The Medium

The Medium, a fixed-camera horror title built on Unreal Engine 4, presents a unique challenge for the hardware driving it. This analysis focuses on the combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus processor and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 graphics card. The data reveals a system where the GPU is the primary bottleneck across all tested settings and resolutions, while the CPU's immense power remains largely untapped. Benchmark results show that this pairing ranks in the 2400th position out of 2911 tested combos, placing it in the lower half of the database, a direct consequence of the aging graphics card holding back a top-tier processor.

Resolution Scaling

The relationship between resolution and frame rate for this combo is stark and clearly demonstrates the GPU's limitations. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system achieves an average of 75 FPS. Moving up to 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 63 FPS, a 16% decrease. Pushing further to 3840x2160 Low yields an average of 50 FPS, which is a 33% drop from the 1080p figure. This downward trend is consistent across all settings presets, confirming that the GTX 1070's rendering pipeline is saturated well before the CPU's potential becomes a factor.

The scaling pattern becomes even more telling when examining the higher quality presets. At 1080p High, the average is 34 FPS. This falls to 28 FPS at 1440p and plummets to 22 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset shows the most severe degradation, starting at 27 FPS at 1080p, dropping to 22 FPS at 1440p, and bottoming out at 18 FPS at 4K. The fact that even at 1080p, the Ultra preset cannot maintain a playable 30 FPS floor indicates that the GPU's compute and memory resources are exhausted. The GTX 1070's 8 GB of GDDR5 memory and 256-bit bus, while adequate for its era, are simply overwhelmed by the game's high-resolution textures and lighting effects at higher settings.

The frame rate deltas between resolutions are not linear, suggesting that the game's memory bandwidth demands scale aggressively with pixel count. For instance, the gap between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 48 FPS (75 vs 27), but at 4K, that gap narrows to 32 FPS (50 vs 18). This compression at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU is hitting a hard performance ceiling, likely due to pixel fillrate and memory bandwidth constraints, rather than shader complexity alone. The data suggests that for a smoother experience, users must significantly reduce visual fidelity as resolution increases, a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus the reason for the low frame rates in The Medium?

A: No. The benchmark data indicates the CPU is not the limiting factor. The processor has 24 cores and 24 threads with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, and it scores in the 96th percentile against all CPUs. The frame rates scale directly with resolution and settings, which is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck. A CPU bottleneck would typically show similar frame rates regardless of resolution changes.

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

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combo achieves consistently playable frame rates across multiple presets. At 1080p Low, it averages 75 FPS, and at Medium, it averages 47 FPS. While the High preset at 34 FPS is technically playable, it is below the 60 FPS threshold. 1440p and 4K resolutions result in average frame rates that are often below 30 FPS, especially on higher settings.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 2400th out of 2911 tested combinations for this game. This places it in the bottom 17% of all tested systems. This low ranking is primarily due to the graphics card's age, as the CPU is a high-end component. The GTX 1070's average benchmark score is 9780, placing it in the 47th percentile of all GPUs, which is a mid-range standing that limits overall system performance.

Q: Can this system handle the Ultra settings preset?

A: The data shows that Ultra settings are not viable for smooth gameplay. At 1920x1080 Ultra, the average frame rate is 27 FPS. At 2560x1440 Ultra, it drops to 22 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Ultra, it falls to 18 FPS. These frame rates are below the generally accepted threshold for a playable experience and would result in significant stuttering and input lag.

Q: Is the GTX 1070 a significant bottleneck for the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus in this game?

A: Yes. The performance data strongly suggests the GPU is the primary constraint. The CPU is vastly more powerful, as evidenced by its 51731 score in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the GPU's performance is limited. The frame rate drops as resolution and settings increase, which is a direct result of the GPU's rendering workload increasing, while the CPU's workload remains relatively constant.

Q: What can a user do to improve frame rates without changing hardware?

A: According to the data, lowering the settings preset is the most effective method. Moving from High to Low at 1080p increases the average frame rate from 34 to 75 FPS, a 120% improvement. Similarly, at 1440p, switching from High to Low improves the average from 28 to 63 FPS. Reducing the resolution is another option, but this has a more significant impact on visual clarity.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a monstrous processor for this workload. Its specifications are top-tier: 24 cores and 24 threads, a base clock of 3.70 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. It is built on a 3 nm process from TSMC and features a 36 MB shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 51731 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 7303 points in single-core, which places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. This indicates it has far more computational headroom than a game like The Medium requires.

However, the measured frame rates in the game do not reflect this power. The consistent FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are the classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see frame rates plateau regardless of resolution changes, as the CPU's work (physics, game logic, draw calls) remains constant. The fact that the average FPS changes by over 20% between resolutions at the same settings shows that the GPU is the component working at its maximum capacity.

The CPU's performance relative to its nearest rivals further underscores its capability. It is just 0.2% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and 1.1% faster than the AMD EPYC 4584PX. These are all high-end server or enthusiast desktop parts. In the context of The Medium, the processor is effectively idling, waiting for the GTX 1070 to finish rendering each frame. The data suggests that a far less powerful CPU would deliver identical frame rates with this GPU, making the Ultra 9 290K Plus a significant overspend for this specific gaming scenario.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Core Ultra 9 and GTX 1070 achieves a rank of 2400 out of 2911 tested combos in The Medium. This is a low ranking, placing the system in the bottom 17% of all configurations tested. This poor standing is a direct result of the pairing's imbalance. The CPU is a top-5% performer, while the GPU sits near the 50th percentile. The system's overall performance is dictated by its weakest link, which is the graphics card.

This ranking is informative for builders, as it illustrates the importance of component balance for gaming. The data shows that the massive computational power of the 24-core CPU is irrelevant in this title. The GPU's 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 256.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth are the limiting factors. The GTX 1070's nearest rivals in the GPU benchmark database are the AMD FirePro W5000 and the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M, all of which are older or workstation-oriented parts, reinforcing its mid-range status in the current landscape.

The combo's rank of 2400 suggests that most other tested systems, likely featuring more balanced CPU/GPU pairings, will outperform it in this specific game. This is a crucial data point for anyone looking to play The Medium, as it indicates that this particular combination of high-end CPU and older GPU is not an effective one for this title. The results would likely be significantly better with a mid-range modern GPU paired with a more modest CPU, as the game's demands are clearly graphics-centric.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the user must prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity to achieve a playable experience. The most balanced option is the Medium preset at 1920x1080, which delivers an average of 47 FPS with a minimum of 40 FPS and a maximum of 54 FPS. This is the only preset at this resolution that offers a playable frame rate while still providing a reasonable level of visual quality, as Low settings often look excessively sparse.

For users with a 1080p 60Hz monitor, the Low preset is the only way to get close to that refresh rate, with an average of 75 FPS. However, the visual compromise may be too significant. The High preset at 1080p is a poor choice, as its 34 FPS average is stutter-prone for many players. At 2560x1440, the situation is more difficult. The Low preset averages 63 FPS, which is playable, but the Medium preset drops to 40 FPS. The 4K resolution is effectively unplayable with this GPU, as even the Low preset only manages an average of 50 FPS, while Medium and High drop to 31 and 22 FPS respectively.

The data strongly suggests that 1920x1080 with Medium settings is the sweet spot for this hardware. It provides a 47 FPS average, which is a reasonable compromise between smoothness and visual quality. Pushing to 1440p Low is an alternative for users who prefer higher resolution over higher visual details, offering 63 FPS. However, any attempt to use High or Ultra settings at any resolution above 1080p will result in a sub-30 FPS experience, which is generally considered unplayable for a slow-paced horror game where smooth camera movement is essential for immersion.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact average FPS measurements for all tested configurations. The data is clear: performance degrades predictably with both increased resolution and higher quality settings.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: Average FPS 75
• Medium: Average FPS 47 (Min 40, Max 54)
• High: Average FPS 34
• Ultra: Average FPS 27

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: Average FPS 63
• Medium: Average FPS 40 (Min 34, Max 45)
• High: Average FPS 28
• Ultra: Average FPS 22

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: Average FPS 50
• Medium: Average FPS 31 (Min 26, Max 36)
• High: Average FPS 22
• Ultra: Average FPS 18

The 1080p results show a clear hierarchy. The 75 FPS at Low is the highest recorded for this combo. The step to Medium incurs a 28 FPS penalty, a 37% reduction. The jump to High costs another 13 FPS, and Ultra brings the system to 27 FPS, which is below the playable threshold. At 1440p, we see the same pattern but with lower absolute numbers. The 63 FPS at Low is still good, but Medium falls to 40 FPS, and the higher presets become increasingly unplayable. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with even the lowest settings failing to maintain a solid 60 FPS. The High and Ultra presets at 4K, with averages of 22 and 18 FPS respectively, are essentially a slideshow and should be avoided entirely. The minimum FPS data for the Medium preset shows that the frame pacing is also affected, with minimums falling 7-8 FPS below the averages, indicating potential stutters during intense scenes.