The Medium

The Medium is a demanding horror title that stresses both processor and graphics hardware, and the combination of the Intel Core i5-11400F with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 produces a specific performance profile that is heavily dependent on resolution and quality settings. The measured data for this pairing reveals a system that is fundamentally constrained by its graphics solution, yet the CPU still plays a critical role in establishing the baseline for playability. This analysis breaks down the measured frame rates, contextualizes the ranking against other tested combinations, and provides a clear picture of what this hardware can deliver.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate data shows a steep and consistent penalty as resolution increases, which is a classic indicator of a GPU-bound scenario. At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the average frame rate is 27 FPS, with a minimum of 23 FPS and a maximum of 31 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same Medium preset drops the average to 23 FPS, and at 3840x2160, the average falls further to 18 FPS. This progression demonstrates that the GTX 1650’s rendering throughput is the primary limiting factor, as the pixel count increase directly translates to a near-linear reduction in performance.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K is particularly stark when examining the Low settings preset. At 1920x1080 Low, the system achieves a 44 FPS average, which is the highest measured result across all configurations. Dropping to 2560x1440 Low reduces this to 37 FPS, and at 4K Low, the average plummets to 29 FPS. This indicates that even when graphical load is minimized, the sheer number of pixels at 4K overwhelms the GTX 1650’s 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth and 2.984 TFLOPS of compute power. The GPU’s 4 GB of GDDR5 memory is also a likely contributor to the severe performance degradation at higher resolutions, as the frame buffer demands exceed what the card can efficiently manage.

The data suggests that the CPU is not the bottleneck in this configuration, as the frame rate scales predictably with resolution. If the Core i5-11400F were the limiting factor, the frame rates would remain relatively flat across resolutions, but they do not. The 6-core, 12-thread processor with a 4.40 GHz boost clock provides sufficient headroom to feed the GPU, but the GTX 1650 cannot translate that CPU capability into higher frame rates as resolution climbs. For users targeting 1080p, the Medium preset at 27 FPS is the most balanced point, while any attempt at 4K gaming, even at Low, will result in sub-30 FPS averages that compromise the experience.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-11400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 3594 out of 3724 tested combos for The Medium, placing it in the bottom percentile of all systems measured. This ranking is poor, but it is consistent with the individual hardware components’ standings. The CPU holds a percentile rank of 71 against all processors, indicating it is a moderately capable part, while the GPU’s percentile rank of 40 against all graphics cards places it well below average. The system’s overall performance is dragged down by the GPU, which is the weaker link in this pairing.

In terms of direct rival comparisons, the CPU’s average benchmark score is 17177, which is nearly identical to several other processors. The AMD EPYC 7H12 scores 17120, a difference of only 0.3%, while the Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17239, putting the i5-11400F 0.4% behind. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G scores 17278 (0.6% ahead), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U scores 17074 (0.6% behind). These negligible differences indicate that the i5-11400F is performing exactly as expected for its class, and any performance deltas in-game are unlikely to stem from CPU variations.

The GPU’s rival comparisons tell a similar story, but with a lower absolute performance ceiling. The GTX 1650’s average benchmark score is 7472, with the AMD Radeon HD 8850M scoring 7447 (0.3% behind) and the Intel UHD Graphics 750 scoring 7441 (0.4% behind). The AMD Radeon R7 350 is 0.6% behind at 7425, and the Intel Arc A310 is 1% ahead at 7550. These scores confirm that the GTX 1650 sits at the very low end of the performance spectrum, and its ranking of 3594 in this game reflects that reality. The combo’s position is not an anomaly; it is the expected outcome of pairing a mid-range CPU with an entry-level GPU.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Rocket Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel’s 14 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with a 12 MB shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU demonstrates solid multi-threaded capability, scoring 14340 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2024 in single-core. Its Geekbench scores are 7737 multi-core and 1777 single-core, and the Passmark multithread score is 16908. These figures place the processor in the 71st percentile of all CPUs, indicating it is a competent performer for gaming workloads.

For The Medium, the CPU’s role is to maintain a stable frame delivery pipeline, and the data shows it does this effectively without becoming a bottleneck. The measured frame rates at 1080p Low (44 FPS) and 1080p Medium (27 FPS) are not limited by the CPU’s processing power; they are constrained by the GPU’s ability to render frames. The CPU’s 12 threads are more than sufficient for the game’s threading model, and the high boost clock ensures that single-threaded tasks, such as game logic and physics, are handled without issue. The processor’s memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s via dual-channel DDR4 is also adequate for feeding the GPU, though the GTX 1650’s own 128.1 GB/s bandwidth is the more critical factor here.

The CPU’s benchmark scores relative to its nearest rivals confirm that it is not a weak link. With a delta of less than 1% compared to the AMD EPYC 7H12, Intel Core i5-12450H, and others, the i5-11400F is delivering its expected performance. In this game, the CPU’s contribution is to enable the GPU to reach its maximum potential, which is a low threshold given the graphics card’s limitations. Users should not expect CPU upgrades to yield meaningful frame rate improvements in this title, as the bottleneck is clearly elsewhere.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play The Medium with this hardware?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 is the only viable resolution, as it produces the highest average frame rates across all settings. At 1080p Low, the system averages 44 FPS, while 2560x1440 and 3840x2160 yield significantly lower results, with the latter dropping to 29 FPS at Low settings.

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

A: No, the measured results at 3840x2160 are unplayable. The best 4K result is 29 FPS at Low settings, but the Medium preset drops to 18 FPS, and High and Ultra fall to 13 FPS and 10 FPS, respectively. The GTX 1650 lacks the compute power and memory bandwidth for 4K rendering.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-11400F compare to its closest rivals?

A: The i5-11400F has an average benchmark score of 17177, which is within 0.6% of the AMD EPYC 7H12, Intel Core i5-12450H, AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G, and Intel Core Ultra 7 164U. These differences are negligible, indicating the CPU performs as expected for its class.

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

A: The GPU is the clear limiting factor. This is evident from the frame rate scaling with resolution; as resolution increases, frame rates drop proportionally, which is a signature of GPU-bound performance. The CPU’s 71st percentile ranking and high benchmark scores indicate it has sufficient headroom.

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The average frame rate at 1920x1080 with Ultra settings is 16 FPS. This is below playable thresholds and indicates that the Ultra preset should be avoided entirely with this hardware.

Q: How much faster is 1080p Low compared to 4K Low?

A: At 1080p Low, the average frame rate is 44 FPS, while at 4K Low, it is 29 FPS. This represents a 34% reduction in performance, highlighting the dramatic impact of resolution on this GPU.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is a Turing-architecture GPU manufactured on a 12 nm process, featuring 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It operates at a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. The card’s compute capability is rated at 2.984 TFLOPS for FP32, and it supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its Passmark G3D score is 7880, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs.

In The Medium, the GPU’s role is overwhelmingly dominant in determining performance. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings are directly tied to the GTX 1650’s capabilities. At 1080p Medium, the card produces a 27 FPS average, which is the best playable result, but it falls to 20 FPS at High and 16 FPS at Ultra. The 4 GB VRAM is likely a contributing factor to the poor high-resolution performance, as the game’s textures and effects at higher settings may exceed the available memory, causing stutters or reduced frame rates.

The GPU’s closest rivals, such as the Intel Arc A310 (1% faster) and the AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% slower), are all in the same performance tier, confirming that the GTX 1650 is an entry-level part. Its 40th percentile ranking is a clear indicator that it is not designed for demanding titles like The Medium at high settings. The card’s 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors suggest it is intended for basic 1080p gaming, and the data reflects this limitation. Users must accept low to medium settings at 1080p to achieve playable frame rates.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal configuration for this hardware is 1920x1080 with the Low settings preset, which yields an average frame rate of 44 FPS. This is the only setting combination that approaches smooth gameplay, and it provides a playable experience without significant visual compromise. The Medium preset at 1080p drops to 27 FPS, which is borderline playable but may feel choppy in fast-paced scenes, as evidenced by the minimum of 23 FPS.

The High and Ultra presets are not recommended, as they produce averages of 20 FPS and 16 FPS, respectively, at 1080p. These frame rates are below the threshold for acceptable gaming and will result in a poor experience. At higher resolutions, the situation worsens, with 1440p Medium averaging 23 FPS and 4K Medium averaging 18 FPS. The Low preset at 1440p (37 FPS) and 4K (29 FPS) are technically playable, but the visual fidelity is so reduced that it defeats the purpose of higher resolutions.

For the best balance of visual quality and performance, users should start with the Low preset at 1080p and consider adjusting settings manually, though no manual settings were measured in the data. The Medium preset is a viable alternative for users who prioritize graphics over smoothness, but the 27 FPS average and 23 FPS minimum indicate it is a compromise. The data strongly suggests that this system is only suited for 1080p gaming with reduced settings, and any attempt to push higher resolutions or quality presets will result in sub-30 FPS performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table summarizes the exact measured average frame rates for all tested configurations, with minimum and maximum values provided where available.

1920x1080:

• Low: 44 FPS average
• Medium: 27 FPS average, 23 FPS minimum, 31 FPS maximum
• High: 20 FPS average
• Ultra: 16 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 37 FPS average
• Medium: 23 FPS average, 20 FPS minimum, 26 FPS maximum
• High: 16 FPS average
• Ultra: 13 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 29 FPS average
• Medium: 18 FPS average, 15 FPS minimum, 21 FPS maximum
• High: 13 FPS average
• Ultra: 10 FPS average

The data reveals a clear pattern: the GTX 1650’s performance degrades rapidly with each step up in resolution and settings. The 1080p Low result is the standout, offering a 63% improvement over 1080p Medium (27 FPS) and a 175% improvement over 1080p Ultra (16 FPS). The 4K results are uniformly poor, with the best being 29 FPS at Low, which is still below the 30 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The minimum frame rates at Medium settings across all resolutions (23 FPS at 1080p, 20 FPS at 1440p, and 15 FPS at 4K) highlight the instability of the experience, indicating that even the average frame rates are not representative of consistent performance. This breakdown confirms that the system is only viable for 1080p Low, and even then, it does not guarantee a perfectly smooth experience.