The Medium

The Medium presents a significant challenge for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, even when paired with the capable Intel Core Ultra 7 265. The benchmark data shows a system that is heavily GPU-bound, with the graphics card being the primary bottleneck across all tested resolutions and settings. While the CPU provides a strong foundation, the GTX 1650’s 4 GB VRAM and modest compute capabilities severely limit the playability of this horror title.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for the GTX 1650 in The Medium?

A: Based on the data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the average frame rate approaches a playable level, hitting 44 FPS on Low settings. At 2560x1440, the best average FPS drops to 37, and at 3840x2160, it falls to 29, indicating diminishing returns above 1080p.

Q: Can the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 handle this game’s CPU demands?

A: Yes. With 20 cores and 20 threads, the Core Ultra 7 265 is far more powerful than what The Medium requires. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 demonstrates immense processing headroom, indicating that the GPU, not the CPU, is the limiting factor in this configuration.

Q: How does the GTX 1650’s performance with this CPU compare to its closest rivals?

A: The GTX 1650’s average benchmark score is 7472, which is 1% lower than the Intel Arc A310’s score of 7550. It is 0.3% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M and 0.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics 750. This places it statistically in the same performance tier as these other low-end GPUs.

Q: Is the Ultra preset usable in this game?

A: No. The Ultra preset yields the lowest average frame rates across all resolutions, from 10 FPS at 3840x2160 to 16 FPS at 1920x1080. These frame rates are far below the threshold for smooth gameplay, making the preset impractical for this GPU.

Q: What is the significance of the 4 GB VRAM on the GTX 1650?

A: The 4 GB GDDR5 memory is a critical limitation. The Medium is a demanding title, and the data suggests that the card’s memory capacity and bandwidth are insufficient for higher detail settings, as evidenced by the drastic frame rate drops when moving from Low to Medium or High settings.

Q: What is the combo's rank among all tested configurations?

A: This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 2817 out of 2911 tested combos in The Medium. This places it in the bottom 4% of all systems benchmarked, highlighting its struggles with this particular game.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the decisive factor in this system’s performance. The benchmark data reveals a clear and predictable pattern: as resolution and settings increase, the GPU’s limitations become more pronounced. The card, based on the Turing architecture, features a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. These clocks, combined with 896 shading units, produce a raw FP32 performance of 2.984 TFLOPS, which is simply insufficient for the graphical demands of The Medium at higher quality levels.

The 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 128.1 GB/s. This is a major bottleneck. The data shows a massive performance cliff between Low and Medium settings. At 1920x1080, the average FPS drops from 44 on Low to 27 on Medium, a 39% decrease. This suggests that the game’s higher-detail textures and effects exceed the card’s memory capacity or bandwidth, causing significant stuttering and frame drops. The situation worsens at higher resolutions; at 3840x2160, the gap between Low (29 FPS) and Medium (18 FPS) is a 38% drop, reinforcing that the GPU’s memory subsystem is overwhelmed.

The GPU's overall benchmark scores confirm its low-end standing. Its Passmark G3D score is 7880, and it sits in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. This is further evidenced by its near-identical average benchmark score of 7472 compared to rivals like the Intel Arc A310 (7550), AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447), and Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441). These numbers paint a picture of a graphics card that is only suitable for esports titles or older games at low-to-medium settings, not for a visually complex horror game like The Medium.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the only viable configuration for a remotely playable experience is the Low preset at 1920x1080, which yields an average of 44 FPS. This is the only setting and resolution combination that approaches a standard 60 FPS target, though it still falls short. The next best option is Low at 2560x1440 with an average of 37 FPS, which may be acceptable for players who prioritize resolution over smoothness, but the 1080p Low preset offers the best balance between visual clarity and performance.

The Medium preset is not recommended for any resolution. At 1920x1080, it produces an average of 27 FPS, which is below the threshold for comfortable play. The High and Ultra presets are entirely unplayable, with average frame rates ranging from 10 to 20 FPS across all resolutions. The data clearly indicates that the GTX 1650 lacks the raw compute power and memory bandwidth to handle these higher fidelity settings.

Therefore, the optimal strategy for this hardware is to accept the Low preset. The visual compromise is significant, but it is the only way to achieve a frame rate that allows the game to be played without constant and severe lag. The performance data for Medium at 1080p shows a min FPS of 23 and a max of 31, which highlights the inconsistent frame pacing that would make the game feel very choppy. For this combination, visual fidelity must be sacrificed entirely for functional gameplay.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data illustrates a clear and consistent pattern of performance degradation as both resolution and graphical settings are increased. The system is firmly GPU-limited, with the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 having no positive impact on the frame rates in this title.

At 1920x1080, the resolution most commonly associated with this class of GPU, the results are as follows: the Low preset achieves an average of 44 FPS. Moving to Medium drops the average to 27 FPS, with a minimum of 23 and a maximum of 31 FPS. The High preset further reduces the average to 20 FPS. Finally, the Ultra preset brings the average down to a slideshow-like 16 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the performance becomes more demanding. The Low preset averages 37 FPS. The Medium preset averages 23 FPS, with a min of 20 and a max of 26. The High preset drops to an average of 16 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 13 FPS. These numbers show that even at a lower quality setting, the increase in pixel count from 1080p to 1440p exacts a heavy toll on the GTX 1650.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the GPU is completely overwhelmed. The Low preset manages an average of 29 FPS. The Medium preset averages 18 FPS, with a minimum of 15 and a maximum of 21. The High preset averages 13 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages a mere 10 FPS. The gap between the Low and Medium presets at 4K is particularly telling, showing a 38% performance hit, which indicates the 4 GB VRAM is being exhausted. This data confirms that the GTX 1650 is not a 4K capable card for modern, demanding titles.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 ranks 2817 out of 2911 tested combos in The Medium. This places it in the bottom percentile of all systems benchmarked, underscoring its poor performance in this specific game. The rank is heavily influenced by the GPU, as the CPU is a high-end desktop part.

The CPU’s own benchmarks show it is a top-tier processor. It scores 42216 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 5960 in single-core, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 64640 is nearly identical to that of its nearest rivals, such as the AMD EPYC 4464P (64823, -0.3% delta) and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64438, 0.3% delta). This indicates that the CPU is performing exactly as expected and is not a source of bottleneck.

However, the GPU's performance is the opposite. With a Passmark G3D score of 7880, it sits in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 7472 is statistically tied with low-end parts like the Intel Arc A310 (7550, -1% delta) and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, 0.3% delta). The combination of a high-end CPU with a low-end GPU results in a severely unbalanced system where the graphics card is the definitive limiting factor, explaining why the combo ranks so poorly in this GPU-intensive title. The data shows that the powerful CPU is left largely idle, waiting for the GTX 1650 to render each frame.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a formidable desktop processor that plays a minimal role in limiting performance in The Medium. Its specifications are impressive: it features 20 cores and 20 threads based on the Arrow Lake architecture. With a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, it has the single-thread speed required for game logic and the multi-core muscle for any background tasks.

Benchmark results confirm its high-end status. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 and single-core score of 5960 are excellent. Furthermore, the data shows that it is not a bottleneck in this configuration. The performance in The Medium is dictated entirely by the GPU. The measured FPS figures are consistently low across all settings, a pattern that would be different if the CPU were the limiting factor, as we would expect to see much higher frame rates at lower resolutions and settings.

The CPU’s 30 MB of shared L3 cache and support for DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s provide a robust platform. However, these advantages are irrelevant to the game's performance because the GTX 1650 cannot deliver frames fast enough to utilize the CPU’s processing power. The system is effectively "GPU-bound" in every scenario tested. The CPU's high percentile ranking (93rd) and its average benchmark score being only 0.7% different from its closest rival, the AMD EPYC 7343, show that it is performing flawlessly. The data leads to the conclusion that the Core Ultra 7 265 is a capable partner that is being held back by the much older and weaker GTX 1650.