The Medium

Settings Recommendations

For The Medium, the measured data shows a clear sweet spot at Medium settings across all three resolutions. At 1920x1080, Medium delivers 93 FPS average with a minimum of 79 FPS and maximum of 107 FPS, which represents a solid balance between visual fidelity and smooth playback. The jump from Medium to High costs 26 FPS at 1080p—dropping to 67 FPS—while the jump from Medium to Low only gains 18 FPS, reaching 111 FPS. That asymmetric trade-off makes Medium the efficient choice: you give up relatively little performance compared to Low while gaining substantially more visual quality than High offers for its cost.

At 2560x1440, Medium maintains 79 FPS average with a minimum of 67 FPS and maximum of 90 FPS. This remains comfortably within playable territory for a horror title where consistent frame pacing matters for atmosphere. High at 1440p falls to 56 FPS, which is still functional but begins to show the strain of the game's fixed-camera rendering style. Low at 1440p hits 105 FPS, but the visual downgrade in a game so dependent on environmental storytelling is hard to justify when Medium is only 26 FPS slower.

The 3840x2160 results tell a different story. Medium drops to 62 FPS average with a minimum of 53 FPS and maximum of 71 FPS. This is the only 4K preset that stays above 60 FPS on average, and the 53 FPS minimum is borderline but acceptable for a slower-paced horror game. High at 4K collapses to 44 FPS, and Ultra falls to 35 FPS—both below the threshold where the game's deliberate pacing feels smooth. Low at 4K reaches 97 FPS, but the aggressive reduction in shadow quality and texture detail undermines the horror atmosphere that The Medium relies on.

The data suggests Medium is the recommended preset for every resolution tested. It delivers the best combination of frame rate stability and visual presentation. For 1080p and 1440p users, Medium provides headroom above 60 FPS with minimums that never dip into stutter territory. For 4K users, Medium is the only preset that keeps the average above 60 FPS, making it the de facto choice despite the 53 FPS minimum. Ultra settings are only viable at 1080p with 53 FPS average, and even then the 26 FPS cost over Medium is steep for what is a marginal improvement in a game already using fixed camera angles.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT carries 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. In The Medium, this memory configuration is more than sufficient at every tested resolution. The game's maximum VRAM consumption never threatens to exceed this capacity, even at 4K Ultra, which means the GPU's memory subsystem is not a limiting factor in these results. Instead, the bottleneck is raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth utilization under the game's rendering load.

The GPU's clock behavior is relevant here. The Radeon RX 9070 XT has a base clock of 1660 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2970 MHz. The spread between base and boost is substantial, and the measured frame rates suggest the card operates closer to its game clock in sustained loads rather than sustaining maximum boost. The 48.66 TFLOPS FP32 compute figure is the primary driver of the measured performance, particularly at higher resolutions where pixel throughput demands scale directly with resolution.

The 4K results illustrate this clearly. At 3840x2160, the RX 9070 XT delivers 97 FPS on Low, 62 FPS on Medium, 44 FPS on High, and 35 FPS on Ultra. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 35 FPS drop, from Medium to High another 18 FPS, and from High to Ultra another 9 FPS. This pattern indicates that the card's compute resources are increasingly taxed as settings rise, with each preset level adding rendering work that directly impacts frame time. The pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s are the specifications that govern this scaling, and the measured results show the card hitting a computational ceiling somewhere between Medium and High at 4K.

The GPU's benchmark percentile ranking is 55th among all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13543. Its nearest rivals in synthetic tests are the AMD Radeon HD 7770M, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570, NVIDIA P106-090, and AMD Radeon Pro 555—all within 1% deltaPct. This is a curious result, as those rivals are far older and less capable cards. The discrepancy suggests the benchmark database's GPU ranking system may not fully capture the RX 9070 XT's modern architecture advantages in real gaming workloads. In The Medium specifically, the measured FPS numbers demonstrate far stronger performance than that synthetic ranking implies, indicating the game's rendering engine benefits from the RDNA 4.0 architecture's specific feature set.

Resolution Scaling

The measured data shows a clear pattern of frame rate degradation as resolution increases, but the magnitude of that degradation varies significantly by settings preset. From 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops from 93 to 79 at Medium settings—a 14 FPS loss. From 2560x1440 to 3840x2160, the drop is steeper: 79 to 62 FPS, another 17 FPS loss. The total 1080p-to-4K scaling at Medium is 31 FPS, representing a 33% reduction in frame rate.

At High settings, the scaling is more pronounced. 1080p yields 67 FPS, 1440p drops to 56 FPS, and 4K falls to 44 FPS. The 1080p-to-1440p loss is 11 FPS, and the 1440p-to-4K loss is 12 FPS—a relatively consistent degradation pattern. At Low settings, 1080p hits 111 FPS, 1440p reaches 105 FPS, and 4K manages 97 FPS. The Low preset shows the smallest absolute drops: only 6 FPS from 1080p to 1440p and 8 FPS from 1440p to 4K. This indicates that at Low settings, the GPU has enough headroom that resolution increases are less punishing.

The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic scaling. 1080p produces 53 FPS, 1440p drops to 45 FPS, and 4K falls to 35 FPS. The 1080p-to-4K loss is 18 FPS, which is a 34% reduction. The fact that Ultra at 1080p only achieves 53 FPS—barely above the 4K Medium result of 62 FPS—reveals that the game's Ultra preset imposes a heavy computational tax regardless of resolution. The rendering workload at Ultra is so demanding that even at lower pixel counts, the GPU is saturated.

This scaling behavior points to the GPU being the primary limiting component across all resolutions. The CPU, an AMD Ryzen 7 3700X with 8 cores and 16 threads, is unlikely to bottleneck at 1080p given its strong multithreaded performance. The consistent FPS degradation as resolution climbs—rather than a plateau or inversion—confirms that the RX 9070 XT's fill rate and compute resources are the deciding factors. The game's fixed-camera perspective reduces CPU overhead compared to open-world titles, making the GPU-bound scenario even more pronounced.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT ranks 1126 out of 3724 tested combos in The Medium. That places it in the 70th percentile of all tested system configurations, meaning roughly 30% of tested combos deliver higher average frame rates in this game. Given the GPU's synthetic benchmark percentile of 55th among all GPUs, the in-game result is somewhat better than the GPU's standalone ranking would suggest, indicating the CPU contributes positively to the overall performance outcome.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 84th among all CPUs is notably higher than the GPU's ranking, and this asymmetry helps explain the combo's position. The Ryzen 7 3700X's average benchmark score of 34260 places it within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 and AMD EPYC 4244P, and 0.5% above the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H. The Intel Core i5-13450HX is 0.2% ahead. These near-identical synthetic scores suggest the CPU is not the limiting factor in most gaming scenarios, including The Medium. The combo rank of 1126 out of 3724 reflects a system where the GPU is the performance ceiling, and that ceiling is adequate for Medium settings at high resolutions but not exceptional.

The ranking also indicates that many of the 2598 combos ranked below this one likely pair weaker GPUs with comparable or stronger CPUs, resulting in lower frame rates. Conversely, the 1125 combos ranked above likely feature more powerful GPUs than the RX 9070 XT, such as higher-tier RDNA 4 or competing NVIDIA offerings. The fact that this combo sits in the upper 30% of all tested configurations is a reasonable outcome for a mid-generation GPU paired with a previous-generation 8-core CPU. The data does not suggest any CPU-GPU mismatch that would artificially depress the ranking; the result is consistent with what the individual component benchmarks imply.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X provides 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 2 architecture at a 7 nm process node. Its base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz are modest by current standards, but the 32 MB L3 cache and 16 threads give it ample headroom for gaming workloads. In The Medium, the CPU's role is secondary to the GPU, as evidenced by the frame rate scaling patterns discussed earlier. The game's fixed-camera presentation reduces draw call complexity and AI overhead compared to free-camera titles, meaning the CPU has fewer responsibilities during gameplay.

The CPU's synthetic benchmarks support this assessment. The Cinebench R15 multicore score of 2092 and single-core score of 204 indicate balanced performance that favors multithreaded workloads. The Geekbench multicore score of 8899 and single-core score of 1593 follow a similar pattern. The PassMark multithread score of 22458 is strong, while the single-thread score of 2656 is adequate but not exceptional. These numbers suggest the CPU can feed the GPU without bottlenecking at the frame rates this combo achieves in The Medium, particularly at 1440p and 4K where GPU load is highest.

The nearest CPU rivals in the benchmark database—AMD Ryzen AI 7 350, AMD EPYC 4244P, Intel Core i5-13450HX, and Intel Core Ultra 7 165H—all score within 0.5% of the 3700X's average. This clustering indicates that the 3700X remains competitive with newer mid-range and mobile processors in synthetic workloads. For The Medium specifically, the CPU's 8 cores and 16 threads are more than sufficient to maintain frame pacing, as the game's rendering engine is not CPU-bound at the settings and resolutions tested. The 65 W TDP and DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for this workload, though the dual-channel memory configuration does not provide the bandwidth headroom that newer DDR5 platforms offer.

At 1080p, the CPU's influence is most visible. The 1080p Low result of 111 FPS and 1080p Medium result of 93 FPS show the CPU can drive frame rates well above 60 FPS without becoming a constraint. If the CPU were bottlenecking, we would expect to see diminishing returns when lowering resolution or settings, but the data shows consistent FPS increases as GPU load decreases. The 1080p Ultra result of 53 FPS is lower than 1440p Medium's 79 FPS, which confirms the GPU is the limiting factor at Ultra settings even at lower resolutions. The CPU is doing its job effectively, providing stable frame delivery without introducing stutter or pacing issues.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured results span a wide range depending on settings. Low settings produce an average of 111 FPS. Medium settings yield 93 FPS average with a minimum of 79 FPS and maximum of 107 FPS. High settings drop to 67 FPS average. Ultra settings produce 53 FPS average. The frame time consistency at Medium is excellent, with the 79 FPS minimum representing a 15% drop from the average—a tight distribution that indicates stable rendering. The Ultra result lacks min/max data, but the 53 FPS average suggests borderline playability for a horror game that benefits from smooth motion.

At 2560x1440, the pattern shifts downward. Low settings average 105 FPS, a 6 FPS reduction from 1080p. Medium settings average 79 FPS with a minimum of 67 FPS and maximum of 90 FPS. The minimum-to-average gap of 12 FPS is slightly wider than at 1080p, indicating more frame time variance at higher resolution. High settings average 56 FPS, and Ultra settings average 45 FPS. The 1440p Medium result remains the strongest recommendation, as the 67 FPS minimum still clears the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. High at 1440p is playable but the 56 FPS average leaves little margin for demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, the results show the GPU's limits. Low settings average 97 FPS, which is surprising given the 4K resolution but demonstrates the game's efficiency at reduced settings. Medium settings average 62 FPS with a minimum of 53 FPS and maximum of 71 FPS. The minimum is below 60 FPS, which could cause noticeable frame drops during intense moments, but the average remains acceptable. High settings average 44 FPS, and Ultra settings average 35 FPS—both below the threshold for smooth horror gameplay. The 4K Medium result is the only viable option at this resolution, and even then, players should be prepared for occasional dips below 60 FPS.

Across all resolutions, the Low settings results show the least variation: 111 FPS at 1080p, 105 FPS at 1440p, and 97 FPS at 4K. This tight spread of 14 FPS total indicates that at Low settings, the GPU is not the primary constraint—the CPU or game engine limits frame rates. In contrast, the Ultra settings results span from 53 FPS at 1080p to 35 FPS at 4K, an 18 FPS spread that demonstrates the GPU's compute resources are fully taxed at this preset. The Medium settings results fall between these extremes, with a 31 FPS spread from 93 FPS at 1080p to 62 FPS at 4K, reflecting the expected resolution scaling behavior for a GPU-bound workload. The data as a whole paints a coherent picture: this combo is well-suited for Medium settings at any resolution, with playable but increasingly compromised results at High settings above 1080p.