To The Core

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 combination delivers exceptionally high frame rates in To The Core, an idle game that rarely stresses modern hardware. This analysis walks through the CPU and GPU contributions, how the pairing ranks among nearly three thousand tested combinations, and what the measured FPS data implies for settings and resolution choices.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture. It operates at a 2.40 GHz base clock and boosts to 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The processor uses the Intel Socket 1851 and supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Its 30 MB shared L3 cache and 3 MB L2 per core are typical for a high-end desktop part. The CPU also integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU, though the presence of an RTX 5090 makes the integrated GPU irrelevant for gaming.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Core Ultra 7 265 scores 42,216 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 5,960 in single-core. It achieves 4,255 in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 600 in single-core. PassMark results show 49,682 for multithread, 4,689 for single-thread, 172,776 for floating-point math, and 134,773 for integer math. The processor’s average benchmark score is 64,640, placing it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs tested on this database.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 7 265 sits in a tight cluster. It trails the AMD EPYC 4464P by 0.3% (64,823 average score) and the AMD EPYC 9124 by 0.7% (65,104). It leads the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F by 0.3% (64,438) and the AMD EPYC 7343 by 0.7% (64,202). These deltas are negligible, meaning the CPU’s performance is effectively identical to its closest competitors. For To The Core, an idle game, this level of processing power is far beyond what the game requires.

The measured FPS data supports this conclusion. At 1080p Low, the combo averages 625 FPS, which is the highest recorded figure across all tested settings and resolutions. At 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 369 FPS. These numbers suggest that even at the lowest settings, the game is not CPU-bound in a traditional sense — the frame rates are so high that they likely hit a game engine or refresh-rate limit rather than a hardware bottleneck. The CPU’s 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost clock provide ample headroom for the game’s idle mechanics, which typically involve simple logic loops rather than heavy physics or AI.

It is worth noting the CPU’s PassMark single-thread score of 4,689 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5,960. Idle games often rely on a single main thread for game logic, and these scores indicate strong per-core performance. The 2.40 GHz base clock is low, but the 5.30 GHz boost ensures that single-threaded workloads can reach high speeds when needed. In practice, the data shows no evidence of CPU limitation — the FPS scales more with GPU settings and resolution, as detailed in later sections.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is the flagship GPU in this pairing, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a GB202 chip. It features 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. The GPU operates at a 2017 MHz base clock and 2407 MHz boost clock, with memory running at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). It has 21,760 shading units, 680 TMUs, 176 ROPs, 170 RT cores, and 680 tensor cores. The card’s FP32 performance is 104.8 TFLOPS, with a pixel rate of 423.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,636.8 GTexel/s.

In synthetic benchmarks, the RTX 5090 scores 18,355 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 334,370 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 376,728 in Geekbench Vulkan. PassMark results include 39,650 for G3D and 26,756 for GPU compute. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 79,842, placing it in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79,605, 0.3% behind), NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (79,396, 0.6% behind), and AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT (78,940, 1.1% behind). The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X leads the RTX 5090 by 1.4% with a score of 80,959. These comparisons are based purely on average benchmark scores, which aggregate diverse workloads; for gaming, the RTX 5090’s 32 GB VRAM and Blackwell architecture are far ahead of those older data-center and mobile parts.

For To The Core, the GPU’s role is largely about pushing frame rates at higher resolutions and settings. The measured FPS shows a clear pattern: at 1080p Low, the combo hits 625 FPS, while at 4K Ultra it falls to 142 FPS. This 4.4x reduction from 1080p Low to 4K Ultra is substantial, but the absolute numbers remain high — even 142 FPS at 4K Ultra is far beyond what most displays can show. The 32 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for an idle game, which likely uses less than 2 GB even at 4K. The GPU’s 1.79 TB/s bandwidth and 2407 MHz boost clock are overkill for this title, but they ensure that the GPU is never a limiting factor at any tested configuration.

The RTX 5090’s 92nd percentile ranking among all GPUs reinforces its position as a top-tier part. In an idle game like To The Core, the GPU’s massive compute resources translate directly into high frame rates, especially at lower resolutions where the CPU and memory bandwidth can feed the GPU quickly. The data shows that the GPU handles 1080p Low with ease — 625 FPS is likely near the engine’s maximum frame output — and still delivers 176 FPS at 4K High. This suggests that the GPU is the primary driver of performance differences across settings and resolutions, while the CPU stays well ahead of demand.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this CPU and GPU combo in To The Core?*

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 625, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 compare to its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64,640, which is 0.3% lower than the AMD EPYC 4464P’s 64,823. This difference is statistically negligible.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS measured for this combo?

A: The lowest average FPS is 142, recorded at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings.

Q: Does the RTX 5090 have more VRAM than its nearest rival, the Tesla P100?

A: Yes, the RTX 5090 has 32 GB of GDDR7 memory, while the nearest rival by average score, the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, has 16 GB. However, the P100 is a data-center GPU, not a gaming card.

Q: How many total combos were tested for ranking purposes in this game?

A: The combo ranks 66th out of 2,991 tested combinations in To The Core.

Q: What is the core count and boost clock of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265?

A: The CPU has 20 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 combination ranks 66th out of 2,991 tested combos in To The Core. This places it in the top 2.2% of all pairings, which is an exceptional result. The rank reflects the measured FPS across all resolutions and settings, not synthetic benchmarks. Given that the game is an idle title with low system requirements, the top 66th position indicates that this pairing delivers near-maximum possible frame rates.

To put the rank in context, there are 2,925 combos that rank below this one. The 66th position suggests that only 65 other CPU-GPU pairings produce higher measured FPS in this game. Since the RTX 5090 is one of the fastest GPUs available (92nd percentile among all GPUs) and the Core Ultra 7 265 is a high-end CPU (93rd percentile among all CPUs), the high rank is expected. However, it is notable that the combo does not rank higher — the 65 combos above it likely feature even faster CPUs or GPUs, or possibly combinations that avoid any minor bottleneck.

The rank also implies that the combo is not limited by either component in a way that would drag it down. The CPU’s 93rd percentile and GPU’s 92nd percentile are both high, but not the absolute highest. A pairing with a faster CPU (e.g., a 95th percentile part) and the same GPU might rank slightly higher if the game benefits from single-thread performance. Conversely, a pairing with a slower GPU but a top-tier CPU could still match this combo if the game is CPU-bound at lower settings. The data shows that this combo’s FPS ranges from 142 (4K Ultra) to 625 (1080p Low), so the rank is driven by the average across all measured configurations.

For users who prioritize idle games, the 66th rank out of 2,991 is a strong indicator that this combo will never struggle with frame rates. Even the lowest measured FPS (142 at 4K Ultra) is above the refresh rate of most monitors. The rank confirms the RTX 5090’s raw performance, as the CPU is unlikely to be a bottleneck in a game with such simple mechanics.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience in To The Core depends on the user’s display refresh rate and resolution preference. At 1920x1080, all settings produce frame rates well above 360 FPS: Low averages 625 FPS, Medium 528 FPS, High 458 FPS, and Ultra 369 FPS. For a 144Hz or 240Hz monitor, even Ultra settings are overkill, so users can max out the game without any perceptible compromise. The minimum FPS is only recorded for Medium settings (449 at 1080p), but even that is far above typical refresh rates.

At 2560x1440, the pattern is similar. Low averages 420 FPS, Medium 355 FPS, High 308 FPS, and Ultra 248 FPS. Again, all settings exceed 240 FPS, making Ultra the clear choice for visual fidelity without sacrificing smoothness. The Medium setting shows a minimum FPS of 302, which is still excellent.

At 3840x2160, the situation changes slightly. Low averages 240 FPS, Medium 203 FPS, High 176 FPS, and Ultra 142 FPS. For 4K 144Hz displays, Ultra settings would drop below 144 FPS, so users may prefer High (176 FPS) or Medium (203 FPS) to maintain a locked frame rate. For 4K 120Hz displays, Ultra at 142 FPS is still above 120, but the margin is slim. Low at 240 FPS is the highest 4K option, but it reduces visual quality significantly for no practical benefit on most displays.

The recommendation is to use Ultra settings at 1080p and 1440p, as the FPS remains above 248 even at 1440p Ultra. At 4K, High settings offer the best balance — 176 FPS is above 144Hz, and the visual difference between High and Ultra is typically small. Medium at 4K (203 FPS) is also viable for users who want extra headroom. Low settings are only advisable if the user has a 360Hz or higher refresh rate display and wants to maximize frame rates, but the visual downgrade is rarely worth it for an idle game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 625 FPS on Low, 528 FPS on Medium (with a minimum of 449 and maximum of 608), 458 FPS on High, and 369 FPS on Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra is 256 FPS, representing a 41% drop from the maximum. Medium and High sit between these extremes, with High being 70 FPS slower than Medium.

At 2560x1440, the scores are 420 FPS on Low, 355 FPS on Medium (minimum 302, maximum 409), 308 FPS on High, and 248 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra is 172 FPS, a 41% reduction — nearly identical to the 1080p scaling. This consistency suggests that the GPU is scaling uniformly with settings regardless of resolution.

At 3840x2160, the results are 240 FPS on Low, 203 FPS on Medium (minimum 173, maximum 234), 176 FPS on High, and 142 FPS on Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra is 98 FPS, a 41% reduction again. This pattern is striking: across all three resolutions, the percentage difference between Low and Ultra is almost exactly 41%. This indicates that the game’s setting presets have a consistent impact on GPU load, independent of resolution.

For each resolution, the Medium setting has recorded minimum and maximum FPS values, while other settings only have averages. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 449 and maximum is 608, showing a frame time variance of 159 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 302 to 409 (107 FPS variance). At 4K Medium, the range is 173 to 234 (61 FPS variance). The decreasing variance at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU becomes more consistently loaded as resolution increases, reducing frame time spikes.

The highest single average FPS is 625 at 1080p Low, and the lowest is 142 at 4K Ultra. The overall spread is 483 FPS. For an idle game, these numbers are extraordinarily high — even the lowest average FPS (142) is more than double the refresh rate of a standard 60Hz monitor. The data confirms that this combo can run To The Core at maximum settings on any resolution without dropping below playable frame rates.

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

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is consistent across all settings. At Low, the average FPS falls from 625 at 1080p to 420 at 1440p to 240 at 4K. This represents a 32.8% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 42.9% drop from 1440p to 4K. At Medium, the scores are 528, 355, and 203 — drops of 32.8% and 42.8%, respectively. At High, the scores are 458, 308, and 176 — drops of 32.8% and 42.9%. At Ultra, the scores are 369, 248, and 142 — drops of 32.8% and 42.7%.

The uniformity of these percentage drops is remarkable. Moving from 1080p to 1440p (a 1.78x increase in pixel count) reduces FPS by roughly 33%, while moving from 1440p to 4K (a 2.25x increase in pixel count) reduces FPS by roughly 43%. This pattern is consistent with a GPU-bound scenario: as resolution increases, the GPU must process more pixels, and the frame rate scales inversely with pixel count. The fact that the drops are nearly identical across all settings reinforces that the GPU is the limiting component at all resolutions.

If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain flat or drop less steeply at higher resolutions because the CPU workload stays constant while the GPU workload increases. Instead, the data shows a clear GPU-bound behavior. At 1080p Low, the CPU might be limiting the FPS to 625 (a common engine cap), but at 4K Ultra, the GPU is clearly the constraint, producing 142 FPS. The CPU’s 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost are more than sufficient to feed the GPU even at 4K, as evidenced by the fact that the FPS scales with pixel count rather than plateauing.

The RTX 5090’s 32 GB VRAM and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth are not limiting factors at 4K, as idle games use minimal memory. The 41% reduction from Low to Ultra at every resolution further indicates that the GPU’s shader and rasterization throughput — not memory bandwidth or VRAM capacity — is what changes with settings. The 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 performance is the key metric here, and the measured FPS scales with the workload imposed by each preset.

In practical terms, the resolution scaling data tells us that users who want the highest frame rates should play at 1080p Low (625 FPS), but this comes at a visual cost. For 4K, High settings (176 FPS) provide the best trade-off between FPS and visual quality, as the drop from 1080p High (458 FPS) to 4K High (176 FPS) is a 61.6% reduction — steep, but the absolute FPS is still high. The limiting component is always the GPU, and the RTX 5090 is powerful enough to deliver playable frame rates at 4K Ultra (142 FPS), though users with 144Hz displays may prefer High settings to avoid any frame rate dips. Overall, the data shows a well-balanced combo where the GPU scales predictably with resolution, and the CPU never becomes a bottleneck.