 58.2 FPS at 4K suggests that the game’s draw calls and post-processing effects are the bottleneck rather than raw pixel throughput.

The GPU’s 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores are present for DirectX 12 Ultimate support, but Road 96 is an adventure game from 2021 that does not rely heavily on ray tracing or DLSS-like features. The measured FPS numbers show no indication of these features being engaged, as the scaling from Low to Ultra is linear and consistent. The RTX 5080’s 360 W TDP and 750 W suggested PSU are not relevant to the gameplay experience, but they do indicate that this is a high-power part that runs hot under load, which is worth considering for system airflow.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a Raptor Lake-S part with 10 cores and 16 threads, running at a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It has a 20 MB shared L3 cache and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, though the memory bandwidth is not specified in the data. The CPU’s architecture is key to understanding its performance in Road 96: it uses a hybrid design with performance and efficiency cores, which allows it to handle multi-threaded tasks well while maintaining strong single-thread performance. The 3dmark single-thread score of 960 and the passmark single-thread score of 3634 are respectable, but they are not top-tier, which explains why the game’s frame rates at 1080p Low are high but not absurdly so.

The CPU’s multi-threaded capabilities are more impressive. The cinebench r23 multicore score of 21279 and the geekbench multicore score of 10971 indicate that the 13400F can handle heavy workloads, but Road 96 does not scale well with core count. The game is likely single-thread bound, as evidenced by the 1080p Low result of 372.7 FPS, which is a hard ceiling that does not improve significantly with higher settings. At 1440p Low, the FPS drops to 236.3, and at 4K Low, it drops to 128.2, which shows that the GPU becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases, leaving the CPU with headroom.

The CPU’s percentile ranking is 82 against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25236. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13620H (25201, deltaPct 0.1) and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25365, deltaPct -0.5). The deltaPct values are negligible, meaning the 13400F is essentially tied with these parts in synthetic tests. In Road 96, this translates to a CPU that is never the bottleneck at 1440p or 4K, but at 1080p with Low settings, the game’s engine likely hits a CPU limit around 372 FPS, which is still far above what any display can show.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 96th out of 1684 tested combinations in Road 96, which places it in the top 6% of all systems in the database. This is a strong showing, but it is not the absolute top tier, which is reserved for more exotic hardware like Threadripper or dual-GPU setups. The rank of 96 is driven by the GPU’s high performance at 4K, where the RTX 5080’s 16 GB of VRAM and 960.0 GB/s bandwidth allow it to maintain playable frame rates even at Ultra settings. The CPU contributes to the rank by providing enough single-thread performance to avoid holding the GPU back at lower resolutions, but it is not the star of the show.

Compared to other combos, this pair excels at 1440p, where it achieves 138.8 FPS at High settings and 175.2 FPS at Medium, both of which are excellent for a smooth experience. The 4K performance is also respectable, but the 58.2 FPS at Ultra is a weak point that pulls the overall rank down. The data shows that the combo’s rank is not determined by the CPU or GPU in isolation, but by how well they work together across the resolution spectrum. At 1080p, the combo’s 372.7 FPS at Low is a top-tier result, but at 4K Ultra, it falls to the 96th rank spot, indicating that many other configurations with faster GPUs or better CPU-GPU balance outperform it in the most demanding scenario.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates across all settings. With Low settings, the average FPS is 372.7, which is the single highest measured value in the entire dataset. Medium settings produce 272.7 FPS, High settings produce 221.5 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 171.7 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra is a 54% reduction, which is significant but still leaves the combo well above the 144 Hz threshold for competitive play. The 1080p results are clearly CPU-bound, as the GPU has massive headroom at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates drop but remain high. Low settings average 236.3 FPS, Medium settings average 175.2 FPS, High settings average 138.8 FPS, and Ultra settings average 110.6 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 37% at Low, 36% at Medium, 37% at High, and 36% at Ultra, which is remarkably consistent. This consistency indicates that the GPU is scaling linearly with pixel count, and the CPU is no longer the bottleneck at this resolution. The 1440p Ultra result of 110.6 FPS is particularly good, as it allows for high refresh rate gaming without needing to compromise on visual quality.

At 3840x2160, the performance is more varied. Low settings average 128.2 FPS, Medium settings average 92.3 FPS, High settings average 76.1 FPS, and Ultra settings average 58.2 FPS. The drop from 1440p to 4K is 46% at Low, 47% at Medium, 45% at High, and 47% at Ultra, which is again consistent. The 4K Low result of 128.2 FPS is excellent for 4K gaming, but the 4K Ultra result of 58.2 FPS is just above the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. The data shows that the combo is best suited for 1440p or 4K with Medium or High settings, where it can maintain frame rates above 90 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the best experience for this combo depends on the target resolution. At 1080p, there is no reason to use anything below High settings, as the 221.5 FPS average is far beyond what any display can show, and Ultra at 171.7 FPS is still incredibly smooth. The data suggests that Ultra is the optimal choice for 1080p, as the visual quality increase is free from a performance standpoint.

At 1440p, the recommended preset is High, which produces 138.8 FPS. This is a sweet spot that balances visual fidelity with a frame rate that is well above the 120 Hz threshold for most gaming monitors. Ultra at 110.6 FPS is also viable for those who prioritize image quality, but the 28 FPS difference between High and Ultra is noticeable in terms of smoothness. Medium at 175.2 FPS is excessive for most users, but it could be used to drive a 240 Hz monitor with ease.

At 4K, the recommendation is to stick with Medium settings, which produce 92.3 FPS. This is the only way to stay above the 90 FPS mark at 4K, and it offers a significant improvement over High’s 76.1 FPS. Ultra at 58.2 FPS is technically playable, but it is close to the edge of what is considered smooth, and the drop from Medium to Ultra is a 37% performance loss for unclear visual gains. Low at 128.2 FPS is an option for competitive play, but the visual compromise is severe for a narrative-driven adventure game. The data indicates that Medium at 4K is the best balance of performance and quality for this combo, while High at 1440p is the overall sweet spot for the entire system.