Undisputed

# Undisputed with AMD Ryzen 5 8400F + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650

This combination of AMD's Ryzen 5 8400F and NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 1650 represents a pairing of a modern six-core Zen 4 desktop processor with an older, end-of-life entry-level graphics card. The measured frame rates across resolutions and settings reveal a system that is heavily constrained by the GPU, with the CPU's capabilities largely untapped in this boxing title. The data shows a playable experience at 1080p with adjusted settings, but the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and limited compute resources create a hard ceiling that no amount of CPU headroom can overcome.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear picture of what this combo can deliver at each preset. At 1920x1080, the Low preset yields an average of 109 FPS, which is more than double the 42 FPS seen at Ultra. The Medium preset at 1080p delivers 79 FPS on average, with a minimum of 67 FPS and a maximum of 91 FPS, indicating a stable experience well above the 60 FPS threshold. High at 1080p drops to 65 FPS average, which is still playable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes.

For the best balance of visual quality and performance, the Medium preset at 1080p is the clear recommendation. The 79 FPS average with a 67 FPS minimum suggests consistent frame pacing, and the jump from Low to Medium likely brings meaningful visual improvements without the steep cost seen when moving to High or Ultra. The data shows that High at 1080p costs 14 FPS compared to Medium, while Ultra costs an additional 23 FPS, making Medium the sweet spot.

At 2560x1440, the situation changes. Medium delivers 57 FPS average with a 48 FPS minimum, which is borderline for smooth gameplay. Low at 1440p achieves 79 FPS average, matching the 1080p Medium result, but the visual compromise is significant. High at 1440p drops to 47 FPS, and Ultra falls to 30 FPS, making both less desirable. For 1440p users, Low is the only preset that consistently maintains playable frame rates, though Medium remains an option for those who prioritize image quality over smoothness.

The 3840x2160 results are largely academic for this hardware. Even Low at 4K only manages 50 FPS average, and Medium drops to 36 FPS with a 31 FPS minimum. High at 4K sits at 30 FPS, and Ultra is effectively unplayable at 19 FPS. The recommendation for 4K is to avoid it entirely, as the GTX 1650's 4 GB VRAM and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for this resolution in Undisputed.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F brings six cores and twelve threads based on the Zen 4 architecture, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The CPU's benchmark results show strong single-threaded performance with a 3dmark_single_thread score of 951 and a cinebench_r23_singlecore score of 2943, which should be more than adequate for a sports title like Undisputed. The multi-threaded scores are also respectable, with cinebench_r23_multicore at 20851 and passmark_multithread at 24389.

However, the measured FPS data suggests the CPU is not the limiting factor in this configuration. The fact that 1080p Low achieves 109 FPS while 1080p Ultra drops to 42 FPS points to GPU-bound performance, as the CPU workload would not change dramatically with different quality presets. The 3dmark_16_threads score of 6091 and 3dmark_max_threads score of 6165 indicate the processor has ample headroom for gaming workloads, and the 16 MB shared L3 cache helps with data locality.

The CPU's percentileVsAllCpus of 77 places it above most processors, and its avgBenchmarkScore of 25005 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F at 24964 (0.2% delta). This suggests the 8400F is a capable gaming CPU on its own. Yet in Undisputed, the GTX 1650's passmark_g3d score of 7880 and percentileVsAllGpus of 40 clearly show a GPU that sits in the lower half of all graphics cards. The bottleneck is unambiguous: the CPU is ready to feed frames far faster than the GPU can render them.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Undisputed at 60 FPS?

A: Yes, but only at specific settings. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 109, and at Medium it is 79. At 2560x1440 with Low settings, the average is 79 FPS. However, at 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS, with the highest being Low at 50 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution for this hardware?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the optimal resolution. At Medium settings, it delivers 79 FPS average with a 67 FPS minimum. At 2560x1440, even Medium drops to 57 FPS with a 48 FPS minimum, making 1080p the only resolution where all presets except Ultra remain at or above 60 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1650's VRAM affect performance?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 128.1 GB/s bandwidth. The sharp FPS drops when moving from Medium to High and Ultra suggest that higher settings may exceed the VRAM capacity, causing performance degradation. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS falls to 19, indicating severe memory pressure.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 8400F holding back the GTX 1650?

A: No. The CPU's benchmarks show it is far more capable than the GPU. The 8400F's avgBenchmarkScore of 25005 ranks in the 77th percentile, while the GTX 1650's avgBenchmarkScore of 7472 ranks in the 40th percentile. The FPS differences between settings at the same resolution are entirely attributable to GPU workload.

Q: What FPS can I expect at 1440p with High settings?

A: The measured average is 47 FPS at 2560x1440 with High settings. This is below the 60 FPS threshold, and since no minimum FPS was recorded for this configuration, the frame pacing may be inconsistent. For smoother play at 1440p, Low settings at 79 FPS average is the safer choice.

Q: How does this combo rank among tested configurations?

A: The comboRankInGame is 3591 out of 3718 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 3.4% of all tested systems. This rank is more reflective of the GPU's limitations than the CPU's capabilities, as the 8400F is a relatively strong processor paired with a weak graphics card.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 3591 out of 3718 tested combos places this system in the lower percentile of all configurations tested in Undisputed. This ranking is unsurprising given the GPU's performance class. The GTX 1650's passmark_g3d score of 7880 puts it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, 0.3% delta), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441, 0.4% delta), and AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425, 0.6% delta), with the Intel Arc A310 (7550, -1% delta) slightly ahead.

The CPU, by contrast, is a strong performer. The Ryzen 5 8400F's avgBenchmarkScore of 25005 places it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs, with its nearest rivals being the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (24964, 0.2% delta), Intel Core i7-11850H (24935, 0.3% delta), and Intel Core i7-13620H (24911, 0.4% delta). The AMD EPYC 9474F (25103, -0.4% delta) sits just ahead.

This disparity between CPU and GPU capabilities explains the ranking. A system with a top-quartile CPU and a bottom-half GPU will be limited by the latter in most games. In Undisputed, the data confirms this: the CPU could likely push much higher frame rates if paired with a stronger GPU, but the GTX 1650 caps performance at the levels shown in the measured FPS table.

Resolution Scaling

Examining the FPS progression from 1080p to 4K reveals the GPU-bound nature of this combo. At Low settings, 1080p averages 109 FPS, 1440p drops to 79 FPS (a 27.5% reduction), and 4K falls to 50 FPS (a 54.1% reduction from 1080p). At Medium settings, the progression is 79 FPS at 1080p, 57 FPS at 1440p (a 27.8% reduction), and 36 FPS at 4K (a 54.4% reduction). These consistent percentage drops across resolutions indicate that the GPU's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors.

The High settings show a similar pattern: 65 FPS at 1080p, 47 FPS at 1440p (a 27.7% reduction), and 30 FPS at 4K (a 53.8% reduction). Ultra settings are more erratic: 42 FPS at 1080p, 30 FPS at 1440p (a 28.6% reduction), and 19 FPS at 4K (a 54.8% reduction). The fact that these percentage drops remain nearly constant across all settings suggests that resolution scaling is purely a GPU limitation, not a CPU constraint.

The GTX 1650's 128.1 GB/s memory bandwidth and 53.28 GPixel/s pixel rate are modest figures, and the 4 GB VRAM capacity becomes a concern at higher resolutions. The 4K Medium measurement includes a 31 FPS minimum and 41 FPS maximum, showing some fluctuation, but the overall trend is clear: each resolution step costs roughly 25-30% of the previous frame rate, which is typical for a GPU with this level of fill rate and bandwidth.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings was measured. Low delivers an average of 109 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium averages 79 FPS with a 67 FPS minimum and 91 FPS maximum, showing a 24 FPS spread. High averages 65 FPS, and Ultra averages 42 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 61.5% drop in average FPS, indicating that the GTX 1650 struggles significantly with the highest quality settings.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 79 FPS, which is identical to the 1080p Medium result. Medium at 1440p averages 57 FPS with a 48 FPS minimum and 65 FPS maximum. High averages 47 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The 1440p Ultra result matches the 4K High result at 30 FPS, showing that resolution and settings have interchangeable costs for this GPU.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 50 FPS, Medium averages 36 FPS with a 31 FPS minimum and 41 FPS maximum, High averages 30 FPS, and Ultra averages 19 FPS. The 4K Low result of 50 FPS is the only 4K measurement that approaches playability, but it still falls short of the 60 FPS target. The 4K Medium minimum of 31 FPS indicates potential stuttering in demanding scenes.

The data shows no instances where the CPU would be the limiting factor. Even at 1080p Low with 109 FPS average, the Ryzen 5 8400F has substantial headroom, as evidenced by its strong multi-threaded benchmarks. The GPU's passmark_directx_11 score of 58 and passmark_directx_12 score of 35 highlight its weakness in modern graphics APIs.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the TU117 chip using the Turing architecture on a 12 nm process. It features 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. The 4 GB GDDR5 memory operates at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, yielding 128.1 GB/s bandwidth. The GPU's FP32 performance is 2.984 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s.

The GPU's benchmark scores show it is a modest performer. The passmark_g3d score of 7880 places it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, and its avgBenchmarkScore of 7472 is just above the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, 0.3% delta) and Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441, 0.4% delta). The Intel Arc A310 (7550, -1% delta) is the closest rival above it, while the AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425, 0.6% delta) sits just below.

In Undisputed, the GPU's role is clearly the dominant factor in determining frame rates. The measured FPS at 1080p Medium (79 FPS average) and 1440p Low (79 FPS average) demonstrate that the GPU's rendering capabilities are the bottleneck. The 4 GB VRAM is likely strained at High and Ultra settings, particularly at 1440p and 4K, which explains the sharp FPS drops. The GTX 1650's 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors indicate it is a low-power card, but that does not compensate for its limited compute resources in this game.

The GPU's DirectX 12 support (12_1) is present, but its passmark_directx_12 score of 35 is low, suggesting that DX12 workloads in Undisputed may not be optimally handled. The Vulkan 1.4 API support could offer an alternative path, but no Vulkan-specific measurements were provided in the data. Overall, the GTX 1650 is the clear performance limiter in this combo, and upgrading the GPU would yield far greater FPS gains than any CPU change.