The Medium

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X paired with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 delivers a highly constrained experience in The Medium, a horror title that clearly favors GPU horsepower over the substantial CPU resources available in this combo. Measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings remain low, with the best result being 44 FPS at 1080p Low, which indicates that this pairing is far from ideal for smooth gameplay in this specific title. The data reveals a system where the graphics card acts as the primary bottleneck, while the processor’s capabilities go largely underutilized in this workload.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 3594 out of 3724 tested combos in The Medium, placing it in the bottom 3.5% of all tested configurations. This is a remarkably low position that underscores how poorly suited this pairing is for this particular game. The rank reflects the aggregate performance across all measured settings and resolutions, and the pattern is consistent: every single measured frame rate sits below playable thresholds, with even the most optimized settings yielding only 44 FPS.

To contextualize this rank, the GTX 1650 itself holds a 40th percentile ranking among all GPUs, meaning that roughly 60% of all graphics cards tested are faster in synthetic benchmarks. However, the GPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic testing — the AMD Radeon HD 8850M with a delta of 0.3%, the Intel UHD Graphics 750 at 0.4%, and the AMD Radeon R7 350 at 0.6% — are all older or integrated solutions, suggesting that the GTX 1650 is already at the lower end of discrete GPU performance. The Intel Arc A310 is 1% faster in synthetic scores, but in The Medium, the combination still fails to break into comfortable territory.

The CPU side tells a different story. The Ryzen 9 9900X sits at the 92nd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 57498. Its nearest rivals — the AMD EPYC 9015 at -0.1%, the AMD EPYC 7313 at 0.2%, the Intel Core i9-14900 at -1.1%, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M at -1.4% — are all high-end server or desktop processors, indicating that the CPU is nowhere near the limiting factor here. The massive gap between the CPU’s strong synthetic standing and the combo’s poor in-game rank points directly to the GPU as the choke point. In a game like The Medium, which is known for its dual-world rendering mechanics, the GPU must handle significantly more pixel work than a typical title, and the GTX 1650’s 4 GB of VRAM and modest compute resources are simply overwhelmed.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture with a TU117 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It features 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, which are modest numbers by modern standards. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, with memory running at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The memory subsystem consists of 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth.

In The Medium, these specifications translate to severe limitations. The game’s measured frame rates show a clear ceiling even at the lowest settings. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 44 FPS, which is the highest number recorded in the entire dataset. Moving to 1080p Medium drops the average to 27 FPS, while High yields 20 FPS and Ultra only 16 FPS. The pattern repeats at 1440p and 4K, with Low settings producing 37 FPS and 29 FPS respectively, while Ultra settings fall to 13 FPS and 10 FPS.

The GPU’s 4 GB VRAM capacity is likely a critical factor. The Medium’s dual-reality rendering, where two worlds are often displayed simultaneously or in quick succession, demands substantial memory for textures and frame buffers. With only 4 GB of GDDR5, the card may be forced to swap data to system memory, causing stutters and preventing higher settings from being viable. The measured FPS data supports this: the gap between Low and Medium settings is relatively small (44 to 27 FPS at 1080p), but the gap between Medium and High is also narrow (27 to 20 FPS), suggesting that the GPU is hitting compute or memory bandwidth limits rather than purely texture limits.

The GTX 1650’s synthetic benchmarks reinforce this picture. Its PassMark G3D score is 7880, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is just 305. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 7472, placing it at the 40th percentile. In DirectX 11 testing, it scores 58, while DirectX 12 yields 35, and DirectX 9 produces 124. These numbers indicate that the card is not designed for modern, demanding titles, and The Medium, released in 2021, is exactly the type of game that exposes its weaknesses.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average FPS is 44, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the dataset that comes close to playable frame rates, though it still falls short of a smooth 60 FPS target.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings, the combo delivers an average of 10 FPS. This is the lowest measured result in the entire dataset, making 4K Ultra completely unplayable for this pairing.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the primary bottleneck in this game?

A: The data strongly indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. The Ryzen 9 9900X ranks at the 92nd percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 57498, while the GTX 1650 ranks at the 40th percentile with an average score of 7472. The CPU’s nearest rivals include server processors like the AMD EPYC 9015 and EPYC 7313, which are far more powerful than what The Medium requires, whereas the GPU’s rivals include integrated graphics like the Intel UHD Graphics 750.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings produce an average of 37 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 13 FPS. This represents a 24 FPS difference, or roughly a 65% reduction in frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does the combo provide consistent frame times at any setting?

A: The dataset only includes min/max FPS values for Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the combo ranges from 23 to 31 FPS with an average of 27 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 20 to 26 FPS with an average of 23 FPS. At 4K Medium, the range is 15 to 21 FPS with an average of 18 FPS. These ranges suggest relatively stable frame pacing, but at such low averages, consistency does not translate into playability.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its nearest rival in synthetic tests?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472. Its nearest rival, the Intel Arc A310, scores 7550, which is 1% faster. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7447 (0.3% slower), the Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 7441 (0.4% slower), and the AMD Radeon R7 350 scores 7425 (0.6% slower). These small deltas highlight how close the GTX 1650 is to entry-level or integrated solutions in raw performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data for this combo covers three resolutions and four settings presets, providing a comprehensive view of performance limitations. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the combo achieves 44 FPS on Low, 27 FPS on Medium, 20 FPS on High, and 16 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset includes a min/max range of 23 to 31 FPS, indicating some variance but no catastrophic drops. At 2560x1440, the results are predictably lower: 37 FPS on Low, 23 FPS on Medium (with a range of 20 to 26 FPS), 16 FPS on High, and 13 FPS on Ultra. At 3840x2160, the highest resolution, performance falls further: 29 FPS on Low, 18 FPS on Medium (with a range of 15 to 21 FPS), 13 FPS on High, and 10 FPS on Ultra.

The scaling between settings is not linear. At 1080p, going from Low to Medium reduces FPS by 38.6% (from 44 to 27), but going from Medium to High reduces FPS by only 25.9% (from 27 to 20). This non-linear pattern suggests that the GPU is hitting different bottlenecks at different settings. At Low, the GPU may be limited by fill rate or shader throughput, while at Medium and above, VRAM capacity or memory bandwidth may become the dominant constraint. The 4 GB VRAM is likely insufficient for High and Ultra textures in The Medium, forcing the card to use slower system memory and reducing performance disproportionately.

The min/max FPS data for Medium settings shows that frame pacing is relatively consistent, with the spread between minimum and maximum being 8 FPS at 1080p, 6 FPS at 1440p, and 6 FPS at 4K. This consistency suggests that the game is not experiencing sudden spikes or stutters, but rather a steady, low-level performance ceiling. For a horror game that relies on atmosphere and tension, even small hitches can be jarring, but the data shows that the main issue is simply low average FPS rather than instability.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is severe and reveals the GPU-bound nature of this combo. At Low settings, performance goes from 44 FPS at 1080p to 37 FPS at 1440p (a 15.9% reduction) to 29 FPS at 4K (a 34.1% reduction from 1080p). At Medium settings, the progression is 27 FPS at 1080p, 23 FPS at 1440p (14.8% drop), and 18 FPS at 4K (33.3% drop). At High settings, 20 FPS at 1080p becomes 16 FPS at 1440p (20% drop) and 13 FPS at 4K (35% drop). At Ultra, 16 FPS at 1080p drops to 13 FPS at 1440p (18.8% drop) and 10 FPS at 4K (37.5% drop).

The consistent pattern of roughly a 15-20% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a further 15-20% reduction from 1440p to 4K indicates that the GPU is scaling its workload as expected with pixel count. However, the absolute numbers are so low that even the smallest drop pushes the experience further into unplayable territory. The fact that 4K Low (29 FPS) performs better than 1080p Ultra (16 FPS) is telling — it suggests that the game’s quality settings have a more significant impact on performance than resolution, which is typical for a GPU-bound scenario where higher settings increase shader complexity and memory pressure.

This resolution scaling analysis points to the GTX 1650 as the definitive limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect frame rates to remain relatively stable across resolutions, as the CPU workload does not change significantly with resolution. Instead, the FPS drops consistently with each resolution increase, which is the classic signature of a GPU that is saturated at even the lowest settings. The Ryzen 9 9900X, with its 12 cores and 24 threads, is simply waiting for the GPU to deliver frames that never come quickly enough.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the only setting that approaches a playable experience is 1080p Low, which delivers 44 FPS. This is still below the 60 FPS threshold that many players consider smooth, but it is the only configuration where the game is arguably responsive enough to play. The Medium preset at 1080p produces 27 FPS, which is playable but noticeably sluggish, while High (20 FPS) and Ultra (16 FPS) are too slow for any meaningful interaction.

At 1440p, Low settings yield 37 FPS, which might be acceptable for players who prioritize resolution over smoothness, but Medium drops to 23 FPS and below, making those settings impractical. At 4K, even Low settings only reach 29 FPS, which is below the threshold for comfortable play. The data suggests that for this combo, the best strategy is to use 1080p Low settings and accept that the game will run at roughly 44 FPS, or to reduce the resolution further if the display allows it (though no sub-1080p resolutions were tested).

It is notably the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM is likely the reason why High and Ultra settings perform so poorly. The Medium’s dual-world rendering can require significant memory for textures and frame buffers, and exceeding 4 GB can cause severe performance degradation. Players with this combo should avoid High and Ultra settings entirely, as the measured results show that the performance penalty is not worth any visual improvement. The Low preset provides the best balance of playability and visual fidelity for this hardware, with Medium being a viable but compromised alternative for those who prioritize image quality over frame rate.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, with a TDP of 120 W. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, and it features 64 MB of L3 cache, plus 1 MB of L2 cache per core and 80 KB of L1 cache per core. Its PCIe Gen 5 interface provides 24 lanes, and it includes integrated Radeon Graphics.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 9 9900X is exceptionally strong. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 32172, while the single-core score is 2253. Geekbench results show 22174 for multicore and 3010 for single-core. PassMark scores include 54643 for multithread and 4672 for single-thread. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 57498 places it in the 92nd percentile, with nearest rivals being the AMD EPYC 9015 (57555, -0.1%), AMD EPYC 7313 (57399, 0.2%), Intel Core i9-14900 (58115, -1.1%), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (58323, -1.4%). These are all high-end processors, confirming that the Ryzen 9 9900X is not the bottleneck in The Medium.

The game’s performance data shows no evidence of CPU limitation. If the CPU were struggling, we would expect to see frame rates plateau across different resolutions or settings, as the CPU would become the limiting factor once GPU load decreased. Instead, frame rates scale consistently with resolution and settings, indicating that the GPU is always the constraint. The Ryzen 9 9900X’s 12 cores and 24 threads are far more than The Medium requires; even a mid-range CPU could likely deliver the same frame rates with this GPU, as the game’s workload is primarily GPU-bound. The CPU’s high boost clock of 5.60 GHz and strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R15 single-core score of 353, 3DMark single-thread score of 1286) would be beneficial in CPU-bound scenarios, but they go to waste here. The data suggests that the GTX 1650 is so far below the performance level needed for The Medium that no amount of CPU capability can compensate.