Undisputed

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti lands at rank 714 out of 2,813 tested combos in Undisputed. That places this configuration in the top 25.4% of all recorded combinations, a strong showing for a sports title that tends to favor raw GPU throughput over exotic multi-core scaling. The combo’s percentile standing is worth noting: both the CPU and GPU individually sit at the 83rd percentile against all their respective peers, which suggests a balanced pairing rather than one component dragging the other down.

Looking at the CPU’s nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 7400F posts an average benchmark score of 32,750, which is virtually identical to the Intel Core i5-14600T at 32,707 (0.1% faster) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H at 32,812 (0.2% slower). The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H trails by a hair at 32,697, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 sits at 32,662. These are all within a 0.3% band, meaning the 7400F is essentially neck-and-neck with a cluster of mid-range and mobile parts in synthetic workloads. In gaming, though, the 7400F’s Zen 4 architecture and high boost clock give it an edge in latency-sensitive scenes, which shows up in the measured FPS data.

On the GPU side, the RTX 3080 Ti’s average benchmark score is 41,187, with the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 at 40,870 (0.8% slower) and the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB at 41,707 (1.2% faster) as the closest comparators. The GeForce RTX 5070, a much newer part, scores 40,377, which is 2% lower. The RTX 3080 Ti’s 34.10 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 912.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth are the key specs driving its performance in Undisputed, a game that seems to respond well to high bandwidth given its 4K results.

The rank of 714 out of 2,813 is respectable but not elite. Combos ahead of this one likely feature newer GPUs like the RTX 40-series or RTX 50-series parts, or CPUs with higher core counts. However, for a 6-core, 12-thread CPU from the 7000 series paired with a last-generation flagship GPU, this combo punches above its weight in this specific title. The data suggests the pairing is well-matched: neither component is a glaring bottleneck at most settings, though the scaling patterns we’ll examine later reveal where the limits lie.

FAQ

Q: What is the combo’s overall rank in Undisputed?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F + RTX 3080 Ti combination ranks 714th out of 2,813 tested combos, placing it in the top 25.4% of all configurations measured for this game.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F scores 32,750 on average, which is 0.1% above the Intel Core i5-14600T (32,707) and 0.2% below the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (32,812). It also edges out the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H by 0.2% and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 by 0.3%.

Q: What is the GPU’s standing relative to its closest competitors?

A: The RTX 3080 Ti averages 41,187 in benchmarks. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 is 0.8% slower, while the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB is 1.2% faster. The newer GeForce RTX 5070 trails by 2% in this comparison.

Q: What resolution and settings produce the highest average FPS?

A: The highest measured average is 372 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 269 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low, it reaches 170 FPS.

Q: Is there a settings preset that maintains 60+ FPS at 4K?

A: Yes. At 3840x2160, the High preset delivers 101 FPS, Medium delivers 122 FPS, and even Ultra stays above 60 FPS at 65 FPS. The only sub-60 result would require heavier settings than Ultra, which are not in the measured data.

Q: How does the CPU’s boost clock relate to gaming performance?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F boosts to 4.70 GHz, and its 6 cores with 12 threads are sufficient for Undisputed’s engine. The single-core Cinebench R23 score of 3,072 points indicates strong per-thread performance, which is more critical for this sports title than raw multi-core throughput.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data offers a clear picture of which preset gives the best experience at each resolution. For a 60 Hz display at 3840x2160, Ultra settings are the sweet spot: 65 FPS average is playable but leaves little headroom for dips. The Medium preset at 4K jumps to 122 FPS, which is far more comfortable for high-refresh 4K panels, though it sacrifices some visual fidelity. High at 4K sits at 101 FPS, a good middle ground if you want better image quality than Medium without the performance hit of Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the story changes. Ultra delivers 103 FPS, which is excellent for a 144 Hz monitor. High pushes that to 160 FPS, and Medium reaches 194 FPS. For competitive play, Low at 269 FPS is the clear choice if you have a 240 Hz or 360 Hz display. The data suggests that 1440p is where this combo truly shines—you can run Ultra and still clear 100 FPS, which is rare for demanding titles.

At 1920x1080, the CPU becomes the limiting factor at lower settings. Low hits 372 FPS, Medium drops to 268 FPS, High to 222 FPS, and Ultra to 143 FPS. If you’re on a 1080p 144 Hz monitor, Ultra is perfect. For 240 Hz panels, High provides enough headroom. Pushing beyond that into Low territory yields diminishing returns unless you’re chasing esports-level refresh rates.

The best overall experience per the measured rows depends on your display. For 4K, Medium at 122 FPS offers the best balance of visual quality and smoothness, with High at 101 FPS as a close alternative if you prefer sharper textures. At 1440p, Ultra at 103 FPS is the recommended preset—it maximizes image quality while staying above the 100 FPS threshold. At 1080p, High at 222 FPS is ideal for most high-refresh monitors, as it provides a large margin over 144 Hz without the visual degradation of Low.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Starting at 1920x1080, the combo shows its raw strength. Low settings produce 372 FPS average, which is the highest number in the entire dataset. Medium drops to 268 FPS with a minimum of 228 and a maximum of 308. High yields 222 FPS, and Ultra settles at 143 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 229 FPS, a 61.5% reduction, which indicates that the GPU is still doing heavy lifting even at this resolution where CPU overhead usually dominates.

Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers scale down proportionally. Low delivers 269 FPS, Medium 194 FPS (min 165, max 223), High 160 FPS, and Ultra 103 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is roughly 28% for Low, 28% for Medium, 28% for High, and 28% for Ultra. This consistent scaling across settings suggests the GPU is the primary constraint at this resolution, as the CPU headroom from 1080p is no longer the bottleneck.

At 3840x2160, the performance curve steepens. Low produces 170 FPS, Medium 122 FPS (min 104, max 141), High 101 FPS, and Ultra 65 FPS. The jump from 1440p to 4K costs roughly 37% of performance for Low, 37% for Medium, 37% for High, and 37% for Ultra. This uniform percentage drop across all settings is a textbook sign of a GPU-bound scenario—the RTX 3080 Ti’s 912.4 GB/s bandwidth and 34.10 TFLOPS are being fully utilized, with the CPU easily keeping pace.

The minimum FPS data, where available, shows that even the 1% lows are respectable. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 104 FPS is only 15% below the average of 122 FPS, indicating smooth frame pacing. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 165 FPS is 15% below the 194 FPS average. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 228 FPS is 15% below the 268 FPS average. This consistency across resolutions implies the engine is well-optimized for this hardware combination, with no sudden spikes or stutters in the measured data.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is remarkably linear. At Low settings, performance goes from 372 FPS at 1080p to 269 FPS at 1440p (a 27.7% drop) to 170 FPS at 4K (a 36.8% drop from 1440p). At Medium, the sequence is 268 → 194 → 122, with drops of 27.6% and 37.1%. At High, it’s 222 → 160 → 101, with drops of 27.9% and 36.9%. At Ultra, 143 → 103 → 65, with drops of 28.0% and 36.9%.

This pattern is telling. The 1080p-to-1440p transition costs about 28% regardless of settings, while the 1440p-to-4K transition costs about 37%. The increasing penalty at higher resolutions is typical of a GPU-bound workload, where pixel count grows quadratically and the rendering load scales accordingly. The fact that the percentage drops are nearly identical across all four settings presets strongly suggests that the GPU is the limiting component at every resolution above 1080p.

At 1080p, the story is slightly different. The jump from Low to Ultra costs 61.5% of performance (372 to 143 FPS), which is a larger relative gap than at 4K (170 to 65 FPS, a 61.8% drop). However, the absolute FPS numbers at 1080p are so high that the CPU’s 6-core, 12-thread configuration with a 4.70 GHz boost clock is likely preventing even higher frame rates at Low settings. The 372 FPS ceiling at 1080p Low is impressive, but it suggests the Ryzen 5 7400F is nearing its limits in this scenario.

The limiting component analysis points to the GPU at 1440p and above. The RTX 3080 Ti’s 384-bit memory bus and 912.4 GB/s bandwidth are being taxed heavily at 4K, as evidenced by the 65 FPS Ultra result. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we’d see smaller performance gaps between resolutions, especially at lower settings where the GPU has less work to do. Instead, the consistent scaling percentages confirm that the GPU is the primary constraint across the board, with the CPU only becoming relevant at 1080p Low.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 5 nm process. Its base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.70 GHz provide strong single-thread performance, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,072 points. The 32 MB of shared L3 cache and 1 MB L2 per core help reduce memory latency, which is critical for a sports game like Undisputed that likely has frequent physics calculations and AI updates.

In multi-threaded workloads, the 7400F scores 21,765 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is respectable for a 6-core part. However, Undisputed doesn’t appear to scale well beyond 6 cores based on the measured FPS data. The game’s performance at 1080p Low (372 FPS) is likely near the CPU’s practical limit, as the 4.70 GHz boost clock and 6 cores are sufficient to feed the GPU at lower resolutions. The PassMark multi-thread score of 25,645 and single-thread score of 3,689 further confirm that this CPU excels in lightly-threaded tasks.

The CPU’s 65W TDP and 5 nm process node mean it runs efficiently, which is beneficial for sustained gaming sessions. Its DDR5 memory support with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth ensures the GPU has fast access to textures and geometry data. While the 7400F doesn’t have integrated graphics, that’s irrelevant for this pairing since the RTX 3080 Ti handles all rendering.

The data indicates the CPU is not a bottleneck at 1440p or 4K. At those resolutions, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. At 1080p, though, the CPU’s influence becomes more apparent—the fact that Low settings produce 372 FPS but Ultra drops to 143 FPS suggests the GPU is still the main driver, but the CPU’s 6 cores are enough to prevent frame drops even in the most demanding scenes. The nearest rival comparison shows the 7400F is nearly identical to the Intel Core i5-14600T in synthetic benchmarks, yet the measured gaming performance here is strong enough to rank in the top 25% of all combos, indicating that the CPU’s architecture and clock speed translate well to real-world gaming.

The 7400F’s 12 threads are adequate for Undisputed’s engine, which doesn’t appear to use more than 6-8 threads based on the scaling data. The boost clock of 4.70 GHz is the more important factor—it ensures that single-threaded physics and AI calculations complete quickly, keeping frame times consistent. The 32 MB L3 cache also helps by storing frequently accessed game data, reducing the need to fetch from system memory. Overall, this CPU provides a solid foundation for the RTX 3080 Ti, with enough headroom to avoid becoming a bottleneck until frame rates exceed 300 FPS at 1080p.