The Medium

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT pairing in The Medium produces a performance profile that is heavily dictated by the graphics card, with CPU headroom to spare. The data shows a stark division between playable and unplayable settings, hinging almost entirely on the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and the game's demanding rendering load. This analysis breaks down the component roles, optimal settings, and resolution scaling based strictly on measured results.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. It sits at the 96th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84,003. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which scores 83,807 (0.2% lower), and the AMD EPYC 7F72, which scores 85,072 (1.3% higher). This places the 290K Plus in a class of extremely high-end desktop and server processors, far beyond what The Medium requires for its logical thread management.

In this specific game, the CPU's contribution is best described as a non-factor. The measured FPS data shows that performance collapses at 4K Ultra (22 FPS) and 4K High (28 FPS), while 1080p Low reaches 95 FPS. This spread is not characteristic of a CPU bottleneck; it is the signature of a GPU-limited scenario where the graphics card's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the decisive constraints. The CPU's 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth are more than sufficient to feed the GPU's demands, even at lower resolutions where the CPU would typically become more relevant.

The most telling evidence is the scaling from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average FPS drops from 43 at 1080p to 28 at 4K — a 35% reduction. At Low settings, it drops from 95 to 63 — a 34% reduction. If the CPU were the limiting factor, these reductions would be far less pronounced, as the GPU would have headroom to spare. Instead, the consistent ~35% drop across settings indicates that the GPU is saturated at all tested configurations, leaving the 24-core processor idle relative to its potential. The CPU's multi-core benchmark scores (Cinebench R23 multi-core: 51,731) are irrelevant here because the game's frame rate is not influenced by core count beyond a certain threshold, which this processor vastly exceeds.

The processor's 96th percentile ranking means it outperforms nearly all other CPUs in synthetic tests, but that headroom translates to zero additional FPS in The Medium. The data shows that even a modest CPU would likely produce identical frame rates in this configuration. The 290K Plus's 125 W TDP and 3 nm process node are markers of its efficiency class, but they do not appear in the measured FPS equations. The conclusion is unambiguous: the CPU is not a performance limiter in this game, and its role is purely to ensure that no CPU-side stutter or frame pacing issues arise — a task it handles with overwhelming authority.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the decisive component in this pairing. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 280.3 GB/s bandwidth, a boost clock of 2635 MHz, and a game clock of 2410 MHz. Its 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19,765, places it in the mid-range tier. Its nearest rivals are professional workstation cards — the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19,885, 0.6% higher) and the AMD FirePro W7000 (19,905, 0.7% higher) — which are not gaming-optimized, underscoring the 6650 XT's modest standing in gaming performance.

The GPU's 8 GB VRAM is the primary constraint in The Medium. The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern: at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 22, and at 4K High, it is 28, while dropping to Low at 4K yields 63 FPS. The gap between High and Low at 4K (28 vs. 63 FPS) is a 125% improvement, which is far larger than what would be expected from pure shader complexity alone. This suggests that the game's High and Ultra presets are exceeding the VRAM capacity, forcing the GPU to spill over into system memory or reduce texture streaming efficiency. The 8 GB VRAM is simply insufficient for 4K High and Ultra in this title.

At 1080p, the GPU performs more comfortably. Low settings deliver 95 FPS, Medium delivers 59 FPS (with min/max of 51/68), and High drops to 43 FPS. The scaling from Low to High at 1080p shows a 55% performance loss, which is moderate for a demanding horror title. However, the Ultra preset at 1080p yields only 34 FPS, which is barely playable. This indicates that even at 1080p, the Ultra preset is pushing the 6650 XT to its absolute limits, and the 8 GB VRAM is likely causing texture-related hitches. The GPU's RDNA 2.0 architecture, with 2048 shading units and 32 ray accelerators, is capable of rendering the game's fixed-camera scenes, but the memory subsystem is the bottleneck.

The GPU's 10.79 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 337.3 GTexel/s texture rate are sufficient for 1080p Medium, but the data shows that the card's 128-bit memory bus is its Achilles' heel. The 280.3 GB/s bandwidth is not enough to sustain high-resolution textures at 4K without significant frame rate drops. The measured 4K Medium average of 39 FPS (min 33, max 45) is the only 4K preset that approaches playability, but it still falls short of a smooth 60 FPS. The GPU's role is therefore a hard ceiling: it can handle 1080p Medium/High and 1440p Medium, but it cannot deliver consistent 60 FPS at higher resolutions or presets.

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

The data points to 1080p Medium as the optimal settings configuration for this hardware combination. The measured 59 FPS average (min 51, max 68) provides a stable, playable experience that stays above the 50 FPS threshold in the worst-case minimum. This is the only preset across all resolutions that delivers both a high average and a minimum above 50 FPS. The 1080p High preset, at 43 FPS average, is playable but dips lower, and the 1080p Ultra preset at 34 FPS is borderline. At 1440p, Medium delivers 50 FPS (min 43, max 58), which is acceptable but the minimum frame rate of 43 FPS is less comfortable than the 1080p Medium's 51 FPS floor.

For players prioritizing visual fidelity over frame rate, 1440p Medium is a viable alternative. The 50 FPS average is smooth enough for a slow-paced horror game, and the minimum of 43 FPS is unlikely to cause significant stutter in a game with fixed camera angles. However, the 1080p Medium preset's higher minimum (51 FPS) makes it the safer recommendation for consistent performance. The 4K presets are not recommended: even 4K Low, at 63 FPS, sacrifices too much visual quality, while 4K Medium's 39 FPS average (min 33) is too low for comfort. The Ultra presets at all resolutions (1080p: 34 FPS, 1440p: 28 FPS, 4K: 22 FPS) are unplayable and should be avoided entirely.

The data suggests that the "sweet spot" is a compromise between the High and Medium presets at 1080p, but since only the measured presets are available, Medium is the clear winner. The 59 FPS average is nearly double the High preset's 43 FPS, and the minimum of 51 FPS ensures no major frame drops. This configuration leverages the GPU's 8 GB VRAM effectively without exceeding its capacity, unlike the High and Ultra presets which likely cause memory pressure. The recommendation is definitive: select 1080p Medium for the best balance of smoothness and visual quality.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this hardware in The Medium?*

A: The highest measured average FPS is 95, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that approaches high refresh-rate territory.

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

A: The GPU is the clear limiting factor. The CPU's performance headroom is vast (96th percentile), but the FPS scales consistently with resolution changes (~35% drop from 1080p to 4K), indicating the GPU is saturated at all settings.

*Q: Can this hardware run The Medium at 4K?*

A: Only at Low settings, where it achieves 63 FPS average. 4K Medium drops to 39 FPS (min 33), and 4K High and Ultra are unplayable at 28 FPS and 22 FPS respectively.

Q: What is the best preset for a stable 60 FPS experience?

A: None of the measured presets achieve a consistent 60 FPS. The closest is 1080p Low at 95 FPS, but for a balance of quality and performance, 1080p Medium (59 FPS) is the highest-quality preset that comes near the 60 FPS target.

Q: How does the RX 6650 XT compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RX 6650 XT's average benchmark score is 19,765. It is 0.6% slower than the NVIDIA Tesla K40m (19,885) and 0.7% faster than the AMD FirePro D300 (19,637). These are professional cards, not gaming equivalents.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide any benefit over High in this game?

A: No. The Ultra preset provides a marginal visual upgrade but exacts a heavy performance cost. At 1080p, Ultra is 34 FPS vs. High's 43 FPS — a 21% performance loss for what is typically an imperceptible quality gain in a horror game with fixed camera angles.

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

The resolution scaling data is a textbook example of a GPU-bound workload. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 95 at 1080p to 80 at 1440p to 63 at 4K. This represents a 16% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 21% drop from 1440p to 4K, for a total reduction of 34% from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the progression is 43 → 36 → 28 FPS, which is a 16% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 22% drop from 1440p to 4K, totaling 35%. The consistency of these percentages across different presets is the key indicator: if the CPU were the bottleneck, the percentage drops would be much smaller at lower resolutions, where the GPU has more headroom.

The absolute FPS values reinforce this conclusion. At 1080p Low, the GPU is pushing 95 FPS, which is close to its theoretical maximum for this title. When resolution increases, the pixel count increases quadratically (1080p is about 2.1 million pixels, 4K is about 8.3 million pixels), and the GPU's fill rate becomes the limiting factor. The 34-35% reduction in FPS from 1080p to 4K is roughly consistent with the increase in pixel count when accounting for the game's fixed-camera scenes, which reduce the effective rendering load compared to a first-person title. This scaling behavior is exactly what would be expected from a GPU with 64 ROPs and a 128-bit memory bus.

The 1440p data points provide a mid-point reference. At Medium settings, 1440p yields 50 FPS (min 43, max 58), which is 15% lower than the 1080p Medium's 59 FPS. At High settings, 1440p is 36 FPS, which is 16% lower than 1080p High's 43 FPS. This linear scaling pattern — roughly 15-16% per step from 1080p to 1440p, and a similar per-step drop from 1440p to 4K — indicates that the GPU's memory bandwidth is being consumed proportionally to the pixel count. There is no sudden cliff or plateau that would suggest a VRAM capacity limit at 1440p, but the 4K High and Ultra presets (28 and 22 FPS) do show a more severe drop than the Low preset (63 FPS), suggesting that the combination of high resolution and high preset exceeds the 8 GB VRAM at 4K.

The practical implication is clear: this hardware is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming. The 4K Low preset is technically playable at 63 FPS, but it defeats the purpose of 4K rendering. The resolution scaling data confirms that the RX 6650 XT is the limiting component, and the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is never stressed. Players should target 1080p for the smoothest experience or 1440p Medium for a visual upgrade, but 4K should be reserved for Low settings or avoided entirely.

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

1920x1080 (Full HD):

• Low: 95 FPS average. This is the highest measured frame rate in the entire dataset, offering a fluid, responsive experience ideal for gameplay mechanics.
• Medium: 59 FPS average, with a minimum of 51 FPS and a maximum of 68 FPS. This is the recommended preset, providing a stable frame rate that stays well above 50 FPS.
• High: 43 FPS average. Playable but noticeably less smooth, with the frame rate dipping into the low 40s.
• Ultra: 34 FPS average. This preset is not recommended, as the frame rate falls below the 35 FPS threshold for comfortable play.

2560x1440 (Quad HD):

• Low: 80 FPS average. Still smooth, but a 16% drop from 1080p Low.
• Medium: 50 FPS average, with a minimum of 43 FPS and a maximum of 58 FPS. This is the best 1440p option, offering a playable experience with a minimum above 40 FPS.
• High: 36 FPS average. This is borderline playable, with a frame rate that will be noticeable in fast-moving scenes.
• Ultra: 28 FPS average. Unplayable, with a frame rate that drops below 30 FPS.

3840x2160 (4K UHD):

• Low: 63 FPS average. Surprisingly playable, but the visual quality is severely compromised.
• Medium: 39 FPS average, with a minimum of 33 FPS and a maximum of 45 FPS. This is the only 4K preset that approaches playability, but the minimum of 33 FPS is risky.
• High: 28 FPS average. Unplayable, with a frame rate that stutters.
• Ultra: 22 FPS average. The worst measured performance, essentially a slideshow.

The data across all resolutions shows a consistent pattern: Low settings are always playable, Medium is playable at 1080p and 1440p but marginal at 4K, and High and Ultra are only viable at 1080p (and even then, High is below 50 FPS). The measured FPS breakdown reinforces the settings recommendation: 1080p Medium is the only preset that combines a respectable average (59 FPS) with a high minimum (51 FPS), making it the single best configuration for this hardware in The Medium.