The Long Drive

The Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 pairing produces a distinctly CPU-bound experience in The Long Drive, a driving simulation where frame pacing at high refresh rates is more dependent on processor throughput than on the graphics card's raw fill rate. The CPU's 6 cores and 6 threads operate at a 2.90 GHz base clock with a 4.10 GHz boost, which is modest by modern standards—its 47th percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms this. The RTX 5050, by contrast, sits at the 66th percentile for GPUs. The data shows that at lower resolutions and settings, the CPU becomes the limiting factor, while at 4K the GPU's workload dominates the frame time budget. The game's release date of 2019-09-02 suggests a title that predates the Blackwell architecture, meaning the RTX 5050's modern features are likely underutilized, but the measured FPS deltas across settings reveal which component is throttling performance at each configuration.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Core i5-9400 is a 14 nm Coffee Lake desktop processor with 6 physical cores and 6 threads, no hyper-threading. Its L3 cache is 9 MB shared, and it supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. In The Long Drive, the CPU's role is most apparent when the graphical load is reduced. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 180 FPS average; at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 64 FPS. This 116 FPS gap is far larger than what the GPU alone would explain, indicating that the CPU's single-thread performance—measured at 935 points in Cinebench R23 single-core—is insufficient to feed the RTX 5050 at high frame rates. The processor's boost clock of 4.10 GHz is the key figure here, as the game's physics and car-handling calculations appear to scale with clock speed rather than core count, given that only 6 threads are available.

The CPU's performance relative to its nearest rivals is instructive. The i5-9400's average benchmark score of 2254 is 0.2% below the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (2259), 0.3% above the Intel Core i7-10710U (2248), and 0.4% above the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2246). These deltas are negligible in synthetic tests, but in The Long Drive, the 6-core/6-thread configuration means that any background process or game thread contention will cause frame dips. The measured data shows no min FPS values for Low and High settings at any resolution, which suggests either the benchmark tool captured only averages or the frame pacing was consistent enough not to register a meaningful minimum. At Medium settings, however, the min FPS is documented: 126 at 1080p, 83 at 1440p, and 46 at 4K. These figures show that the CPU's 6 threads can maintain a playable minimum at Medium settings, but the margin narrows as resolution increases, pointing to the GPU taking over the bottleneck role.

The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6629 places it in the lower-middle tier of desktop processors, but its 47th percentile ranking means half of all tested CPUs are faster. In a game like The Long Drive, which likely has a single primary simulation thread, the 935 single-core score becomes the critical metric. The 4.10 GHz boost clock is the maximum achievable on a single core, and the data suggests the game's frame rate at 1080p Low (180 FPS) is close to the CPU's practical ceiling for this title. The RTX 5050, with its 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance, could theoretically push higher frame rates, but the CPU's 6 threads cannot issue draw calls fast enough to exceed approximately 180 FPS in this configuration.

How This Combo Ranks

The Core i5-9400 + RTX 5050 combo ranks 1771 out of 2934 tested combinations in The Long Drive. This places it in the 60th percentile of all combos—above the median but nowhere near the top tier. The ranking reflects a fundamental imbalance: the GPU is capable of much higher performance than the CPU allows in most scenarios. For context, the RTX 5050's nearest rivals in GPU benchmarks are the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (avg score 21153, 0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21237, 1% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713, 1.6% lower). These are all older or lower-tier GPUs, yet the combo's rank is dragged down by the CPU's 47th percentile standing.

The ranking becomes more meaningful when examining the FPS data. At 1080p Low, the combo delivers 180 FPS, which is excellent for a driving game. However, the 93 FPS at 1080p High shows a 48% drop from Low to High, a steeper decline than would be expected from GPU workload alone. This suggests the CPU is unable to maintain high IPC under increased draw calls and shader complexity. At 1440p, the gap narrows: 119 FPS Low versus 61 FPS High (a 49% drop), similar to 1080p. At 4K, the drop is 66 FPS Low to 34 FPS High (a 48% drop), indicating the GPU is now the primary bottleneck, but the CPU's headroom is still insufficient to push higher averages. The combo's rank of 1771 reflects this mixed behavior—it performs well at low settings but falls behind combos with stronger CPUs at high settings.

The deltaPct values for the CPU's nearest rivals show how close the i5-9400 is to its direct competitors, yet none of these rivals are paired with an RTX 5050 in the dataset. The combo's rank is therefore a function of the specific CPU-GPU pairing, and the data shows that the RTX 5050 is underutilized in this configuration. The GPU's 66th percentile ranking versus the CPU's 47th creates a 19-percentage-point gap, which is larger than typical balanced pairings. This imbalance is the primary reason the combo sits at 1771 rather than higher, as the GPU's potential is capped by the CPU's throughput.

FAQ

Q: Why does the combo achieve 180 FPS at 1080p Low but only 64 FPS at 1080p Ultra?

A: The 116 FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p indicates that the CPU's 6 threads and 4.10 GHz boost clock cannot sustain frame rates above approximately 64 FPS when the GPU is fully loaded with Ultra effects. The RTX 5050 has the raw power to render more frames, but the Core i5-9400's single-thread performance (935 in Cinebench R23) becomes the bottleneck as shader complexity increases.

Q: Is the RTX 5050 the limiting component at 4K resolution?

A: Yes. At 4K, the FPS drops from 66 (Low) to 34 (High), a 48% reduction, and from 54 (Medium) to 23 (Ultra), a 57% reduction. These percentages are consistent with GPU-bound behavior, as the 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are taxed by the higher pixel count. The CPU's 6 threads can keep up with the GPU at this resolution, but the GPU's 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 is insufficient for High and Ultra settings at 4K.

Q: What is the best setting for a smooth experience at 1440p?

A: The data shows 1440p Medium delivers 98 FPS average with a min FPS of 83 and max of 112. This is the only 1440p setting with complete min/max data, and the 83 FPS minimum is well above the 42 FPS at Ultra. The 83 FPS min indicates the CPU can maintain consistent frame pacing at Medium, making it the recommended setting for 1440p.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-9400's average benchmark score of 2254 is within 0.4% of four rivals: the Core i7-1068NG7 (2259, -0.2%), Core i7-10710U (2248, +0.3%), Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2246, +0.4%), and Core i3-10305 (2264, -0.4%). These deltas are negligible, meaning the CPU's performance in The Long Drive would be similar with any of these processors.

Q: Why does the combo rank 1771 out of 2934?

A: The rank reflects the CPU's 47th percentile versus the GPU's 66th percentile. The 19-percentage-point gap means the RTX 5050 is significantly more capable than the i5-9400, and in a game where CPU performance limits frame rates at lower resolutions, the combo underperforms relative to balanced pairings. The rank is driven by the CPU's inability to fully utilize the GPU.

Q: Does the GPU's 8 GB VRAM cause issues at any setting?

A: The measured data shows no indication of VRAM-related stuttering, as min FPS values are only provided for Medium settings. At 4K Ultra, the 23 FPS average is likely due to GPU compute limits rather than VRAM capacity, as the 8 GB GDDR6 memory is sufficient for this 2019 title's texture requirements at the measured settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) across three resolutions (1080p, 1440p, 4K). At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 180 (Low) to 64 (Ultra). Medium delivers 148 FPS with a min of 126 and max of 171, while High produces 93 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 116 FPS, a 64% reduction from the maximum. At 2560x1440, the averages are 119 (Low), 98 (Medium), 61 (High), and 42 (Ultra). The Medium setting has documented min/max of 83/112, showing a 29 FPS variance. The drop from Low to Ultra is 77 FPS, or 65%. At 3840x2160, the averages are 66 (Low), 54 (Medium), 34 (High), and 23 (Ultra). Medium shows min/max of 46/62, a 16 FPS variance. The Low-to-Ultra drop is 43 FPS, or 65%.

The pattern across resolutions is consistent: Low-to-Ultra reduction is approximately 64-65% at each resolution. This consistency suggests the GPU's workload scales linearly with both resolution and settings, while the CPU's contribution remains constant. The min FPS data at Medium settings reveals the frame pacing: at 1080p, the min of 126 is 85% of the average; at 1440p, the min of 83 is 85% of the average; at 4K, the min of 46 is 85% of the average. This 85% ratio indicates the CPU's 6 threads can maintain a stable frame delivery at Medium settings, regardless of resolution.

The High settings show no min/max data, which is notable. The averages of 93 (1080p), 61 (1440p), and 34 (4K) suggest these are likely GPU-bound, as the CPU's 6 threads can handle the draw calls, but the RTX 5050's 2560 shading units and 32 ROPs are saturated. The Ultra settings similarly lack min/max data, with averages of 64, 42, and 23 respectively. These figures indicate that Ultra settings at any resolution are playable but not ideal for competitive driving, as the frame rates fall below 60 FPS except at 1080p.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die. Its 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs deliver 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance. The GPU's boost clock is 2572 MHz, with a base of 2317 MHz, and the memory runs at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, yielding 320.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 8 GB GDDR6 VRAM is sufficient for The Long Drive's 2019-era textures, as evidenced by the lack of VRAM-related frame drops in the min FPS data at Medium settings.

The GPU's role in this combo is to provide headroom that the CPU cannot use. At 1080p Low, the 180 FPS average is likely near the CPU's limit, as the GPU could theoretically push higher with its 82.30 GPixel/s pixel rate. The GPU's 66th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it above the median, and its nearest rivals in average benchmark score are the RX Vega M GL (21153, 0.6% higher), HD 8970M (21237, 1% higher), and RX 5600 XT (20713, 1.6% lower). These rivals are all older GPUs, yet the RTX 5050's 13.17 TFLOPS is competitive with them in synthetic tests.

The GPU's role becomes dominant at 4K. The 66 FPS at 4K Low versus 180 FPS at 1080p Low shows a 63% reduction, which is close to the pixel count difference (4K has 4x the pixels of 1080p, but the GPU's scaling is not linear due to memory bandwidth). At 4K Ultra, the 23 FPS average is clearly GPU-bound, as the 320.0 GB/s bandwidth and 32 ROPs are insufficient for the fill rate required. The GPU's 130 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU indicate it is a mid-range part, and the data confirms it performs as such—capable at 1080p and 1440p Medium, but struggling at 4K High and Ultra.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance for optimal settings. At 1080p, Medium delivers 148 FPS average with a 126 FPS minimum, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. High at 93 FPS is also smooth, but Ultra at 64 FPS may introduce input lag in a driving game. Low at 180 FPS is only useful for competitive play where frame rate trumps visual fidelity. For 1440p, Medium at 98 FPS (min 83) is the best balance, as High at 61 FPS is playable but not ideal, and Ultra at 42 FPS is too low for smooth driving. At 4K, Medium at 54 FPS (min 46) is the only acceptable setting, as High at 34 FPS and Ultra at 23 FPS are below the 60 FPS threshold for comfortable gameplay.

The data shows that Medium settings provide the most consistent frame pacing across all resolutions, as it is the only setting with documented min/max values. The 85% ratio of min-to-average FPS at Medium (126/148, 83/98, 46/54) indicates stable frame delivery, which is crucial in a driving simulation where frame stutters affect vehicle control. High settings at 1080p (93 FPS) are acceptable, but the lack of min/max data suggests potential variance. The recommendation is Medium for all resolutions, with High as a viable option only at 1080p.

For users with 144 Hz monitors, 1440p Medium (98 FPS) will not saturate the refresh rate, but the 83 FPS minimum ensures no major drops. At 1080p, Medium at 148 FPS is closer to the 144 Hz target, and Low at 180 FPS exceeds it. The Ultra settings are not recommended at any resolution due to the sub-60 FPS averages at 1440p and 4K, and the 64 FPS at 1080p is borderline. The data supports Medium as the "best experience" preset, balancing visual quality with frame rate consistency.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the bottleneck shift. At Medium settings, the FPS drops from 148 (1080p) to 98 (1440p) to 54 (4K). The 1080p-to-1440p drop is 34%, while the 1440p-to-4K drop is 45%. The pixel count increases by 78% from 1080p to 1440p, and by 125% from 1440p to 4K. The FPS drop percentages are smaller than the pixel increases, indicating that the GPU is not fully saturated at lower resolutions, but the larger drop at higher resolutions suggests the GPU becomes the limiting factor. At Low settings, the drops are 119/180 = 34% from 1080p to 1440p, and 66/119 = 45% from 1440p to 4K, identical ratios to Medium.

At High settings, the drops are 61/93 = 34% and 34/61 = 44%, showing the same pattern. This consistency across settings indicates that the GPU's scaling is entirely resolution-dependent, with the CPU's 6 threads providing a constant baseline. The key insight is that the 1080p-to-1440p drop of 34% is less than the pixel increase of 78%, suggesting the CPU is still the bottleneck at 1080p. At 1440p, the GPU begins to take over, and at 4K, the GPU is fully saturated, as the 45% FPS drop exceeds the pixel increase ratio.

The limiting component analysis is clear: at 1080p, the CPU's 6 threads cap frame rates at approximately 148 FPS (Medium), as the GPU could likely render more. At 1440p, the balance shifts, with the GPU's 320.0 GB/s bandwidth becoming a factor. At 4K, the GPU is the sole bottleneck, as evidenced by the 54 FPS at Medium and 23 FPS at Ultra. The 4K Ultra figure of 23 FPS is particularly revealing—it represents a 84% reduction from 1080p Medium, far exceeding the pixel count difference, which indicates the GPU's compute and memory bandwidth are exhausted. The data shows that users seeking higher frame rates at 4K would need to reduce settings to Low (66 FPS), which is the only 4K configuration that approaches playable frame rates.