Undisputed

The AMD Ryzen 9 5950X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 pairing delivers a decisive performance envelope in Undisputed, with measured results showing the combination ranks 476th out of 1580 tested combos. The data indicates a system that is firmly capable of high-refresh-rate play at mainstream resolutions, but one where the GPU’s architectural strengths and memory configuration become increasingly critical as resolution climbs. The RTX 3080, built on the Ampere architecture with 8704 shading units and 272 texture mapping units, pulls the heavy lifting in this sports title, while the 16-core Ryzen processor ensures the simulation and physics workloads never stall the frame pipeline.

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

The RTX 3080’s role in Undisputed is defined by its raw throughput and memory bandwidth rather than sheer capacity. The card operates with a base clock of 1440 MHz and a boost clock of 1710 MHz, delivering a measured FP32 performance of 29.77 TFLOPS. This compute headroom translates directly into frame rate: at 1080p Ultra, the system produces 138.3 FPS, and dropping to Low settings nearly triples that figure to 361.4 FPS. The GPU’s 10 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 320-bit bus provides 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is particularly relevant at 4K where the data demands on the memory subsystem rise sharply. The benchmark data shows a clear scaling pattern: from 1080p Low to 4K Low, average FPS falls from 361.4 to 165.6, a reduction that highlights how the RTX 3080’s memory bandwidth and pixel rate (164.2 GPixel/s) become the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

The GPU’s standing relative to its peers reinforces this analysis. In the aggregate benchmark scores, the RTX 3080 sits at the 80th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 35787. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro Duo, scores 35860, which places the RTX 3080 just 0.2% behind. The AMD Radeon 880M trails by 0.4% with a score of 35646, while the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE leads by 0.9% at 36101. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile scores 35435, putting the desktop RTX 3080 1% ahead. These tight margins indicate that in Undisputed, the RTX 3080 performs essentially on par with a cluster of modern rivals, meaning the observable differences in FPS will come more from settings and resolution than from any inherent GPU advantage.

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

The Ryzen 9 5950X contributes to this pairing through sheer core count and clock speed. With 16 cores and 32 threads running at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, the Zen 3 architecture (codenamed Vermeer) provides the parallel processing headroom that Undisputed’s physics and AI routines can exploit. The benchmark data confirms the processor’s strength: Cinebench R23 multicore scores 38607, while single-core reaches 5450. PassMark multithread results hit 45424, and the 3DMark max-thread score is 11597. The 64 MB of L3 cache helps keep the simulation state local to the cores, reducing memory stalls.

The CPU’s position among rivals is notable for its balance. The Ryzen 9 5950X holds the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49062. Its closest competitor, the Intel Core i5-14600K, scores 49166, a delta of only -0.2%. The i5-14600KF is 0.6% ahead at 49367, while the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H sits 0.7% behind at 48698. The AMD EPYC 4345P leads by 1.1% with 49595. In practical terms, these deltas are negligible, meaning the 5950X is neither a bottleneck nor a standout advantage in this game—it simply provides enough compute to keep the RTX 3080 fed at lower resolutions. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (361.4) versus 4K Low (165.6) suggests that at 1080p the CPU is still able to push frames beyond what the GPU can render, while at 4K the GPU becomes the clear constraint.

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

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy of settings, and the choice depends on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1080p, the High preset delivers 214.8 FPS, which is already beyond the refresh rate of most monitors and offers a substantial improvement over Ultra’s 138.3 FPS. The jump from High to Ultra costs 76.5 FPS, a 35% reduction, which is not justified by the visual gains in a fast-paced sports title. The Medium preset at 261.1 FPS is even faster, but High strikes the best balance between visual fidelity and frame rate for competitive play.

At 1440p, the picture shifts. High produces 157.2 FPS, comfortably above 144 Hz territory, while Ultra drops to 97.7 FPS. The Medium preset at 188.1 FPS is the highest playable setting for those seeking maximum smoothness, but High remains the recommended choice because it retains the higher-quality textures and effects while still exceeding the 144 FPS threshold. At 4K, the situation changes dramatically. High yields 97.8 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for high-refresh monitors, while Ultra falls to 64.1 FPS—noticeably stutter-prone for a sports game that benefits from fluid motion. The Low preset at 4K produces 165.6 FPS, but the visual compromise is severe. For 4K users, High is the practical ceiling, offering the best playable experience without dropping to Low.

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

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals the GPU as the primary bottleneck at higher pixel counts. From 1080p Low to 4K Low, the average FPS drops from 361.4 to 165.6, a reduction of 54%. This is a substantial loss, but it trails the pixel count increase—4K has four times the pixels of 1080p, yet the frame rate only halves, indicating that the RTX 3080’s bandwidth and compute scale efficiently under load. The High preset shows a similar pattern: 214.8 FPS at 1080p falls to 97.8 FPS at 4K, a 54% drop. The consistency of this percentage across settings suggests the GPU is the limiting factor, as the CPU workload does not scale with resolution in the same way.

The Ultra preset demonstrates the steepest decline: 138.3 FPS at 1080p falls to 64.1 FPS at 4K, a 54% drop as well. This uniformity across presets points to a GPU-bound scenario, where the RTX 3080’s 10 GB of VRAM and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth are being saturated at 4K Ultra. The fact that the CPU’s performance does not change with resolution—its 3DMark scores are fixed—further supports this conclusion. At 1080p, the system is likely CPU-bound at Low settings, as evidenced by the 361.4 FPS figure, but by 1440p and 4K, the GPU takes over as the dominant constraint.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

*Q: What is the best resolution to play Undisputed with this CPU/GPU combo?*

A: The measured data shows 1440p High provides 157.2 FPS, which is the sweet spot for high-refresh gaming. At 1080p High you get 214.8 FPS, but the visual quality gain from 1440p is worth the 57.6 FPS sacrifice.

Q: How does the RTX 3080 compare to its nearest rival in this game?

A: The RTX 3080’s average benchmark score of 35787 is just 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35860) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon 880M (35646). The AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE leads by 0.9%, while the RTX 3080 is 1% ahead of the RTX 5070 Ti Mobile (35435).

Q: Should I use the Ultra preset at 4K?

A: No. The measured 4K Ultra average FPS is 64.1, which is too low for smooth sports gameplay. The 4K High preset at 97.8 FPS is the better option, offering a 52% FPS improvement with modest visual trade-offs.

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 5950X a bottleneck for the RTX 3080?

A: At 1080p Low, the system reaches 361.4 FPS, suggesting the CPU can feed the GPU well below 4K. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 49062 places it 0.2% behind the Intel Core i5-14600K, indicating it is not a limiting factor in this pairing.

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p?

A: The measured 1080p Low average FPS is 361.4, while 1080p Ultra is 138.3. That is a difference of 223.1 FPS, or a 61% reduction from Low to Ultra.

Q: How much performance does the 4K resolution cost compared to 1440p at High settings?

A: At High settings, 1440p produces 157.2 FPS while 4K produces 97.8 FPS. The 4K resolution costs 59.4 FPS, a 38% reduction in frame rate.

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

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. The Low preset averages 361.4 FPS, which is the maximum measured in this dataset. Medium drops to 261.1 FPS, while High produces 214.8 FPS. The Ultra preset at 138.3 FPS is the lowest at this resolution, but still exceeds 120 FPS for most displays. The scaling from Low to Ultra represents a 223.1 FPS reduction, indicating that the GPU’s shading units and texture rate (465.1 GTexel/s) are heavily taxed by the higher-quality effects.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show the first signs of GPU pressure. Low averages 259.8 FPS, a 28% drop from 1080p Low. Medium yields 188.1 FPS, while High produces 157.2 FPS—a figure that still comfortably drives 144 Hz monitors. Ultra at 97.7 FPS is the first preset to fall below 100 FPS, and it represents a 59.5 FPS loss compared to the High preset. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 162.1 FPS, showing the same relative scaling as 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. Low averages 165.6 FPS, which is still high but 54% lower than the 1080p Low figure. Medium drops to 118.3 FPS, while High reaches 97.8 FPS—just under the 100 FPS threshold. Ultra at 64.1 FPS is the only preset below 60 FPS, and it is not recommended for competitive play. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is 101.5 FPS, and the 4K Ultra result of 64.1 FPS is the lowest measured value in the entire dataset, reinforcing the recommendation to use High settings at this resolution.