The Medium

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile delivers a mid-pack performance tier for The Medium in this benchmark database. With a combo rank of 1999 out of 3724 tested configurations, this system sits just past the halfway point of all recorded results, placing it in the 46th percentile of combinations. The data indicates a capable but not exceptional pairing; it outpaces the lower quartile of systems but trails the top performers by a significant margin. This rank reflects a balance between the CPU’s strong multi-threaded capacity and the GPU’s mid-range mobile standing, a combination that yields playable frame rates at most settings but struggles to maintain high refresh rates at maximum quality.

How This Combo Ranks

The ranking of 1999 out of 3724 combos for The Medium positions this laptop configuration in the lower-middle segment of the tested pool. This is not a top-tier gaming rig, yet it is far from a weak contender. The data suggests that roughly 46% of tested configurations perform better, while 54% fall behind, making it a solidly average performer for this specific title. The CPU’s own percentile ranking is much higher at 95th among all processors, indicating the processor has ample headroom; the bottleneck in this pairing is clearly the graphics subsystem. The GPU’s percentile rank is 73rd among all graphics cards, which is respectable, but The Medium’s demanding rendering engine appears to tax it more than typical workloads.

When examining the CPU’s nearest rivals, the data shows it trades blows with high-end desktop parts. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 trails the Intel Core i9-14900K by 1.7% in average benchmark score, while leading the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX by 2%. This places the mobile chip's compute power in a strange position: it rivals desktop-class CPUs, but its integrated graphics are not the focus here. For The Medium, this means the CPU is unlikely to be the limiting factor at most resolutions; instead, the RTX 4070 Mobile will dictate the overall experience. The GPU’s nearest rivals show a similar picture: it scores 0% different from the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090, which are both desktop parts, suggesting the mobile 4070 punches above its weight class in synthetic tests.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile is the primary driver of The Medium’s performance, and its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus is a crucial factor. The memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s matches the CPU’s own system bandwidth, creating a balanced data pipeline, but the 8 GB capacity is a potential limitation at higher resolutions. The GPU’s boost clock of 1695 MHz and base clock of 1395 MHz are modest for the Ada Lovelace architecture, yet the 4608 shading units and 144 tensor cores provide substantial raw compute power. The FP32 throughput of 15.62 TFLOPS is healthy, but the data shows that The Medium’s visual effects, likely including ray-traced reflections and volumetric lighting, push this GPU to its limits.

The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (25 avg) versus 4K Low (72 avg) reveals a dramatic scaling range, indicating that the GPU is heavily stressed by the game’s highest presets. The GPU’s memory configuration is particularly telling: at 3840x2160 Ultra, the frame rate collapses to 25 FPS, a figure that suggests the 8 GB buffer is either full or the compute units are saturated. At 1080p Low, the same GPU produces 108 FPS, showing that when the load is reduced, the card has significant headroom. The GPU’s percentile rank of 73rd and its average benchmark score of 27435 place it near the desktop Radeon RX 6700 XT, but the mobile thermal and power constraints (115 W TDP) mean sustained performance in a laptop chassis may differ from synthetic scores.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data from 1080p to 4K exposes a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling, with the CPU’s role diminishing as resolution climbs. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 108 FPS, but dropping to 1440p Low reduces this to 91 FPS, a 15.7% decrease. Moving to 4K Low yields 72 FPS, another 20.9% drop from 1440p. This scaling is relatively linear for a low preset, suggesting the GPU is the primary limiter even at 1080p, though the high FPS at Low indicates the CPU can feed it adequately. At Medium settings, the trend continues: 1080p yields 68 FPS, 1440p drops to 57 FPS (-16.2%), and 4K falls to 45 FPS (-21.1%). The consistency of these percentage drops across resolutions points to a system where the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth are the controlling factors.

The Ultra preset tells a starker story: 1080p Ultra averages 39 FPS, 1440p Ultra drops to 32 FPS (-17.9%), and 4K Ultra collapses to 25 FPS (-21.9%). The gap between 1080p and 4K at Ultra is a 35.9% reduction, which is less severe than the Low preset’s 33.3% drop but still substantial. This indicates that at Ultra, the game is pushing the GPU’s compute and memory limits simultaneously, and the 8 GB VRAM may be causing texture thrashing at 4K. The data suggests that for a consistent 60 FPS experience, the user must target 1080p with Medium settings (68 FPS) or 1440p with Low settings (91 FPS), as the 4K Medium result of 45 FPS falls short of smooth gameplay.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a granular view of performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the results range from 39 FPS at Ultra to 108 FPS at Low. The Medium preset yields 68 FPS with a minimum of 58 and a maximum of 78, indicating a playable range with some variance. The High preset at 1080p produces 49 FPS, which is borderline for smooth play but acceptable for a slower-paced horror title. At 2560x1440, the frame rates drop across the board: Low remains high at 91 FPS, Medium falls to 57 FPS (min 49, max 66), High drops to 41 FPS, and Ultra sinks to 32 FPS. The 1440p Medium result is notable for its consistency, with the minimum frame rate only 14% below the average.

At 3840x2160, the data shows a severe performance cliff. Low settings yield 72 FPS, which is respectable for 4K, but Medium drops to 45 FPS (min 38, max 52), High falls to 32 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 25 FPS. The difference between 4K Low and 4K Ultra is 47 FPS, a 65.3% reduction, highlighting the massive cost of the game’s highest-quality effects. The min/max values for 4K Medium (38-52) suggest occasional stutters, which could be jarring in a horror game where pacing matters. At 1080p Medium, the min/max range of 58-78 is tighter, implying a more stable experience. The data implies that the sweet spot for this hardware is 1080p Medium or 1440p Low, depending on whether the user prefers higher resolution or higher graphical fidelity.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal preset for this combo is 1920x1080 with Medium settings, which delivers an average of 68 FPS with a minimum of 58 FPS. This configuration provides a smooth, consistent experience that stays above the 60 FPS threshold, with enough headroom to avoid noticeable dips during intense scenes. The Low preset at 1080p yields 108 FPS, which is excellent for competitive play but sacrifices visual quality that The Medium’s atmospheric horror benefits from. The Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 39 FPS, which is too low for a game that relies on tension and timing, making it a poor choice despite the visual upgrade.

For users with a 1440p display, the Low preset is the only viable option for high refresh rates, offering 91 FPS, but the Medium preset at 57 FPS is acceptable for a cinematic experience, provided the user can tolerate occasional drops to 49 FPS. At 4K, the Low preset at 72 FPS is surprisingly playable, but the Medium preset at 45 FPS is a compromise, and anything above that is not recommended. The data strongly suggests that High and Ultra presets are not worth the performance penalty at any resolution, as the visual gains do not justify the 30-50% frame rate drops. For the best balance of image quality and playability, 1080p Medium is the clear winner, with 1440p Low as a secondary option for those prioritizing resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combo for a smooth 60 FPS experience?

A: The only measured configuration that averages above 60 FPS with a minimum above 58 is 1920x1080 with Medium settings, which produces 68 FPS average (58 min, 78 max). The 1440p Low preset also exceeds 60 FPS at 91 FPS, but it lacks the visual fidelity of Medium settings.

*Q: Can this laptop handle 4K gaming in The Medium?*

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, which yields an average of 72 FPS. At Medium settings, 4K drops to 45 FPS, and at High or Ultra, it falls to 32 FPS and 25 FPS, respectively, making those presets unplayable for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the CPU’s performance compare to its rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has an average benchmark score of 77740, which is 1.6% higher than the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX and 1.6% higher than the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P. It trails the Intel Core i9-14900K by 1.7% but leads the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX by 2%.

Q: Is the GPU a bottleneck in this system?

A: Yes, the data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 95th percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 73rd percentile. The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K follows a pattern consistent with GPU-bound performance, not CPU limitations.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory bandwidth and how does it affect performance?

A: The GPU has 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, identical to the CPU’s system bandwidth. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K Ultra result of 25 FPS suggests the memory capacity or bandwidth is insufficient for the highest settings at that resolution.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 Mobile compare to the RTX 3090 in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 4070 Mobile’s average benchmark score is 27435, which is 0.5% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090’s score of 27565. This indicates the mobile part performs nearly identically to the desktop 3090 in general compute tests, though gaming performance may vary.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, running at a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. With 64 MB of shared L3 cache and a 256.0 GB/s quad-channel memory interface, this CPU provides exceptional multi-threaded bandwidth, which is reflected in its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35314 and Geekbench multi-core score of 20992. However, for The Medium, the CPU’s role is secondary to the GPU, as evidenced by the frame rate scaling. At 1080p Low, the system hits 108 FPS, which is a high value that still leaves the GPU as the primary constraint; if the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see diminishing returns at lower resolutions, but the data shows consistent scaling across all resolutions.

The CPU’s single-thread performance is strong, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2044 and a Geekbench single-core score of 2464, ensuring it can handle the game’s AI and physics calculations without stuttering. The PassMark multi-thread score of 54934 and the data encryption score of 35455 further underscore its capability for background tasks, but these do not translate to higher FPS in The Medium. The processor’s 95th percentile ranking and its proximity to the Intel Core i9-14900K (1.7% difference) suggest that in CPU-bound scenarios, this chip would perform admirably, but this game is clearly GPU-limited. The 4 nm process node and 55 W TDP indicate efficient power delivery, which may allow the GPU to draw more power in a shared thermal envelope, but the measured FPS data shows the graphics card is the deciding factor in this pairing.