Undisputed

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS progression across resolutions tells a clear story about where the Intel Arc B580 becomes the limiting factor in Undisputed. At 1920x1080, the game is heavily CPU-bound, with the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D doing most of the heavy lifting. Dropping settings from High to Low at 1080p yields a massive jump from 132 FPS to 221 FPS, representing a 67% improvement. This suggests the GPU is not the primary constraint at this resolution—the frame rate scales almost proportionally with image quality, which is typical of a scenario where the graphics card has headroom to spare.

Moving to 2560x1440, the picture changes. High settings produce 95 FPS, while Low jumps to 160 FPS—a 68% increase, nearly identical to the 1080p scaling. This consistency indicates the GPU is still not fully saturated at 1440p Low. However, the gap between Medium and High narrows slightly: 115 FPS versus 95 FPS, a 21% improvement. The fact that Medium (115) is closer to High (95) than to Low (160) suggests the render complexity increases non-linearly as settings climb, but the GPU still has headroom for higher frame rates.

At 3840x2160, the dynamics change completely. High settings deliver 60 FPS, Low hits 101 FPS, and Medium lands at 73 FPS. The Low-to-High delta is 68%, still large, but the absolute numbers matter more here. At 4K, the GPU is now the limiting factor—the Arc B580’s 12 GB GDDR6 memory and 456 GB/s bandwidth are being taxed by the higher pixel count. The jump from Medium (73 FPS) to Low (101 FPS) is 38%, but the gap from High (60 FPS) to Medium (73 FPS) is only 22%, indicating diminishing returns as settings rise. The Ultra preset at 4K drops to 39 FPS, which is a 61% reduction from Low—a brutal penalty that confirms the GPU is overwhelmed at this resolution with maximum fidelity.

The resolution scaling pattern reveals that the CPU-Ryzen 7 7800X3D with its 8 cores and 16 threads remains sufficient even at 4K, as the frame rates are purely GPU-bound. The 1080p to 4K scaling at High settings shows a 55% FPS drop (132 to 60), which is less severe than the 69% drop from 1080p Low (221) to 4K Low (101). This suggests the Ultra settings at 4K are disproportionately expensive, likely due to memory capacity or memory bandwidth limits rather than raw compute, given the Arc B580’s 13.67 TFLOPS FP32 performance.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows clearly indicate that Medium is the sweet spot for this combination. At 1080p, Medium delivers 159 FPS with a minimum of 135 FPS and maximum of 183 FPS—a rock-solid experience for any competitive play. The jump from Medium to High at 1080p is only 27 FPS (159 to 132), which is a 17% reduction, but the visual fidelity gain might not justify that loss for most players. Low at 1080p hits 221 FPS, which is excessive for any display unless you have a 240Hz monitor, and the visual quality penalty is significant.

At 2560x1440, Medium is again the best balance. It delivers 115 FPS average with a minimum of 98 FPS and a maximum of 132 FPS. The dip below 100 FPS is only 2 frames, which is within acceptable variance for most experiences. High at 1440p drops to 95 FPS, which is still playable, but the 20 FPS loss from Medium might be noticeable in fast-paced sports action. Low at 1440p hits 160 FPS, but the visual downgrade is severe—you lose shadows, textures, and effects that are crucial for a boxing game where atmosphere matters.

For 4K, the recommendation is more nuanced. Medium delivers 73 FPS with a minimum of 62 and a maximum of 84, making it the only playable preset above 60 FPS with reasonable quality. High at 4K sits at exactly 60 FPS, which is borderline for a fighting game where timing is critical. Low at 4K hits 101 FPS, but the visual downgrade is substantial. Ultra at 4K is unplayable at 39 FPS, and even at 1440p Ultra only reaches 61 FPS, which is marginal. At 1080p Ultra, the 85 FPS average is decent, but the 46% drop from Medium is too steep for the visual improvement.

The data suggests that Medium preset at any resolution is the safe choice, but with a caveat: at 1440p, you could argue for High if you have a 144Hz display, since 95 FPS still exceeds 60 Hz but is not enough to fully saturate 144Hz. For 4K, Medium is the only option that keeps you above 70 FPS, and you should avoid Ultra settings entirely. The 1080p Medium recommendation is particularly strong—159 FPS is 60% better than High and only 62 FPS behind Low, making it the best compromise between quality and performance.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B580’s specifications are central to understanding its performance in Undisputed. The GPU features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 456.0 GB/s. This is a significant amount of VRAM for a 2024 GPU, and the data shows it matters: the 4K Ultra preset’s 39 FPS average suggests the game is likely exceeding 12 GB at that setting, causing a bottleneck. The 192-bit bus width is narrower than some rivals, but the 456 GB/s bandwidth is reasonable for the target resolution.

The GPU’s clock speeds are modest: base and boost both at 2670 MHz, with memory at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The shader units number 2560, with 160 texture mapping units and 80 ROPs, and 20 RT cores. These specifications translate to a 13.67 TFLOPS FP32 performance. In the benchmark hierarchy, the Arc B580 sits at the 68th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 23021. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (deltaPct -0.2%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (deltaPct +0.6), and the RTX 3080 (deltaPct -0.7%). The data shows that the Arc B580’s performance is essentially on par with the RTX 2080, which is a four-year-old card, and slightly behind the RTX 3080. This places it in the upper midrange tier.

The memory bus width is 192-bit, which is narrower than the 256-bit bus found in some competitors, but the 456 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming. At 4K, the bandwidth becomes a limiting factor, as evidenced by the steep drop from Low to High at 3840x2160. The 12 GB VRAM is also a double-edged sword: it can handle 4K textures, but the bandwidth may struggle with the data transfer required for high-res textures plus anti-aliasing.

The GPU’s compute is also a factor. The 13.67 TFLOPS FP32 rating is behind the RTX 3080’s 30 TFLOPS, but the Arc B580 still manages to be within 0.7% of the RTX 3080’s average benchmark score. This suggests that the game is not purely compute-bound at the test settings, but rather memory-bound at 4K. In contrast, at 1080p and 1440p, the GPU’s compute is sufficient, and the CPU is the bottleneck.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D is the CPU’s role, and its specifications heavily influence the 1080p and 1440p results. With 8 cores and 16 threads, a base clock of 4.20 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, this is a high-end desktop processor. The benchmark data shows a single-thread score of 959 in 3DMark, a multi-thread score of 7980, and a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 16817. These numbers place the 7800X3D at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 33079. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G, Intel Core i7-13650HX, and AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX, all with a deltaPct of 0, and the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H with a deltaPct of -0.4%.

The CPU’s cache structure is substantial: a 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and a 96 MB shared L3. This large L3 cache is a significant advantage for gaming, as it can hold more of the game’s working set, reducing memory latency. The CPU also supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel memory, and a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The 5 nm process node and TSMC foundry ensure efficient power draw, with a TDP of 120W.

In Undisputed, the CPU’s role is evident in the 1080p results. At 1080p Low, the 221 FPS is likely CPU-bound, as the GPU has plenty of headroom at this resolution. The single-thread performance is critical for the game’s simulation (boxing has physics and AI), and the 4330 single-thread score ensures the CPU can keep up with the frame rate. The multi-thread scores (7980 in 16-thread, 7967 in max-thread) mean that even when the game spawns multiple opponents or crowds, the CPU doesn’t bottleneck. The 1440p results show a similar trend, with Low hitting 160 FPS, which is higher than the 4K Low’s 101 FPS, but the CPU is still not the limiting factor at 1440p.

The 96 MB L3 cache is a key differentiator. In a boxing game with many dynamic elements (crowd, physics, AI), a larger cache reduces access to main memory, which is slower. The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, while lower than the GPU’s 456 GB/s, is plenty for the data the CPU needs. The 7800X3D’s 83rd percentile rank confirms its strength, and the fact that it is on par with the 8700G and 13650HX in the benchmark suggests that any CPU-limited scenario would see identical performance across these chips.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Let’s go through the exact numbers from the FACT PACK.

At 1920x1080:

• Low: 221 FPS average (no min/max recorded)
• Medium: 159 FPS average, 135 FPS minimum, 183 FPS maximum
• High: 132 FPS average (no min/max)
• Ultra: 85 FPS average (no min/max)

The 1080p results show a clear hierarchy. Low to Medium is a 38% decrease (221 to 159), but the minimum of 135 FPS on Medium is still higher than the High average of 132 FPS. This is a key insight: Medium’s average is 27 FPS higher than High, but its minimum is 3 FPS higher as well, indicating that the Medium preset is more consistent. Ultra at 1080p drops to 85 FPS, a 35% decrease from High, but it’s still above 60 FPS.

At 2560x1440:

• Low: 160 FPS average (no min/max)
• Medium: 115 FPS average, 98 FPS minimum, 132 FPS maximum
• High: 95 FPS average (no min/max)
• Ultra: 61 FPS average (no min/max)

1440p Medium has a minimum of 98 FPS, which is within 3% of the 100 FPS target. The High average of 95 FPS means that 1440p High is just 5 FPS below the Medium minimum—so Medium is the safer bet. Ultra at 1440p is exactly 61 FPS, which is exactly at 60 FPS, but with no min/max, it’s risky; the 4K Ultra’s 39 FPS suggests that 1440p Ultra might dip below 60 FPS in demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160:

• Low: 101 FPS average (no min/max)
• Medium: 73 FPS average, 62 FPS minimum, 84 FPS maximum
• High: 60 FPS average (no min/max)
• Ultra: 39 FPS average (no min/max)

The 4K Medium is the only preset with min/max data, and it shows a spread of 62 to 84 FPS. The minimum of 62 FPS is just above 60, so it’s playable but tight. High at 4K averages exactly 60 FPS, but without min/max, it could dip to 55 FPS in spikes. Ultra at 4K is unplayable at 39 FPS. The 4K Low to Medium to High deltas are 29% and 22%, which is a progressive hardening.

The combo rank in game is 2794 out of 3718 total combinations, which put this CPU/GPU combination in the bottom 25% of tested combos, but that’s relative to all possible pairings, not just this class.

Measured FPS Breakdown

To be precise, the data is a single set of measurements, so we cannot extract average across multiple runs. The table below summarizes the exact numbers:

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|------------|----------|---------|---------|---------|

| 1920x1080 | Low | 221 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 159 | 135 | 183 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 132 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 85 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 160 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 115 | 98 | 132 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 95 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 61 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 101 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 73 | 62 | 84 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 60 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 39 | - | - |

The pattern is clear: Medium is the only preset that records min/max numbers, indicating that the test suite captured more data for those runs. The other cells are likely from a single pass, but the numbers are consistent. The 1080p Medium’s 135 minimum is 3 FPS higher than the 1440p High average, showing that even at higher resolution, Medium is just as stable as 1080p High.

The 4K Medium’s 62 FPS minimum is the lowest recorded across all Medium settings, but it’s still above 60. In contrast, 1080p Ultra’s 85 FPS is the highest Ultra, but it’s a 35% drop from High, so you’re paying a big visual cost. The 1440p Ultra’s 61 FPS is exactly 60, but with no min/max, it’s a higher risk than 1440p Medium’s 98 FPS minimum.

In summary, the data indicates that the combo’s performance is best described as "good at 1080p, acceptable at 1440p, and 4K is for Medium only." The GPU’s 12 GB memory and 456 GB/s bandwidth are the primary constraints at 4K Ultra, while the CPU’s strong single-thread and 96 MB cache keep 1080p and 1440p clean. The rank of 2794/3718 shows that this is not a top-tier combo, but for a sports game like this, it’s more than enough for a playable experience.