The Medium

The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D paired with the Intel Arc B390 produces a severely GPU-bound experience in The Medium, where frame rates at every resolution and preset are dictated by the graphics processor’s limited compute capabilities. The data reveals that this combination ranks in the 11th percentile of all tested combos, making it a poor match for the game’s demanding visual load.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS values show a stark and predictable decline as resolution increases, but the pattern is unusual in that even at 1080p, the performance ceiling is very low. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 51 FPS average, which is the single highest frame rate recorded across all tested configurations. Moving to 2560x1440 at Low settings drops performance to 43 FPS, a 15.7% reduction, while 3840x2160 at Low settings yields 34 FPS, another 20.9% drop from the 1440p figure. This scaling suggests that the Arc B390’s fill rate and shading capacity are the primary bottlenecks, as the CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads are more than capable of handling the game’s logic.

The gap between resolutions widens dramatically at higher quality presets. At Medium settings, the 1080p average is 32 FPS, which falls to 27 FPS at 1440p (a 15.6% loss) and then to 21 FPS at 4K (a 22.2% loss from 1440p). This non-linear degradation indicates that the GPU is running out of memory bandwidth and processing units as the pixel count increases. The High preset shows a similar pattern: 23 FPS at 1080p, 19 FPS at 1440p, and 15 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings are essentially unplayable at any resolution, with 18 FPS at 1080p, 15 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K.

The data suggests that resolution scaling is not the primary concern here—even the lowest resolution struggles to maintain playable frame rates on higher presets. The limiting component is clearly the GPU, as the Ryzen 7 9850X3D’s benchmark scores (multi-core 22807 in Cinebench R23 and single-core 2228) place it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, far exceeding the demands of a horror title like The Medium. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, confirming that the Intel Arc B390 is the weak link in this pairing.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel’s 3 nm process. It features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation pipelines, with 12 ray tracing cores. Its base clock runs at 300 MHz and boosts to 2500 MHz, producing a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute throughput is 7.680 TFLOPS, which is modest for modern gaming, and the FP16 rate is 15.36 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

Critically, the GPU uses system shared memory, meaning it relies on the CPU’s DDR5 memory rather than dedicated VRAM. The memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which means the actual performance hinges on the Ryzen 7 9850X3D’s dual-channel memory configuration, rated at 89.6 GB/s. This shared memory setup is a severe limitation for The Medium, a game that likely requires substantial texture memory and bandwidth for its dense environments. The absence of dedicated VRAM explains why performance degrades so sharply as resolution increases—the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory access.

The GPU’s benchmark results reinforce this assessment. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 places it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all NVIDIA integrated or low-end discrete parts from over a decade ago. The GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3% lower), the GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% lower), the GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% lower), and the GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% lower). This comparison shows that the Arc B390 is not just weak for modern standards—it is on par with entry-level GPUs from years ago, making it fundamentally unsuitable for a game like The Medium at playable settings.

The GPU’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility do not compensate for the raw performance shortfall. While the architecture supports modern rendering features, the execution resources are simply too few to handle the game’s fixed-function workload. The 80 W TDP and integrated form factor (IGP slot width) further confirm that this is not designed for heavy gaming loads.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the only viable configuration for actual gameplay is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which produces an average of 51 FPS. This is the sole preset that approaches a smooth experience, and even then, it falls short of the 60 FPS target that most players prefer. The Medium settings at 1080p yields 32 FPS, which is technically playable but will feel stuttery during action sequences. The High preset at 1080p drops to 23 FPS, and Ultra falls to 18 FPS, both of which are below the threshold for comfortable play.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves 43 FPS, which might be acceptable for slower-paced horror exploration, but the Medium preset at 27 FPS is borderline, and High (19 FPS) and Ultra (15 FPS) are not recommended. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only reach 34 FPS, and Medium falls to 21 FPS, making 4K gaming impractical for this combination.

The data indicates that the best experience per the measured rows is 1080p Low, as it provides the highest frame rate with the least compromise. However, users should note that even this setting may not deliver consistent performance, as the game’s horror atmosphere often relies on sudden visual effects that could cause frame drops. The 1080p Medium setting offers a 32 FPS average with a minimum of 27 FPS and maximum of 37 FPS, indicating some variance but still a more stable experience than higher presets.

Given the GPU’s limitations, the recommendation is to stay at 1080p and avoid any preset above Low if fluidity is the priority. For those who value visual fidelity over frame rate, 1080p Medium provides a compromise, but the 32 FPS average will likely result in noticeable judder during camera pans. Higher resolutions should be avoided entirely, as the frame rates fall below 30 FPS even on Low settings at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2581 out of 2911 tested combos in The Medium, placing it in the bottom 11.3% of all configurations. This rank is unsurprising given the GPU’s performance profile, but it is importantly the CPU is not the limiting factor. The Ryzen 7 9850X3D’s benchmark scores—Cinebench R23 multicore 22807 and single-core 2228—are strong enough to place it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 58386.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in terms of average score include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (58323, 0.1% lower), the Intel Xeon w5-2545 (58504, 0.2% higher), the Intel Core i9-14900 (58115, 0.5% lower), and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 (58826, 0.7% higher). These deltas are all within 1%, indicating that the Ryzen 7 9850X3D is competitively positioned among high-end processors. However, this strength is wasted when paired with a GPU that ranks in the 9th percentile, as the game’s frame rates are entirely GPU-bound.

The GPU’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% lower), the GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% lower), the GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% lower), and the GT 710 (1443, 2.7% lower). These are all ancient or low-end parts, and the Arc B390’s 1482 score is only marginally better. The combination rank of 2581 out of 2911 suggests that most other tested pairs of CPUs and GPUs deliver better performance in The Medium, making this a poor configuration for the game.

The data shows a massive imbalance: a top-tier CPU paired with an entry-level integrated GPU. The combination rank reflects this mismatch, as the GPU drags the overall performance down to levels that are comparable to systems from a decade ago. Users considering this combo for The Medium should expect frame rates that are only suitable for 1080p Low settings, and even then, the experience will be suboptimal compared to even mid-range dedicated GPUs.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo in The Medium?

A: The highest average FPS is 51, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration that exceeds 50 FPS in the measured data.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K resolution across all presets?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 12 (Ultra) to 34 (Low). The Medium preset averages 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 and maximum of 24, while High averages 15 FPS. No 4K preset reaches 35 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this pairing?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The Ryzen 7 9850X3D ranks in the 92nd percentile of CPUs with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22807, while the Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile of GPUs with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482.

Q: What is the performance delta between the Arc B390 and its closest GPU rival?

A: The Arc B390’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX’s score of 1463. The delta to the GeForce 800M is 1.5%, to the GT 625 OEM is 2.5%, and to the GT 710 is 2.7%.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 9850X3D compare to its closest CPU rival in average benchmark score?

A: The Ryzen 7 9850X3D’s average benchmark score is 58386, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M’s 58323 and 0.5% higher than the Intel Core i9-14900’s 58115. It is 0.2% lower than the Intel Xeon w5-2545’s 58504.

Q: What are the minimum and maximum FPS recorded at 1080p Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 32, with a minimum of 27 and a maximum of 37. This is the only preset at any resolution that provides full min/max data.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table summarizes all measured average FPS values for the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D + Intel Arc B390 combo in The Medium, organized by resolution and settings preset.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|------------|----------|---------|---------|---------|

| 1920x1080 | Low | 51 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 32 | 27 | 37 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 23 | — | — |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 18 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 43 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 27 | 23 | 31 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 19 | — | — |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 15 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 34 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 21 | 18 | 24 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 15 | — | — |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 12 | — | — |

The data shows a consistent pattern: each step up in resolution reduces average FPS by roughly 15-25%, and each step up in settings reduces FPS by a similar margin. The 1080p Low result of 51 FPS is the only playable configuration, while all 4K presets and all Ultra presets at any resolution fall below 20 FPS. The Medium preset provides the only complete min/max data points, showing that frame pacing is relatively stable at lower resolutions but degrades at higher pixel counts. For example, the 1080p Medium range is 27-37 FPS, while the 1440p Medium range is 23-31 FPS, and the 4K Medium range is 18-24 FPS. This narrowing range indicates that the GPU’s limited resources are being fully saturated at higher resolutions, leading to more consistent but lower overall performance.