The Medium

The Medium pairs the Intel Core i5-13400F with the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT, a combination that produces a wide spread of frame rates depending on how you configure it. The data shows a system that is clearly GPU-limited at higher resolutions, but which also reveals that the CPU has enough headroom to push very high frame rates at lower settings. This analysis breaks down the measured results for this specific pairing.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. This is a modern desktop part with a solid core count for both gaming and productivity tasks. In synthetic benchmarks, the chip scores 22,604 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3,191 in single-core, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 11,068 and a single-core score of 1,996. The Passmark multithread score is 25,032, and the single-thread score is 3,634.

For a horror title like The Medium, which often relies on fixed camera angles and pre-baked lighting rather than massive physics simulations, the CPU load is typically moderate. However, the measured FPS data indicates that the i5-13400F is not a bottleneck in most scenarios. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo hits 152 FPS average, which suggests the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU far more frames than the GPU can render at higher quality settings. The processor's 20 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support (DDR4 and DDR5) provide a solid foundation for frame pacing.

The percentile rank for this CPU is 77, meaning it performs better than 77% of all tested CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in average benchmark score are the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (deltaPct 0), the Intel Core 5 120 (deltaPct -0.3), and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (deltaPct 0.4). The i5-13400F essentially matches the Ryzen 9 6900HS in average score, with a negligible 0% difference. This places it in a strong tier for gaming, where single-thread performance and high boost clocks often matter more than raw core counts. The data shows that even at 4K Ultra, where the GPU is heavily taxed, the CPU still allows the game to run, though the frame rate drops to 38 FPS, indicating that the GPU is the limiting factor, not the processor.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is a high-end graphics card built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, using the Navi 31 chip on a 5 nm process from TSMC. It features 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 800.0 GB/s. The card has a base clock of 1387 MHz, a boost clock of 2394 MHz, and a game clock of 2025 MHz. It contains 5,376 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 192 raster operation units, with 84 ray tracing cores. The FP32 performance is 51.48 TFLOPS.

This GPU is a monster on paper, but its performance in The Medium is surprisingly mediocre relative to its raw specs. In synthetic benchmarks, the card scores 29,009 in Passmark G3D and 56,623 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its percentile rank is 55, which means it performs better than 55% of all GPUs, but its nearest rivals are telling: the AMD Radeon 660M (deltaPct -0.5), the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile (deltaPct -0.5), and the AMD Radeon RX 570X (deltaPct -0.9). These are not comparable cards in terms of tier, yet their average benchmark scores are nearly identical to the RX 7900 XT. This suggests that the average benchmark score may not fully capture gaming performance, or that The Medium is particularly demanding in a way that doesn't favor this architecture.

In the game itself, the 20 GB of VRAM is more than sufficient for any resolution, so memory capacity is not a limiting factor. The issue appears to be the card's raw throughput in this specific title. At 1080p Low, the card delivers 152 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 57 FPS. This is a significant performance cliff that suggests the game's Ultra preset uses features that heavily tax the GPU, possibly ray tracing or high-resolution textures that require more bandwidth than the card can effectively utilize in this engine. The boost clock of 2394 MHz is high, but it doesn't translate to consistent frame rates under load.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of performance scaling across resolutions. At Low settings, the frame rate goes from 152 FPS at 1080p, to 136 FPS at 1440p, to 107 FPS at 4K. This is a drop of 10.5% from 1080p to 1440p, and a further drop of 21.3% from 1440p to 4K. The total drop from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is 29.6%, which indicates that the GPU is still managing the workload reasonably well at lower quality settings, and the CPU is not a bottleneck at any of these points.

At Medium settings, the scaling is steeper: 101 FPS at 1080p, 85 FPS at 1440p, and 67 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 15.8%, and from 1440p to 4K is 21.2%. The total drop from 1080p to 4K is 33.7%. This is a more pronounced decrease, showing that as the GPU starts to work harder with additional effects and texture detail, the frame rate suffers more at higher resolutions.

At High settings, the drop is even more dramatic: 72 FPS at 1080p, 61 FPS at 1440p, and 48 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 15.3%, and from 1440p to 4K is 21.3%. The total drop is 33.3%. At Ultra settings, the frame rates are already low at 1080p (57 FPS), and they fall to 48 FPS at 1440p and 38 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 15.8%, and from 1440p to 4K is 20.8%.

The pattern is consistent: the relative drop from 1080p to 1440p is around 15-16%, and from 1440p to 4K is around 21%. This indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component across all settings. The CPU is not holding back the system, as the frame rates scale linearly with the resolution increase, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The data strongly suggests that players should not expect to run this game at 4K Ultra with this combo, as the 38 FPS average is below playable thresholds for most users.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Looking at the measured FPS rows, the best experience depends on the target resolution and frame rate preference. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers 101 FPS average, with a minimum of 86 FPS and a maximum of 116 FPS. This is a smooth, highly playable experience that maintains good visual quality. The High preset at 1080p drops to 72 FPS, which is still playable but noticeably less fluid. The Ultra preset at 1080p drops to 57 FPS, which may feel stuttery in a game that relies on atmosphere and timing.

At 1440p, the Medium preset is the sweet spot, delivering 85 FPS average with a minimum of 72 FPS and a maximum of 98 FPS. This is a solid experience for a horror game, where frame pacing is important for immersion. The High preset at 1440p drops to 61 FPS, which is borderline for a smooth experience. The Low preset at 1440p delivers 136 FPS, but the visual quality is significantly reduced, which undermines the atmospheric horror experience.

At 4K, the situation is more challenging. The Medium preset delivers 67 FPS average, with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 77 FPS. This is the only preset at 4K that approaches a playable frame rate. The High preset drops to 48 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 38 FPS, both of which are likely too low for a comfortable experience in a game that requires quick reactions to scripted scares.

The data indicates that the Medium preset is the best overall choice for this combo. It offers a balance of visual fidelity and performance across all resolutions, with the 1080p and 1440p results being particularly strong. At 4K, Medium is the only viable option, and even then, it hovers around the 60 FPS mark. Players who prioritize frame rate over visuals should consider the Low preset, but for The Medium, the atmosphere and lighting are core to the experience, so Medium is the recommended setting.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo of the Intel Core i5-13400F and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT ranks 694th out of 3,724 tested combos in The Medium. This places it in the top 18.6% of all tested configurations, which is a solid result, but not exceptional given the hardware involved. The rank suggests that there are many other combinations that perform better, likely due to the GPU's underwhelming performance in this specific game.

The GPU's percentile rank of 55 is a significant factor here. While the CPU is ranked at the 77th percentile, the GPU is only at the 55th percentile, and its nearest rivals in average benchmark score are integrated or mobile-class GPUs like the Radeon 660M and RTX A2000 Mobile. This is a stark indicator that the RX 7900 XT's average benchmark score does not reflect its expected performance in this title. The combo's rank of 694 is dragged down by the GPU's performance, meaning that a less powerful CPU paired with a more suitable GPU might rank higher.

For context, the combo rank of 694 out of 3,724 means that 3,030 other combinations performed better in this game. This is surprising for a top-tier GPU, but the data is clear. Players considering this combo for The Medium should be aware that the GPU is not delivering the frame rates that its specifications would suggest. The CPU is doing its job, but the GPU is the bottleneck, and its low percentile rank relative to its peers explains why this combo doesn't rank higher.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance for this combo. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 152 FPS. The Medium preset delivers 101 FPS, with a minimum of 86 and a maximum of 116. The High preset delivers 72 FPS, and the Ultra preset delivers 57 FPS. These results show that at 1080p, the system is capable of very high frame rates at lower settings, but the Ultra preset causes a significant drop.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset delivers 136 FPS. The Medium preset delivers 85 FPS, with a minimum of 72 and a maximum of 98. The High preset delivers 61 FPS, and the Ultra preset delivers 48 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 37.5%, and from Medium to High is 28.2%, showing that each settings tier has a meaningful impact on performance.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset delivers 107 FPS. The Medium preset delivers 67 FPS, with a minimum of 57 and a maximum of 77. The High preset delivers 48 FPS, and the Ultra preset delivers 38 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium at 4K is 37.4%, which is the largest relative drop across all resolutions, indicating that the GPU struggles more with the transition to higher quality settings at 4K.

The minimum FPS values are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution, with 86 FPS at 1080p, 72 FPS at 1440p, and 57 FPS at 4K. These minimums are within 15% of the averages, suggesting that the frame times are relatively stable at Medium settings. The lack of minimum FPS data for other presets means we cannot assess frame pacing stability for Low, High, or Ultra settings, but the averages indicate that Ultra is likely to have noticeable stutters, especially at 4K.