The Medium

The Medium’s performance with the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is defined by a stark contrast between CPU headroom and GPU limitations. The combo ranks 1486th out of 2911 tested configurations, positioning it in the lower-middle tier for this title. The data shows a system where the processor is never the bottleneck, while the graphics card dictates playability, especially at higher resolutions and settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, built on a 3 nm process. Its base clock is 3.70 GHz, boosting up to 5.80 GHz. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU is exceptionally strong, scoring 51,731 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 7,303 in single-core. Its Passmark single-thread score of 4,823 and multithread score of 60,860 place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, indicating top-tier processing power.

In the context of The Medium, this CPU’s capabilities are far beyond what the game demands. The game’s performance is not constrained by the processor, as evidenced by the fact that frame rates scale directly with GPU load changes when adjusting resolution. The CPU’s 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth provide ample data throughput for the game’s logic, but this headroom is largely unused. The processor’s nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores an average of 83,807, a mere 0.2% difference, while the AMD EPYC 4584PX trails by 1.1%. This places the 290K Plus in a performance class where the differences between top-tier CPUs are negligible for gaming.

The benchmark results indicate that the CPU’s role here is to provide a stable, unconstrained platform for the GPU. With a Passmark physics score of 3,315 and data encryption score of 52,563, the processor handles any background threading or game engine overhead without issue. The game is not using the CPU’s full potential; instead, the bottleneck shifts entirely to the graphics card. This is typical for a horror title with fixed camera angles and pre-rendered elements, where the visual fidelity is heavily dependent on the GPU’s rasterization and shading capabilities rather than complex CPU-driven simulations. The 290K Plus is effectively a non-factor in this pairing, ensuring that any performance ceiling is purely a function of the Radeon RX 6700 XT.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT, based on the Navi 22 chip and RDNA 2.0 architecture, is the primary performance limiter in this configuration. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. Its boost clock is 2581 MHz, with a game clock of 2424 MHz. The GPU holds a Passmark G3D score of 19,786 and sits in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090, has an average score of 27,565, which is only 0.5% higher, showing that the 6700 XT is competitive with much higher-tier cards in certain synthetic tests, though its real-world gaming performance in this title is more modest.

The GPU’s 12 GB VRAM is a crucial factor. The data shows that at 4K Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 26, which is nearly unplayable. This is not just a raw compute issue; the VRAM capacity and bandwidth are stretched thin at this resolution and detail level. The card’s FP32 performance of 13.21 TFLOPS and texture rate of 413.0 GTexel/s are sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but they are overwhelmed by the demands of 4K. The GPU’s 40 ray accelerators are present, but The Medium’s use of ray tracing appears to have a significant impact, as seen in the steep performance drop when moving from High to Ultra settings.

The GPU’s role is to render the game’s dual-reality mechanic, where two worlds are often displayed simultaneously. This feature demands substantial fill-rate and memory bandwidth. The data indicates that the 6700 XT can handle this at Medium settings, where it achieves 45 FPS at 4K, but it struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher presets. The card’s 64 ROPs and 160 TMUs are the limiting factor here, as they dictate how quickly pixels and textures can be processed. The benchmark results suggest that the GPU is the sole determinant of performance, as the CPU’s high scores do not translate into higher frame rates when the GPU is saturated.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear and predictable scaling pattern that confirms the GPU-bound nature of this system. At 1080p Medium settings, the combo achieves an average of 69 FPS. Moving to 1440p Medium drops this to 58 FPS, a decrease of roughly 16%. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 45 FPS, another 22% drop. This scaling is consistent with a GPU that is running out of pixel throughput and memory bandwidth as resolution increases.

The Low settings tell a similar story. At 1080p Low, the system posts 110 FPS, which drops to 92 FPS at 1440p and 73 FPS at 4K. The drops are less severe in percentage terms at Low because the GPU is less stressed, but the trend is the same. The High settings show a more compressed range: 49 FPS at 1080p, 41 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K. The Ultra settings are the most punishing, with 39 FPS at 1080p, 33 FPS at 1440p, and 26 FPS at 4K.

The key insight from this scaling is that the frame rate drops are proportional to the increase in pixel count, indicating that the CPU is not introducing any frame pacing issues or bottlenecks. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions. Instead, the data shows a classic GPU-limited scenario. For example, the difference between 1080p and 4K at Medium settings is a 24 FPS drop, which aligns with the roughly four-fold increase in pixel count. This means that to improve performance at higher resolutions, the user would need a more powerful GPU, as the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has ample headroom to support a faster graphics card without becoming a constraint.

FAQ

Q: What is the best settings preset for this combo at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the Medium preset yields an average of 69 FPS with a minimum of 58 FPS and a maximum of 79 FPS. The High preset drops to 49 FPS, and Ultra falls to 39 FPS. The Low preset achieves 110 FPS. The data suggests Medium is the optimal balance, providing a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold.

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

A: At 3840x2160, the system achieves 32 FPS on High, 45 FPS on Medium, and 73 FPS on Low. The Ultra preset delivers only 26 FPS. While it can technically run at 4K, the frame rates are below 60 FPS, and the experience is playable only on Low or Medium settings, with 45 FPS on Medium being the maximum acceptable level.

Q: How does the CPU performance compare to its closest rival?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84,003. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83,807, a delta of 0.2%. The AMD EPYC 4584PX scores 83,090, which is 1.1% lower. This indicates the 290K Plus is marginally faster than its direct predecessor but within the margin of error for gaming.

Q: Is the 12 GB VRAM on the GPU sufficient for this game?

A: The 12 GB GDDR6 memory is sufficient to run the game at all settings, but the bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s becomes a limiting factor at 4K Ultra, where the average FPS drops to 26. At 1440p and below, the VRAM capacity does not appear to cause issues, as the game runs with playable frame rates on Medium settings.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset achieves an average of 92 FPS, while the Ultra preset achieves 33 FPS. This is a 59 FPS difference, representing a 64% drop in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: This configuration ranks 1486th out of 2911 tested combos for The Medium. This places it in the 51st percentile of all tested systems, meaning it performs better than roughly half of the configurations tested, but it is not a top-tier performer for this specific title.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT combination ranks 1486th out of 2911 tested combos in The Medium. This ranking places it just above the median of all tested systems, which is a notable position given the high-end CPU paired with a mid-range GPU. The data indicates that the CPU’s high percentile ranking (96th) does not boost the overall combo ranking, because the GPU’s 72nd percentile is the limiting factor.

This rank suggests that in a database of 2,911 combinations, there are 1,485 systems that perform better in this game. The implication is that many systems with slightly weaker CPUs but significantly stronger GPUs will outperform this pairing. The combo’s position is a direct result of the GPU’s inability to push frame rates higher at the settings where the CPU is not a bottleneck. For context, the GPU’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090, has a nearly identical average benchmark score, yet in real-world gaming, the RTX 3090 would likely achieve higher FPS due to its larger memory bus and higher bandwidth. However, the data here shows the 6700 XT holding its own in synthetic tests, but the in-game rank reflects the actual measured performance, which is constrained by the card’s 192-bit memory interface.

The rank of 1486 is a reliable indicator that this system is balanced for 1080p and entry-level 1440p gaming, but it is not suited for high-refresh-rate 1440p or 4K gaming. The system falls in the lower-middle bracket, where users can expect a playable experience at Medium settings, but should not expect to max out the game’s graphical options. The combo’s rank is a function of the GPU’s raw performance, and the CPU’s contribution is to ensure that the GPU is always the limiting factor, which it is.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system’s performance across resolutions and settings. The data is presented as average FPS, with minimum and maximum values available for the Medium preset at each resolution.

At 1920x1080, the system delivers the following average FPS:

• Low: 110 FPS
• Medium: 69 FPS (min 58, max 79)
• High: 49 FPS
• Ultra: 39 FPS

At 2560x1440, the average FPS is:

• Low: 92 FPS
• Medium: 58 FPS (min 49, max 66)
• High: 41 FPS
• Ultra: 33 FPS

At 3840x2160, the average FPS is:

• Low: 73 FPS
• Medium: 45 FPS (min 39, max 52)
• High: 32 FPS
• Ultra: 26 FPS

The Medium preset data shows consistent frame times, with the minimum FPS being roughly 15-20% lower than the average, indicating no major stuttering issues. The gap between Low and Ultra settings widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 71 FPS; at 1440p, it is 59 FPS; and at 4K, it is 47 FPS. This narrowing gap suggests that at higher resolutions, even the Low preset begins to tax the GPU heavily, reducing the performance headroom available for higher quality settings. The 4K Low preset’s 73 FPS is notable, as it shows the GPU can still produce high frame rates when the graphical load is minimized, but the jump to Medium costs 28 FPS, highlighting the significant cost of the game’s visual features. The Ultra preset at 4K is effectively a slideshow at 26 FPS, making it unsuitable for play. The data supports the conclusion that this combo is best used at 1080p or 1440p with Medium settings, where it can maintain frame rates that are smooth and responsive.