Undisputed

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 presents a fascinating study in bottleneck dynamics within Undisputed. The data shows a combination that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions, yet the CPU’s six Zen 4 cores prove more than capable of feeding the flagship GeForce 40-series card. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across resolutions and settings, contextualizes the combo’s standing among 2,813 tested configurations, and offers clear guidance on how to best leverage this hardware in a boxing sim where frame pacing matters.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F + RTX 4090 combination ranks 123rd out of 2,813 tested combos in Undisputed. That places it in the top 4.4% of all configurations, which is strong but not the absolute top tier, reflecting that the RTX 4090’s raw power is slightly held back by the mid-range CPU in certain scenarios.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 7400F compare to its nearest CPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F has an average benchmark score of 32,750, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H, which scores 32,812, meaning the 7400F trails by just 0.2%. Conversely, it leads the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H by 0.2% (32,750 vs 32,697) and the Intel Core i5-14600T by 0.1% (32,750 vs 32,707). These deltas are within noise, making them effectively equivalent in multi-threaded workloads.

Q: What is the RTX 4090’s standing relative to other GPUs?

A: The RTX 4090 holds an 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 60,347. Its closest rival is the Intel Arc Pro A60, which scores 60,326, a 0% delta. Interestingly, the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 61,896, which is 2.5% higher, while the AMD Radeon PRO V710 trails by 2.9% with a score of 58,657. The 4090’s nearest listed rivals are all professional/workstation cards, not gaming GPUs.

Q: Does the RTX 4090 bottleneck the Ryzen 5 7400F at 1080p?

A: Benchmark results indicate the opposite. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 530 FPS average, which is far beyond any display’s refresh rate and suggests the CPU is the limiting factor at that point. The GPU is so fast that it finishes frames faster than the CPU can issue them, but the practical takeaway is that 1080p is overkill for this pairing.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 4K gaming with this combo?

A: At 4K, the High preset delivers 144 FPS average, which is suitable for high-refresh 4K displays. The Medium preset yields 174 FPS with a minimum of 148 FPS, providing an even smoother experience. Ultra drops to 93 FPS, which is still playable but sacrifices the high-refresh advantage. Given the data, Medium at 4K offers the best balance of fidelity and frame rate.

Q: How much FPS does the combo lose when moving from 1080p to 4K?

A: The drop depends on the preset. At High settings, average FPS falls from 315 at 1080p to 228 at 1440p, and finally 144 at 4K — a 54% reduction from 1080p to 4K. At Low settings, the drop is steeper: from 530 FPS at 1080p to 383 at 1440p and 242 at 4K, a 54% reduction as well. This consistent scaling indicates the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications dictate the performance envelope. The GPU features 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth. This massive memory capacity and bandwidth are crucial for Undisputed at 4K, where textures and geometry data can be substantial. The card’s 16,384 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 176 ROPs handle the heavy lifting of rendering the boxing arenas, character models, and dynamic lighting. With a boost clock of 2520 MHz, the 4090 achieves an FP32 throughput of 82.58 TFLOPS, which is the raw compute that drives high frame rates.

In Undisputed, the GPU’s role becomes evident when examining the measured FPS across settings. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 93, which is a significant drop from the 144 FPS at High. This 35% performance penalty for moving from High to Ultra suggests that the Ultra preset introduces effects that heavily tax the GPU, likely including higher-resolution shadows, ambient occlusion, and reflections. The RTX 4090’s 128 RT cores and 512 tensor cores are present, but Undisputed is not a ray-tracing-heavy title based on the data; the FPS scaling is more consistent with traditional rasterization loads.

The GPU’s memory clock runs at 1313 MHz, which translates to 21 Gbps effective. This speed, combined with the 384-bit bus, allows the 4090 to feed its 16,384 cores without starvation. The measured results show that at 1440p and 4K, the GPU is the clear bottleneck. For example, at 1440p High, the combo hits 228 FPS, which is 72% of the 1080p High result of 315 FPS. This scaling is typical of a GPU-bound scenario where resolution increases linearly tax the render pipeline.

The RTX 4090’s 24 GB of VRAM is another factor. While Undisputed may not use all of it at 1080p or 1440p, at 4K Ultra, the game could be allocating more memory for high-resolution textures. The fact that the 4K Ultra result (93 FPS) is much lower than 4K High (144 FPS) suggests that the Ultra preset may be pushing memory usage and shader complexity beyond what is optimal for high refresh rates. However, the 24 GB buffer means there is no risk of VRAM overflow, which would cause stuttering or texture pop-in. The data indicates the 4090 is never memory-limited; instead, compute and fill-rate limits are the constraints.

Resolution Scaling

Resolution scaling in Undisputed with this combo reveals a clear GPU-bound pattern. Starting at 1920x1080, the measured FPS ranges from 530 (Low) down to 203 (Ultra). At 1080p, the CPU’s single-thread performance and the game’s engine overhead become relevant. The Ryzen 5 7400F has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,072, which is strong but not exceptional. The 1080p Low result of 530 FPS indicates that the CPU can issue frames at a rate exceeding 500 FPS, but this is far beyond any practical display capability.

Moving to 2560x1440, the FPS drops proportionally. At Medium, the average falls from 381 FPS at 1080p to 275 FPS at 1440p, a 28% reduction. At High, the drop is from 315 to 228, a 28% reduction as well. This consistent scaling suggests that the GPU’s pixel throughput is the limiting factor. The 1440p results show that the RTX 4090 still has ample headroom, as even the Ultra preset manages 147 FPS average. The minimum FPS recorded at 1440p Medium is 234, indicating smooth frame delivery without significant dips.

At 3840x2160, the scaling becomes more pronounced. The 4K Low result of 242 FPS is still very high, but it is only 46% of the 1080p Low figure. This 54% drop is larger than the 1440p drop, which reinforces that the GPU is being pushed harder. The 4K High result of 144 FPS is exactly half of the 1080p High result of 315 FPS, showing a linear relationship with pixel count (4K has 4x the pixels of 1080p, but the FPS halves, indicating the GPU has enough bandwidth to mitigate the full cost). The 4K Ultra result of 93 FPS is the lowest measured, and it suggests that this preset is extremely demanding. The 4K Medium result of 174 FPS with a 148 FPS minimum is notable because it shows that a mid-tier preset can provide a high-refresh 4K experience.

The data supports a conclusion that this combo is GPU-bound at all resolutions above 1080p. The CPU’s impact is negligible at 1440p and 4K, as evidenced by the smooth scaling. The only place where the CPU might matter is at 1080p Low, where the 530 FPS result is likely limited by the CPU’s ability to process game logic and draw calls. For practical gaming, users should target 1440p or 4K, where the GPU’s strengths are fully utilized.

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F + RTX 4090 combo ranks 123rd out of 2,813 tested combinations in Undisputed. This percentile placement (top 4.4%) is impressive but not the top. The ranking is determined by measured FPS across all settings and resolutions, and the 4090’s raw power ensures a high placement. However, the Ryzen 5 7400F, while capable, is not the fastest CPU available. Its 83rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32,750, is respectable but shows that there are faster processors.

The nearest CPU rivals to the 7400F include the Intel Core i5-14600T (32,707 score, 0.1% slower) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (32,812 score, 0.2% faster). These deltas are minimal, meaning that swapping the 7400F for one of these CPUs would likely produce nearly identical FPS in Undisputed. The bottleneck at 4K is the GPU, not the CPU, so the combo’s ranking is primarily driven by the RTX 4090’s performance.

The RTX 4090 itself holds an 88th percentile GPU ranking, with an average score of 60,347. Its nearest rival, the Intel Arc Pro A60, scores 60,326, a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600M scores 2.5% higher, but that is a workstation card with different drivers and optimizations. In gaming, the RTX 4090 is effectively the top consumer GPU, and its inclusion in this combo ensures that the 123rd ranking is more a reflection of the CPU’s mid-range standing than any GPU deficiency.

The combo rank of 123rd out of 2,813 means that 122 other combinations achieved higher average FPS in Undisputed. These likely include CPUs with higher single-thread performance, such as Intel Core i9 or AMD Ryzen 7/9 variants, paired with the RTX 4090. At 1080p, where the CPU matters more, those combos would pull ahead. However, at 4K, the gap narrows significantly. The measured data shows that this combo delivers 144 FPS at 4K High, which is a strong result. The ranking suggests that while this is not the absolute fastest combo, it offers near-flagship GPU performance with a sensible mid-range CPU.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of how this combo performs across three resolutions and four settings presets. The following is a detailed breakdown:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 530 FPS average. This is the highest measured FPS in the entire dataset, indicating the CPU and GPU are both operating at their limits.
• Medium: 381 FPS average, with a minimum of 324 FPS and a maximum of 438 FPS. The minimum frame time suggests no stutter, as the 324 FPS low is still far above any refresh rate.
• High: 315 FPS average. This is a 17% drop from Medium, showing that the High preset adds shading and texture work that taxes the GPU.
• Ultra: 203 FPS average. This is a 36% drop from High, indicating that Ultra settings at 1080p are still GPU-bound but manageable.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 383 FPS average. This is 28% lower than 1080p Low, showing the expected scaling with pixel count.
• Medium: 275 FPS average, with a minimum of 234 FPS and a maximum of 317 FPS. The minimum is still above 144 Hz, making this a solid choice for high-refresh 1440p monitors.
• High: 228 FPS average. This is a 17% drop from Medium, consistent with the 1080p scaling pattern.
• Ultra: 147 FPS average. This is a 36% drop from High, similar to 1080p. The 147 FPS result is just above 144 Hz, making it usable for most displays.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 242 FPS average. This is a 37% drop from 1440p Low, showing that 4K’s pixel count is a significant burden.
• Medium: 174 FPS average, with a minimum of 148 FPS and a maximum of 200 FPS. This is the standout result: the minimum of 148 FPS is above 144 Hz, providing a smooth experience with medium settings.
• High: 144 FPS average. This is a 17% drop from Medium, matching the pattern. The 144 FPS average is exactly at 144 Hz, meaning some frames may dip below.
• Ultra: 93 FPS average. This is a 35% drop from High, and it is the only preset where the average drops below 100 FPS. The 93 FPS result is suitable for 60 Hz displays but not for high-refresh.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each preset step (Low to Medium, Medium to High, High to Ultra) incurs roughly a 17-36% performance penalty, with the largest jumps occurring from High to Ultra. The minimum FPS figures, where available, indicate that Medium settings provide the most stable frame delivery, with minimums that are close to the averages. The lack of min/max data for Low, High, and Ultra presets means we cannot confirm frame pacing for those settings, but the averages are sufficient for comparison.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal settings preset depends on the user’s resolution and refresh rate priorities. For 4K users, the Medium preset is the clear recommendation. At 3840x2160, Medium delivers 174 FPS average with a 148 FPS minimum. This means the frame rate never drops below 148 FPS, which is above the 144 Hz refresh rate of many high-end monitors. The visual difference between Medium and High at 4K is often subtle, but the performance gain (174 vs 144 FPS) is substantial. The High preset at 4K produces 144 FPS average, but with no min/max data, there is a risk of dips below 144 Hz. Medium provides a safety margin.

For 1440p users, the Ultra preset is viable. At 2560x1440, Ultra achieves 147 FPS average, which is above 144 Hz. The High preset at 228 FPS is overkill for most displays, but if a user has a 240 Hz monitor, High would be the better choice. Medium at 275 FPS is also excellent, but Ultra adds visual fidelity without dropping below the 144 Hz threshold. The data shows that at 1440p, the combo has enough headroom to run Ultra comfortably.

For 1080p users, the recommendation is to use Ultra if the display supports it. The Ultra preset at 1080p yields 203 FPS average, which is above 144 Hz and close to 240 Hz. High at 315 FPS is excessive for most monitors, and Low at 530 FPS is purely academic. The CPU’s single-thread performance may become a factor at 1080p Low, but for practical gaming, Ultra is the best balance. However, it should be noted that 1080p is not where this combo shines; the RTX 4090 is wasted at that resolution, and users would be better served by upgrading to a higher-resolution display.

The data also suggests that Low and Medium presets are not ideal for this combo. At 4K Low, the 242 FPS average is high, but the visual quality is severely compromised. The Medium preset at 4K (174 FPS) offers a much better visual experience with only a 28% FPS drop from Low. Similarly, at 1440p, Medium (275 FPS) is a better choice than Low (383 FPS) because the visual uplift is significant. The High preset is a middle ground, but the jump from High to Ultra (17-36% FPS drop) is often worth it for the extra visual polish, especially at 1440p where Ultra still exceeds 144 FPS.

In summary, the best experience per the measured rows is as follows: 4K users should choose Medium for a guaranteed 148+ FPS. 1440p users should choose Ultra for 147+ FPS with maximum fidelity. 1080p users should choose Ultra for 203+ FPS, though they should consider a higher-resolution monitor to utilize the GPU’s full potential. The combo’s strength lies in its ability to deliver high-refresh 4K gaming with the right settings, and the data confirms that Medium at 4K is the sweet spot.