Undisputed

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates across the three resolutions show a clear and predictable scaling pattern for this pairing. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 359 FPS, which drops to 259 FPS at 2560x1440 and further to 164 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 27.9% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a 54.3% reduction from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is not linear, with the largest absolute loss occurring when moving from 1440p to 4K, where the frame rate falls by 95 FPS.

Looking at the Medium preset, the pattern is similar but with slightly different proportions. At 1080p, the average is 258 FPS, dropping to 187 FPS at 1440p (a 27.5% decrease) and then to 118 FPS at 4K (a 54.3% decrease from 1080p). The High preset shows 214 FPS at 1080p, 154 FPS at 1440p, and 98 FPS at 4K, with the 1440p to 4K drop being 36.4%. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, with 137 FPS at 1080p, 99 FPS at 1440p, and 63 FPS at 4K.

These numbers indicate that the system is not purely GPU-bound at all resolutions. At 1080p with Low settings, the 359 FPS result strongly suggests the CPU is doing a significant portion of the work, as the GPU would likely be capable of higher output if it were the only limiting factor. The 5800X3D’s 8 cores and 16 threads, along with its 96 MB shared L3 cache, appear to hold up well, but the frame rates still scale downward consistently. As resolution increases, the gap between Low and Medium settings narrows relatively, which is typical for a GPU that becomes more of a bottleneck at higher pixel counts.

The 4K Ultra result of 63 FPS is the only point where the system falls below the 100 FPS mark, and it’s also the point where the min FPS data is not recorded (except for Medium). At 4K Medium, the minimum is 100 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, the average itself is 63 FPS, suggesting that the GPU’s 10 GB of GDDR6X memory and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth are being taxed heavily. The over 5x difference between 1080p Low and 4K Ultra (359 vs 63 FPS) shows the expected workload scaling, but the fact that 1080p Low exceeds 300 FPS indicates the CPU is not the primary limiter at lower resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 holds a combo rank of 1058 out of 3718 measured combos. That places it in the 72nd percentile of all tested configurations, meaning it outperforms roughly 28.5% of the combinations in the database. While not a top-tier result for a high-end GPU, it is solidly above the median.

The GPU’s percentile versus all GPUs is 68, which means it sits in the 68th percentile. The CPU’s percentile versus all CPUs is 80, which is higher, but the combo rank is influenced by how the two parts interact in the game. The nearest CPU rivals, based on average benchmark score, include the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U (deltaPct 0), Intel Core i9-10900K (deltaPct 0.1), and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 (deltaPct -0.1). These are all within 0.3% of the 5800X3D’s average score, showing that the CPU is a very close match to these alternatives in synthetic tests.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA P106-100 (deltaPct -0.3), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (deltaPct -0.3), and AMD Radeon RX 6600M (deltaPct -0.4). These are all slightly behind the RTX 3080 in average benchmark score. The deltaPct values are small, indicating that the RTX 3080 is not far ahead of these older or lower-tier cards in raw compute. However, in this game, the combo’s rank of 1058 suggests that the specific workload of Undisputed favors the 5800X3D and RTX 3080 combination well, as it places in the top 30% of all combos.

The rank implies that many other CPU/GPU pairings, likely with more modern parts, achieve higher frame rates. But within the context of the 3080’s generation, the 5800X3D provides a strong pairing. The 5800X3D’s 3DMark 16-thread score of 7299 and single-thread score of 884 are solid, and the RTX 3080’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4407 is competitive. The combo’s rank is not the best, but it’s not lagging either; it’s a reliable mid-to-high performer.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 in this system has 10 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 320-bit bus, with memory clocks of 1188 MHz (19 Gbps effective) and a bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s. The boost clock is 1710 MHz, and the FP32 performance is 29.77 TFLOPS. These specifications directly affect the measured frame rates, particularly at higher resolutions.

In the 4K results, the average FPS for Low is 164, Medium is 118, High is 98, and Ultra is 63. The drop from Medium to High is 16.9%, and from High to Ultra is 35.7%. The 10 GB VRAM is likely a factor at 4K Ultra, as the game’s texture requirements may approach or exceed that capacity. The bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s is sufficient for most scenarios, but the 320-bit bus width is a limiting factor compared to newer cards with larger buses.

At 1080p, the GPU is less stressed, and the results show that the CPU is able to feed the card effectively. The 1080p Low average of 359 FPS indicates that the GPU has excess capacity at that resolution. The 1080p Ultra at 137 FPS still leaves room for the CPU to be the bottleneck, as the GPU could likely produce more if the CPU were faster. The 3080’s texture rate of 465.1 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 164.2 GPixel/s are high, but the game’s engine at 1080p Ultra may be constrained by CPU-bound logic.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 23172, which puts it in the 68th percentile of all GPUs. In this game, the 3080’s performance at 1440p High (154 FPS) and 4K High (98 FPS) indicates that it is capable of high refresh rate gaming at 1440p and good 60+ FPS at 4K with High settings, but Ultra at 4K drops to 63 FPS. The data suggests that the GPU is the performance limiter at 4K Ultra, as expected, but not at lower resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates are as follows:

• 1920x1080: Low 359 FPS, Medium 258 FPS (min 219, max 297), High 214 FPS, Ultra 137 FPS.
• 2560x1440: Low 259 FPS, Medium 187 FPS (min 159, max 215), High 154 FPS, Ultra 99 FPS.
• 3840x2160: Low 164 FPS, Medium 118 FPS (min 100, max 136), High 98 FPS, Ultra 63 FPS.

At 1080p, the spread from Low to Ultra is 222 FPS, with Low being 167% faster than Ultra. The Medium settings provide a min FPS of 219, which is above the 1440p High average, showing that even 1080p Medium is smooth. The 1080p High at 214 FPS is still above the 1440p Ultra average of 99 FPS, and the 1080p Ultra at 137 FPS is higher than the 1440p High at 154? Wait, that’s incorrect: 1080p Ultra 137 FPS is lower than 1440p High 154 FPS, but that’s because the resolution increase has a larger impact than the settings change. The data shows that moving from 1080p Ultra to 1440p High actually improves frame rate by 12.4%, which is counterintuitive but indicates that the settings preset difference is more significant than the resolution increase at that point.

At 1440p, the Low to Ultra range is 259 to 99 FPS, a 161.6% difference. The Medium settings at 1440p produce a min FPS of 159, which is only slightly lower than the 1080p Ultra average of 137? No, 159 is higher. The 1440p High at 154 FPS is close to the 1080p Ultra, showing that the High preset at 1440p is about 12% faster than Ultra at 1080p, likely due to the reduced load.

For 4K, Low at 164 FPS is surprising, as it’s only 37% lower than 1440p Low, but it’s still above many games’ 4K expectations. The Medium at 118 FPS is solid, and the High at 98 FPS is close to 100. The Ultra at 63 FPS is the least playable for high refresh, but it’s still above 60. The min FPS for 4K Medium is 100, which is the exactly the same as the min for 1440p Medium? No, 1440p Medium has min 159, 4K Medium has min 100, so the min drops significantly.

The data shows that the game is well-optimized at lower settings, but the CPU becomes less of a factor as resolution increases. At 1080p, the CPU is clearly the primary driver, as the GPU is not fully utilized. At 4K, the GPU is the main constraint, especially on Ultra.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the best experience depends on the resolution and refresh rate. If targeting 4K (3840x2160) at 60 FPS, the Ultra preset delivers 63 FPS average, which is close to but above 60. However, the High preset provides 98 FPS, which is much smoother and still visually acceptable. The Medium preset at 118 FPS is even better, and even the Low at 164 FPS is highly playable. For 4K, the High settings offer the best balance, as they are 35.7% faster than Ultra and still provide good visual fidelity.

At 1440p, the High preset at 154 FPS is excellent for high refresh rate monitors (144Hz). The Medium preset at 187 FPS is better for 165Hz or 240Hz displays, but lacks some visual features. The Ultra at 99 FPS is just below 100, so it’s not ideal for 144Hz, but it’s fine for 60Hz. The Low at 259 FPS is overkill for most displays, but it’s the most frame-rate-friendly. For 1440p, Medium is the recommended preset for a balance of frame rate and quality, as it exceeds 144 FPS.

At 1080p, all presets are above 137 FPS, with Low at 359 FPS, Medium at 258 FPS, High at 214 FPS, and Ultra at 137 FPS. For 1080p, the High preset at 214 FPS is a good choice, as it offers high visual quality and still supports 200+ FPS. The Medium preset at 258 FPS is also strong, but High is more visually pleasing. The Ultra at 137 FPS is also usable for 144Hz, but the High preset is a better trade-off.

In summary, the data indicates that High settings are the sweet spot across the board, providing 98 FPS at 4K, 154 FPS at 1440p, and 214 FPS at 1080p. These are all above 60 FPS, and the 1440p results are above 144 FPS. For players with 60Hz displays, Ultra at 4K might be acceptable, but High is more consistent.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 4K with High settings?

A: The average FPS is 98, with a minimum not recorded. This is above 60 FPS, making it playable for most monitors.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 359, which is very high, suggesting that the CPU is the primary limiting factor, as the GPU would likely produce even higher frame rates if it were not CPU-bound.

Q: How does the combo rank in the database?

A: This combo ranks 1058 out of 3718 tested combos, placing it in the top 28.5% of all combinations in the database.

Q: Does the RTX 3080’s VRAM affect gaming at 4K?

A: The RTX 3080 has 10 GB of GDDR6X memory with 760.3 GB/s bandwidth. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 63, which is the lowest measured, indicating that the memory capacity may be a limiting factor for the highest settings.

Q: What is the difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 1440p, Low averages 259 FPS, while Ultra averages 99 FPS, a difference of 160 FPS. The Low preset is 161% faster than Ultra, showing a large performance gap.

Q: Which settings provide the best experience for a 144Hz monitor at 1440p?

A: The Medium preset at 1440p yields 187 FPS, which is above 144Hz, while High yields 154 FPS, also above 144Hz. Ultra at 99 FPS is below 144Hz, so Medium or High are recommended.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. It is built on the Zen 3 architecture (Vermeer) with a 7 nm process, and it has a 96 MB shared L3 cache, 64 KB L1 per core, and 512 KB L2 per core. The CPU’s TDP is 105 W, and it supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

In the context of Undisputed, the CPU’s role is most evident at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 359, which is 54% higher than at 1440p Low (164 FPS). This indicates that the CPU is able to drive a high frame rate, but the game’s physics and rendering at higher resolutions shift more load to the GPU. The 5800X3D’s single-thread and multi-thread scores are strong, as shown by its 3DMark scores: single-thread 884, 2-threads 1746, 4-threads 3392, 8-threads 5906, and 16-threads 7299. These scores suggest that the CPU can handle both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded workloads.

The 5800X3D’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 6800U, Intel Core i9-10900K, and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340, all with average benchmark scores within 0.3% of each other. This means that in synthetic tests, the 5800X3D is very similar to these CPUs, but in game, the combo rank of 1058 shows that the pairing with the RTX 3080 is better than many others.

At 4K Ultra, the CPU is still active, but the GPU is the main constraint. The 4K Ultra average of 63 FPS is the lowest, and this is likely due to the GPU’s VRAM and compute. The CPU’s 4.50 GHz boost clock is high, but the game’s engine may not scale perfectly with many cores, so the single-thread performance of 884 in 3DMark is also important. The CPU’s 16 threads may not all be used, but the 8 cores provide a solid base.

The data indicates that the 5800X3D is a good match for the RTX 3080 in this game, but the CPU is more critical at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the 5800X3D’s high single-thread and cache size give it an edge, allowing the RTX 3080 to reach 359 FPS on Low. The CPU’s 80th percentile among all CPUs indicates that it is above average, and its 3DMark multi-thread score of 7299 shows good scaling, but the game prefers higher clocks.

In summary, the CPU is not the main bottleneck at 4K, but it is at 1080p. The 5800X3D’s 8 cores and 16 threads are ample for this game, and the 96 MB L3 cache helps with hit rates. The boost clock of 4.50 GHz is high, and the single-thread performance is solid, making it a capable partner for the RTX 3080.