The Medium

The Medium pairs a 24-core Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with a GeForce GTX 1650, a combination that immediately signals a massive imbalance. The CPU is a top-tier desktop processor, while the GPU is an older, end-of-life entry-level card. The measured frame rates reflect this divide, showing that the GTX 1650 is the definitive bottleneck across all tested settings and resolutions. This analysis breaks down the data to show what you can expect from this pairing and how to best configure the game for a playable experience.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is severe, confirming the GPU is the limiting component. At 1080p Medium, the combo averages 27 FPS. Moving to 1440p Medium drops the average to 23 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it falls to 18 FPS. This is a clear downward trend, but the most dramatic collapse occurs at the highest settings. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is just 10, compared to 16 FPS at 1080p Ultra. This represents a 37.5% performance loss from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings.

The pattern is similar across all presets. At Low settings, the game runs at 44 FPS at 1080p, 37 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K. This shows that even when the graphical load is minimized, the GTX 1650 still struggles to maintain high frame rates at higher resolutions. The data indicates that the GPU's 4 GB of memory and 128-bit memory bus are simply overwhelmed by the pixel count at 4K, and even at 1440p, the card is working near its limit.

The scaling between resolutions is not linear, which points to memory bandwidth and fill-rate limits. For instance, dropping from 1080p to 1440p at Medium settings reduces performance by 17.4%, but dropping from 1440p to 4K at the same settings reduces performance by 21.7%. The larger the resolution, the more the GPU's limited resources are taxed. This is a textbook example of a system where the CPU has plenty of headroom, but the GPU cannot keep up with the demands of modern game rendering at higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

In The Medium, this specific CPU-GPU combination ranks 3594 out of 3724 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 3.5% of all systems tested, a very poor showing that underscores the GPU's limitations. The combo's rank is dragged down almost entirely by the GTX 1650, which itself sits at the 40th percentile of all GPUs. The CPU, in contrast, is at the 96th percentile, indicating it is far more powerful than most processors in the database.

The data suggests that this pairing is not well-balanced for this game. The CPU is capable of far higher frame rates, but the GPU acts as a hard ceiling. Looking at the GPU's nearest rivals, its average benchmark score of 7472 is only 0.3% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M and 0.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics 750. It is also 1% behind the Intel Arc A310. These are all low-end or integrated graphics solutions, confirming that the GTX 1650 is positioned at the entry-level tier.

The CPU's nearest rivals, on the other hand, are high-end workstation and server chips like the AMD EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9135, which it trails by 1.1% and 1.2% respectively. It is also only 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. The massive gulf in performance class between the CPU and GPU is the primary reason for the low combo rank. The benchmark results indicate that upgrading the GPU would yield a dramatic improvement in The Medium, while a CPU upgrade would have virtually no effect on frame rates.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run The Medium at 1080p with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, but only at the lowest settings. The measured data shows an average of 44 FPS at 1080p Low. At Medium settings, the average drops to 27 FPS, which may be playable for some but is below the smooth 60 FPS target.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus the reason for the low performance?

A: No. The CPU is not the bottleneck. It sits at the 96th percentile of all CPUs and has 24 cores and 24 threads. The GPU, which is at the 40th percentile, is the limiting factor.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?

A: According to the data, 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the game approaches playability. At 1440p and 4K, the average FPS is below 40 even on Low settings, making the experience very choppy.

Q: How does the GTX 1650 compare to its closest rivals in raw benchmark score?

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472. This is 0.3% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 8850M, 0.4% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics 750, and 1% lower than the Intel Arc A310.

Q: Will lowering the settings from High to Low improve the frame rate at 4K?

A: Yes, significantly. At 4K High, the average FPS is 13. Dropping to 4K Low doubles the average FPS to 29. While this is an improvement, it is still not high enough for a smooth experience.

Q: What does the combo's rank of 3594 out of 3724 tell us?

A: It tells us that this pairing performs worse than 96.5% of all other tested combinations in this game. It is a very low rank, primarily due to the GPU's inability to keep up with the CPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. The game was tested at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, with results for Low, Medium, High, and Ultra settings. The minimum and maximum FPS were only recorded for Medium settings.

At 1920x1080, the results are:

• Low: 44 FPS average
• Medium: 27 FPS average, with a minimum of 23 FPS and a maximum of 31 FPS
• High: 20 FPS average
• Ultra: 16 FPS average

At 2560x1440, the results are:

• Low: 37 FPS average
• Medium: 23 FPS average, with a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 26 FPS
• High: 16 FPS average
• Ultra: 13 FPS average

At 3840x2160, the results are:

• Low: 29 FPS average
• Medium: 18 FPS average, with a minimum of 15 FPS and a maximum of 21 FPS
• High: 13 FPS average
• Ultra: 10 FPS average

These numbers show a consistent and expected pattern: performance degrades as resolution and settings increase. The gap between Low and Ultra at any given resolution is substantial. At 1080p, the difference is 28 FPS (44 vs 16), and at 4K, the difference is 19 FPS (29 vs 10). The frame time variance, evident in the min/max data at Medium settings, also becomes more pronounced at higher resolutions, indicating less stable performance. The data clearly shows that the GTX 1650 is only capable of providing a reasonable frame rate at 1080p with the Low preset.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the only way to get a consistently playable experience with this hardware is to use the Low preset at 1920x1080, which yields an average of 44 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth 60 FPS target. The Medium preset at 1080p, with an average of 27 FPS, is borderline playable but will suffer from noticeable stuttering, especially in action sequences. The minimum FPS of 23 at this setting confirms that there are dips below the average.

The High and Ultra presets are not recommended at any resolution. At 1080p, they produce averages of 20 and 16 FPS, respectively, which is far too low for a game that relies on atmosphere and timing. At 1440p and 4K, all presets are effectively unplayable, with averages ranging from 10 to 37 FPS. Even the best 1440p result (37 FPS on Low) is below the threshold for a smooth experience.

The data suggests that players should prioritize frame rate over visual fidelity. The GTX 1650's 4 GB of VRAM is likely a limiting factor at higher settings, causing texture thrashing and performance dips. For a better visual experience without sacrificing too much performance, one could attempt to manually adjust settings, but based on the measured presets, the Low preset is the only one that provides a stable foundation. The jump from Low to Medium at 1080p costs 17 FPS, a 38.6% performance hit, which is too significant to recommend.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 51731, and its single-core score is 7303. These figures place it at the 96th percentile of all CPUs, indicating it is one of the most powerful processors available.

In The Medium, however, this CPU power is almost entirely wasted. The benchmark results show that the GPU is the sole bottleneck, and the CPU's role is to feed frames to the GTX 1650. The CPU's performance is so far ahead of the GPU that it will be idle for most of the time, waiting for the graphics card to finish rendering. The data supports this: the combo's rank is low, but the CPU's individual benchmark score is high. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, is only 0.2% slower in average benchmark score.

This scenario is typical of an unbalanced system. The CPU's 24 cores and high clock speeds are irrelevant when the GPU can only produce 44 FPS at 1080p Low. The game is not CPU-bound in this configuration. The data indicates that a much weaker CPU would produce nearly identical frame rates in The Medium. This pairing highlights that while a powerful CPU is beneficial for CPU-intensive tasks, it cannot compensate for a weak GPU in a graphically demanding game. The 36 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support are also features that will have no tangible impact on this game's performance given the GPU's limitations. The system is, for all intents and purposes, a GTX 1650 machine with a very powerful CPU.