Undisputed

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X is an 8-core, 16-thread processor built on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer), manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. Its base clock is 3.80 GHz and it boosts to 4.70 GHz. The CPU carries 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 32 MB L3 cache. It supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The chip uses AMD Socket AM4 and provides 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes from the CPU.

In terms of synthetic performance, the 5800X posts a 3DMark single-thread score of 943, a 2-thread score of 1846, a 4-thread score of 3543, an 8-thread score of 6035, and a max-thread score of 7578. The 16-thread score is 7586, nearly identical to the max-thread result, indicating that the chip scales well to its full thread count in threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core yields 15476, while single-core yields 1574.5. Geekbench multi-core is 11036, single-core 2032. PassMark single-thread is 3445, and multithread is 27732. The average benchmark score across all tests is 29123, placing the CPU in the 81st percentile of all CPUs.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the 5800X is essentially level with the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H (avgScore 29093, deltaPct 0.1%), meaning the AMD chip is 0.1% ahead. It trails the Intel Xeon Phi 7210 by 0.4% (29245), the Intel Core i5-13500HX by 0.5% (29270), and leads the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT by 0.6% (28940). These deltas are all within a single percentage point, so the 5800X sits in a tightly contested performance band.

For a fighting/sports game like Undisputed, the CPU's single-thread and multi-thread characteristics matter differently. The game's simulation of boxing physics, AI opponent behavior, and damage modeling can be sensitive to per-core throughput. The 5800X's single-thread score of 943 in 3DMark is modest relative to its multi-thread capability, but the game's frame pacing is likely more dependent on the GPU at high settings. The 16-thread score being effectively equal to the max-thread score (7586 vs 7578) suggests that the CPU's thread scheduling is efficient, but the game may not leverage all 16 threads simultaneously.

The data from the measured FPS shows that at 1080p Low settings, the CPU is not a bottleneck: average FPS reaches 479. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 84, which is a much larger performance gap that points to the GPU as the primary limiter. The CPU's 81st percentile ranking and its near-tie with the Core i5-13500HX (a mobile chip) suggest that in this title, the 5800X provides ample headroom for the RTX 4080 to operate at its full potential, especially at lower resolutions where CPU overhead is more visible.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is based on the AD103 chip, using the Ada Lovelace architecture on TSMC's 5 nm process. It packs 9728 shading units, 304 texture mapping units, 112 ROPs, 76 ray tracing cores, and 304 tensor cores. The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus, with a memory bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 1400 MHz, translating to 22.4 Gbps effective. The base clock is 2205 MHz, with a boost clock of 2505 MHz. The card's FP32 performance is 48.74 TFLOPS, and FP16 is also 48.74 TFLOPS (1:1). Pixel rate is 280.6 GPixel/s, texture rate is 761.5 GTexel/s.

The RTX 4080's benchmark results include a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6567, Geekbench OpenCL of 214739, and Geekbench Vulkan of 263779. PassMark G3D is 34457, and GPU Compute is 20671. The average benchmark score is 54247, placing the GPU in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the RTX 4080 SUPER (avgScore 54209, deltaPct 0.1%, meaning the 4080 is 0.1% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54828, -1.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698, -2.6%), and the AMD Radeon 8060S (55757, -2.7%). Notably, the 4080 is slightly ahead of the 4080 SUPER in this aggregate, but trails the AMD cards by 1-3%.

For Undisputed, the GPU's role is dominant at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the game runs at 479 FPS average, which is far beyond any display's refresh rate, indicating the GPU is underutilized. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 84 FPS, showing a significant load increase. The 16 GB VRAM is more than sufficient for a sports title like this, where texture memory requirements are moderate compared to open-world or simulation games. The 716.8 GB/s bandwidth ensures that high-resolution textures and effects do not cause stutter.

The boost clock of 2505 MHz, combined with the Ada Lovelace architecture, provides substantial raw compute for the game's physics and particle effects. The data shows a clear scaling pattern: from Low to Ultra at each resolution, the FPS drops by roughly 2.5-3x (e.g., 1080p Low 479 vs Ultra 184; 1440p Low 346 vs Ultra 133; 4K Low 219 vs Ultra 84). This suggests that the Ultra preset imposes a heavy load on the GPU's shading and memory subsystems, but the card still maintains playable frame rates at 4K.

The GPU's 86th percentile ranking and its near-tie with the 4080 SUPER in benchmarks indicate that this is a top-tier card for this game, but the measured FPS at 4K Ultra (84 FPS) shows that even this hardware cannot sustain a locked 120 FPS at maximum settings in 4K. The card's 320 W TDP and triple-slot design are consistent with high-end performance, but the game's optimization is the limiting factor at Ultra.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Looking at the measured FPS data, the Medium preset stands out as the sweet spot across all resolutions, primarily because it is the only preset with min and max FPS values recorded, indicating more consistent frame pacing. At 1080p Medium, the average is 345 FPS, with a min of 293 and a max of 396. At 1440p Medium, the average is 249 FPS, with a min of 212 and a max of 286. At 4K Medium, the average is 158 FPS, with a min of 134 and a max of 181. These min-to-max spreads (103, 74, and 47 FPS respectively) are narrower than the differences between presets, suggesting that Medium provides a stable experience.

The High preset offers higher averages but lacks min/max data. At 1080p High, the average is 285 FPS; at 1440p High, 206 FPS; at 4K High, 130 FPS. These are 20-30% lower than Medium at the same resolutions (e.g., 4K High 130 vs Medium 158, a 17.7% drop). The Ultra preset is the most demanding: 1080p Ultra averages 184 FPS, 1440p Ultra 133 FPS, and 4K Ultra 84 FPS. For a game like Undisputed, where reaction time matters for dodging and counter-punching, the extra visual fidelity of Ultra may not be worth the FPS sacrifice.

Given the data, Medium is the recommended preset for most users. At 4K Medium, the 158 FPS average is above the 144 Hz refresh rate common on high-end monitors, and the min of 134 FPS stays above 120 Hz, ensuring smooth gameplay during intense exchanges. At 1440p, Medium's 249 FPS average is far beyond any display's capability, but the consistency (min 212) makes it ideal for high-refresh-rate panels. For competitive play at 1080p, Low offers 479 FPS, which is overkill, but Medium's 345 FPS is still excellent.

The data implies that the Ultra preset is only suitable for 1080p or 1440p if the user prioritizes visuals over frame rate, but the 84 FPS at 4K Ultra is borderline for a fast-paced sports game. The Medium preset's min FPS values (134 at 4K, 212 at 1440p, 293 at 1080p) are all above 60 FPS, guaranteeing a playable experience even in the most demanding moments. Therefore, the measured rows suggest that Medium delivers the best balance of visual quality and performance, especially at 4K.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 achieves a rank of 246 out of 3718 tested combos in Undisputed. This places the combo in the top 6.6% of all configurations tested (246/3718 = 0.0661). That is a strong showing, but not at the very top—there are 245 other combos that deliver higher average FPS in this game.

What does this rank imply? The 5800X, despite being a capable 8-core/16-thread CPU, is not the fastest processor available, and the RTX 4080, while in the 86th percentile of GPUs, is outranked by the 4080 SUPER and several AMD cards in aggregate benchmarks. The combo's rank of 246 suggests that the game's performance is more sensitive to the GPU than the CPU, as the 4080 is a high-end card, but the 5800X's single-thread performance (3DMark single-thread 943) may hold back the combo in CPU-bound scenarios at lower resolutions.

Comparing to the nearest rivals, the RTX 4080 is 0.1% ahead of the RTX 4080 SUPER in average benchmark score, but the SUPER is likely paired with faster CPUs in other combos, which could explain the 4080's rank not being higher. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is 2.6% faster in aggregate, but its 12 GB VRAM might be a limitation at 4K Ultra. The combo's rank of 246 out of 3718 means that the 5800X + 4080 is a well-balanced pairing, but not the absolute best. For context, the top combos likely use the 5800X3D or newer Ryzen 7000/9000 series CPUs paired with the RTX 4090 or 4080 SUPER.

In terms of percentile, the combo sits at the 93.4th percentile (1 - 246/3718), meaning it outperforms 93% of all tested combos. This is a high rank, but the data shows that the 4080's nearest rival (the 4080 SUPER) is only 0.1% behind in aggregate benchmarks, so the difference between this combo and a 4080 SUPER combo is minimal. The rank indicates that the 5800X is not a bottleneck at higher resolutions, but at 1080p Low (479 FPS), the CPU's limits may be reached, as no combo can exceed the CPU's frame generation capability.

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

The measured FPS data shows a clear scaling pattern across resolutions. At the Low preset, the average FPS drops from 479 at 1080p to 346 at 1440p (a 27.8% decrease) and then to 219 at 4K (a 36.7% decrease from 1440p). The total drop from 1080p to 4K is from 479 to 219, a 54.3% reduction. At Medium, the drop is from 345 (1080p) to 249 (1440p, -27.8%) to 158 (4K, -36.5% from 1440p), a total reduction of 54.2%. At High, the drop is from 285 to 206 (-27.7%) to 130 (-36.9%), a 54.4% total drop. At Ultra, the drop is from 184 to 133 (-27.7%) to 84 (-36.8%), a 54.3% total reduction.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings is striking. Each resolution step (1080p to 1440p) reduces FPS by approximately 27.7%, and each step (1440p to 4K) reduces FPS by approximately 36.7%. This pattern indicates that the scaling is purely resolution-driven, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect the FPS to plateau at higher resolutions, but instead, the FPS continues to drop proportionally to the pixel count increase (1440p has 1.78x the pixels of 1080p, and 4K has 2.25x the pixels of 1440p).

For example, the pixel count increase from 1080p to 1440p is 2.25x (2560x1440 / 1920x1080 = 1.78x, actually 1.78x), but the FPS drops by only 27.7%, which is less than the pixel increase. This suggests that the GPU has enough headroom to partially absorb the resolution increase. From 1440p to 4K, the pixel count increases by 2.25x (3840x2160 / 2560x1440 = 2.25), but the FPS drops by 36.7%, showing that the GPU is becoming more stressed as the resolution approaches 4K.

The fact that the percentage drops are nearly identical across all settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) implies that the GPU's memory bandwidth and shading units are the limiting factor, not the CPU or the game's engine logic. At 1080p Low, the 479 FPS is likely CPU-limited, as the GPU can render frames faster than the CPU can feed it, but the scaling pattern shows that the 5800X is not a bottleneck at higher resolutions. The data suggests that the RTX 4080's 716.8 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 4K, but the game's visual effects at Ultra (e.g., crowd rendering, lighting) push the GPU to its limits, resulting in 84 FPS at 4K Ultra.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X a bottleneck for the RTX 4080 in Undisputed?

A: Based on the measured FPS, the 5800X is not a bottleneck at 1440p or 4K, as the FPS scales consistently with resolution (e.g., 4K Medium 158 FPS vs 1080p Medium 345 FPS). At 1080p Low, the 479 FPS average suggests the CPU may limit frame generation, but for typical gaming at 1440p or 4K, the GPU is the primary driver.

Q: What is the best settings preset for a 144 Hz monitor at 4K?

A: The Medium preset at 4K averages 158 FPS, with a minimum of 134 FPS, which stays above 144 Hz for most of the time. The High preset averages 130 FPS, which is below 144 Hz, so Medium is the recommended preset for a 144 Hz 4K display.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 compare to its nearest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER, in benchmarks?

A: In aggregate benchmark scores, the RTX 4080 is 0.1% ahead of the RTX 4080 SUPER (54247 vs 54209). This difference is negligible, so the two cards perform nearly identically in synthetic tests.

Q: Does the game use more than 8 CPU threads?

A: The 5800X's 16-thread score (7586) is nearly identical to its max-thread score (7578), indicating that the CPU scales well to all threads. However, the game's FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K suggests that the GPU is the limiting factor, so the game may not heavily utilize all 16 threads.

Q: What is the frame rate at 1440p Ultra, and is it playable?

A: At 1440p Ultra, the average FPS is 133. This is playable for most users, but the lack of min/max data means there is no guarantee of consistency. The Medium preset at 1440p (249 FPS average, 212 min) offers a more stable experience.

Q: How does the combo's rank of 246 out of 3718 translate to a percentile?

A: The combo ranks in the top 6.6% of all tested combos, meaning it outperforms 93.4% of configurations. This is a strong result, but there are 245 combos with higher average FPS, likely using faster CPUs or GPUs.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The following table summarizes the measured FPS for each resolution and settings preset, using the exact data from the fact pack.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 479 FPS average (no min/max recorded)
• Medium: 345 FPS average, 293 min, 396 max
• High: 285 FPS average (no min/max)
• Ultra: 184 FPS average (no min/max)

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 346 FPS average (no min/max)
• Medium: 249 FPS average, 212 min, 286 max
• High: 206 FPS average (no min/max)
• Ultra: 133 FPS average (no min/max)

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 219 FPS average (no min/max)
• Medium: 158 FPS average, 134 min, 181 max
• High: 130 FPS average (no min/max)
• Ultra: 84 FPS average (no min/max)

From these numbers, the Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max data across all resolutions, indicating that the frame pacing was measured and found to be stable. The High preset at 4K (130 FPS) is below the Medium's 4K minimum (134 FPS), showing that High is less consistent. The Ultra preset at 4K (84 FPS) is the lowest recorded, but still above 60 FPS. The Low preset at 1080p (479 FPS) is the highest average, but such frame rates are unnecessary for most displays. The data shows a clear hierarchy: Low > Medium > High > Ultra in terms of FPS, with Medium offering the best balance of stability and performance.