The Medium

The Medium’s performance on this system—an Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060—presents a compelling case study in bottleneck dynamics. The data shows a configuration where a top-tier, 24-core CPU is paired with a mid-range, older GPU, resulting in frame rates that are almost entirely dictated by the graphics card across all tested resolutions. The measured results, spanning 1080p to 4K with four quality presets, reveal a clear ceiling imposed by the RTX 2060, while the CPU’s immense headroom goes largely untapped in this specific title.

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 based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, built on a 3 nm process. Its core configuration is split, with performance cores handling the heavy lifting and efficiency cores managing background tasks, a design that yields exceptional multi-threaded throughput. The CPU’s base clock of 3.70 GHz can boost up to 5.80 GHz, providing substantial single-thread performance, which is often critical for game logic and frame pacing. In synthetic benchmarks, the processor posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 and a single-core score of 7303, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs tested.

Given this immense processing power, the CPU is never the limiting factor in The Medium. The game’s fixed camera angles and pre-rendered backgrounds are not particularly demanding on processor physics or AI calculations compared to open-world titles. The benchmark data supports this: at 1080p Low settings, where the GPU load is minimized, the system achieves 83 FPS. While this is the highest frame rate recorded, it is not a reflection of CPU limits, as the GPU is still the primary renderer. The CPU’s PassMark multi-thread score of 60860 and single-thread score of 4823 indicate it has vast reserves of performance that the game simply does not require. Even at the lowest settings, the frame rate is capped by the GPU’s ability to process the scene, not the CPU’s ability to feed it instructions.

The CPU’s 36 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR5 memory support with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth ensure that data transfer to the GPU is never a bottleneck. In comparison to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is essentially tied with the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, showing a mere 0.2% performance delta, and it leads the AMD EPYC 4584PX by 1.1% and the AMD EPYC 9135 by 1.2% in average benchmark scores. These are marginal differences in synthetic workloads, and in a game like The Medium, these differences would be imperceptible. The processor’s role here is to remain idle, waiting on the GPU, and it does so with authority. The data suggests that any frame rate variance between different quality settings is a direct result of the GPU’s workload, not the CPU’s.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060, based on the TU106 chip and Turing architecture, is the definitive performance bottleneck in this configuration. With 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, it offers a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. The GPU’s base clock is 1365 MHz, boosting to 1680 MHz, and it features 1920 shading units, 30 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores. While this was a capable card at its launch, its position in the 58th percentile of all GPUs indicates it is now a mid-range solution, especially against modern hardware. Its PassMark G3D score of 14111 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1242 reflect its aging architecture.

In The Medium, the RTX 2060’s limitations are stark. The game’s dual-reality rendering technique, which often displays two perspectives simultaneously, places a massive load on the GPU’s pixel and texture processing capabilities. The GPU’s 48 ROPs and 120 TMUs are tasked with rendering these complex scenes, and the results show a steep decline in performance as settings are increased. At 1080p Medium, the card manages 52 FPS, but at 1080p High, it drops to 37 FPS, and at Ultra, it is down to 30 FPS. This scaling pattern shows that the card is saturated even at 1080p, as the higher presets demand more shader work and fill rate than the TU106 can provide.

The 6 GB VRAM capacity is also a concern. At 4K Ultra, the average frame rate falls to 20 FPS, likely because the card is not only compute-bound but also nearing its memory limit, causing severe stutters and low throughput. Even at 4K Low, the card only achieves 55 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. When compared to its nearest rivals, the RTX 2060 is statistically identical to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (0% delta) and the AMD Radeon 680M (0.1% delta) in average benchmark score, and it is only 0.6% faster than the RTX 3050 OEM. This confirms that the GPU is a mid-tier part by modern standards, and its performance in The Medium reflects that classification. The GPU’s 160 W TDP and dual-slot cooler are adequate, but the silicon itself is the limiting factor.

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

The frame rate scaling across resolutions is a textbook example of GPU-bound performance. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 and then to 3840x2160 shows a clear and consistent degradation in average FPS, regardless of the quality preset. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 83 at 1080p to 70 at 1440p (a 15.6% decrease), and then to 55 at 4K (a 21.4% decrease from 1440p). At High settings, the drop is from 37 at 1080p to 31 at 1440p (a 16.2% decrease), and then to 25 at 4K (a 19.4% decrease from 1440p). These percentage drops are consistent and substantial, indicating that the GPU is unable to keep up with the increased pixel count.

This behavior confirms that the CPU is not a limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the frame rate to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU workload stays the same while the GPU workload grows. Instead, the frame rate drops sharply, showing that the RTX 2060 is working at its maximum capacity even at 1080p. The jump from 1080p to 1440p requires the GPU to render 77% more pixels, and the frame rate drops accordingly. The jump from 1440p to 4K requires another 125% increase in pixel count, and the frame rate drops further. The data shows a near-linear relationship between pixel count and frame time, which is the hallmark of a GPU bottleneck.

The scaling also reveals that the game is heavily pixel-bound. At 4K Ultra, the system achieves only 20 FPS, a 75% reduction from 1080p Ultra. This is not a smooth degradation but a steep cliff, suggesting that the GPU is also hitting memory bandwidth limits. The 336.0 GB/s bandwidth is simply not enough to feed the shader units at 4K resolution with high-quality textures. This makes the RTX 2060 the clear and only limiting component in this system, with the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus providing a stable platform that never introduces frame pacing issues or CPU-side stalls. In summary, the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is a direct measure of the GPU’s rendering capability, and the results show it is a mid-range card that struggles at high resolutions.

FAQ

*Q: What is the maximum average frame rate achievable with this CPU and GPU combo in The Medium?*

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 83 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only setting that comes close to high-refresh-rate territory, with all other settings and resolutions falling below 70 FPS.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus or the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 the main performance bottleneck?

A: The benchmark data clearly identifies the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 as the primary bottleneck. The frame rates scale inversely with resolution and settings, which is the signature of a GPU-limited scenario. The CPU’s high benchmark scores and the fact that FPS drops as pixel count increases confirm that the GPU is the limiting component.

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

A: Technically, yes, but with severe compromises. The system achieves an average of 55 FPS at 4K Low, which is playable, but at 4K Medium it drops to 34 FPS, and at 4K High it falls to 25 FPS. 4K Ultra is not viable, with an average of only 20 FPS. The 6 GB VRAM is likely a limiting factor at this resolution.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 compare to its nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 2060’s average benchmark score is 15290. It is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (15283, 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon 680M (15270, 0.1% delta). It is 0.6% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15199) and 0.8% faster than the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (15171). These are negligible differences in real-world gaming.

Q: What is the best resolution to play at if targeting 60 FPS?

A: The data shows that no setting at 1920x1080 reaches 60 FPS except for Low, which averages 83 FPS. At 1440p, only Low settings exceed 60 FPS, hitting 70 FPS. At 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS. For a stable 60 FPS experience, the user must play at 1440p Low or 1080p Low, as Medium settings at 1080p only manage 52 FPS.

Q: Why does the frame rate drop so significantly when moving from 1440p to 4K?

A: The drop is due to the GPU’s limited pixel throughput and memory bandwidth. At 4K, the RTX 2060 must render four times the pixels of 1080p. The card’s 336.0 GB/s bandwidth and 48 ROPs are insufficient for this workload, causing the average FPS to plummet, especially on higher quality presets that require more texture sampling and shading.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates provide a complete picture of the system’s capabilities across all tested configurations. The data includes average FPS, with minimum and maximum FPS recorded for Medium settings at each resolution.

At 1920x1080, the system shows its best performance. With Low settings, the average FPS is 83. Medium settings reduce this to 52 FPS, with a minimum of 44 and a maximum of 60 FPS. High settings average 37 FPS, and Ultra settings average 30 FPS. This shows a clear step-down in performance as graphical fidelity increases, with the gap between Low and Ultra being a 64% reduction in frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 70 FPS, which is still smooth. Medium settings average 44 FPS, with a minimum of 37 and a maximum of 50 FPS. High settings average 31 FPS, and Ultra settings average 25 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra at this resolution is a 64% reduction, similar to 1080p, but the absolute numbers are lower across the board.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles. Low settings average 55 FPS, making it the only playable preset at this resolution. Medium settings average 34 FPS, with a minimum of 29 and a maximum of 40 FPS. High settings average 25 FPS, and Ultra settings average 20 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is a 64% reduction, showing that the relative scaling is consistent, but the starting point is so low that Ultra is effectively unplayable.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|------------|----------|---------|---------|---------|

| 1920x1080 | Low | 83 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 52 | 44 | 60 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 37 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 30 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 70 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 44 | 37 | 50 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 31 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 25 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 55 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 34 | 29 | 40 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 25 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 20 | - | - |

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark data suggests that the optimal experience balances visual quality with acceptable frame rates. For a target of 60 FPS or higher, the user is limited to the Low preset. At 1920x1080, Low yields 83 FPS, which is excellent. At 2560x1440, Low yields 70 FPS, which is also above the 60 FPS threshold. At 4K, Low yields 55 FPS, which is close but slightly below 60.

For users with a 1080p display who prefer higher visual fidelity, the Medium preset at 52 FPS is a viable compromise, as it offers a significant visual upgrade over Low with a playable frame rate. The minimum FPS of 44 ensures that the experience remains smooth, with only minor dips. The High preset at 37 FPS is a substantial drop and is not recommended for fast-paced gameplay, as the lower frame rate can impact responsiveness. Ultra at 30 FPS is borderline unplayable.

At 1440p, the Medium preset offers 44 FPS, which is acceptable for a slower-paced horror game. The visual upgrade from Low to Medium is notable, and the frame time consistency, as shown by the 37-50 FPS range, indicates a stable experience. High and Ultra are not recommended due to their low frame rates of 31 and 25 FPS, respectively.

At 4K, the only sensible choice is the Low preset, which delivers 55 FPS. The Medium preset at 34 FPS is playable for a story-driven game but may feel sluggish. High and Ultra are not viable. The best experience per the measured rows is to play at 1080p or 1440p with Medium settings, as this provides a good balance of visual quality and smoothness. For users prioritizing frame rate above all else, 1080p Low is the clear winner.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 ranks 2287th out of 2911 total combos in The Medium. This places it in the bottom 21% of all systems tested, which is a direct reflection of the GPU’s mid-range status. The ranking is not a commentary on the CPU, which is a top-tier processor, but rather an indication that the RTX 2060 holds this system back significantly in this title.

The combo’s rank of 2287 is lower than what the CPU alone would suggest, as the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. This discrepancy highlights the importance of GPU selection in gaming performance. The data shows that the CPU is capable of supporting a much faster graphics card, and the system would rank significantly higher if paired with a modern, high-end GPU. The low ranking is entirely attributable to the GPU’s inability to render the game’s complex scenes at higher settings and resolutions.

This ranking means that the system is likely outperformed by a majority of other configurations in the database, which likely include more balanced pairings of mid-range CPUs with mid-range or high-end GPUs. The RTX 2060’s performance, as measured by its 58th percentile ranking among all GPUs, is the anchor dragging the combo down. While the CPU provides a massive foundation for future upgrades, the current config is firmly in the lower quartile of performance for this specific game. The data suggests that for this combo to move up in the ranks, a GPU upgrade is mandatory, as the CPU is already operating with significant excess capacity.