Undisputed

The Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 9060 combination delivers a highly capable 1080p and 1440p experience in Undisputed, with the data indicating a clear shift in system bottleneck as resolution and settings scale. This analysis walks through the measured performance data, contextualizing the CPU and GPU roles within the game's specific demands.

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

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Comet Lake architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The processor features a shared 12 MB L3 cache and supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. Its benchmark profile shows a single-thread score of 688 in 3dmark and a multicore score of 10283 in Cinebench R23, placing it at the 68th percentile among all CPUs.

In the context of Undisputed, a sports title that typically relies on consistent frame pacing and physics simulation for boxer interactions, the CPU's single-thread performance is a critical factor. The data shows that at 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 252 FPS average. This extremely high frame rate suggests that at these lower graphical loads, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough data to maintain very high output. The i5-10400F's boost clock of 4.30 GHz provides the necessary speed for the game's core logic. The 12 threads also ensure that background tasks and the game's AI calculations for opponent behavior do not create stutter, as evidenced by the smooth averages even at lower resolutions where CPU load is relatively higher compared to GPU load.

The processor's memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while not the fastest available, is sufficient for this title. The performance data implies that the CPU is not a limiting factor until the graphical settings are pushed to Ultra at higher resolutions. For instance, at 1440p Ultra, the average FPS drops to 70, while at 1440p High it is 108. This gap is more attributable to the GPU's workload than a CPU limitation, as the CPU's workload does not change significantly with graphical fidelity. The single-thread performance, measured at 1451 in Cinebench R23, ensures that the game's main simulation loop does not become a bottleneck at standard High settings, allowing the GPU to be the primary driver of frame rate.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific CPU-GPU pairing holds a rank of 1633 out of 2813 tested combos for Undisputed. This places it in the top 58% of all tested systems, indicating a solidly mid-to-upper-tier configuration for this game. While not a top-tier enthusiast setup, the rank reflects a balanced pairing that can handle the game's demands well at mainstream resolutions.

To understand this rank, it is useful to look at the individual component standings. The CPU's nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score include the Intel Xeon 6756E and the AMD EPYC 7552, with delta percentages of 0.2% and 0.5% respectively. This indicates the i5-10400F's compute performance is very closely matched with these server-class chips, though the gaming performance may differ due to architectural differences. The GPU's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, with the RX 9060 trailing by just 0.7% in average benchmark score. This places the RX 9060's raw graphics compute power in the same league as a well-known previous-generation mid-range card.

The combination's rank of 1633 suggests that while the individual parts are competitive, the pairing is not optimized for absolute maximum frame rates in Undisputed. The rank indicates that many other combinations, likely featuring higher-end CPUs or GPUs, produce higher average FPS. However, the measured data shows this combo is far from a weak performer; it delivers excellent playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, making it a relevant data point for users with this specific hardware configuration. The rank is a holistic measure, and the actual FPS results show that this mid-table ranking translates to a very smooth gameplay experience at common settings.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a classic scaling pattern that highlights the shifting bottleneck between CPU and GPU. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 252 FPS at 1080p to 182 FPS at 1440p, a 28% decrease, and then further to 115 FPS at 4K, a 37% decrease from 1440p. This significant drop at 4K indicates that the GPU is becoming the primary limiting factor at this resolution. The CPU is likely capable of producing more frames, but the GPU's rendering workload at 4K is too high.

At High settings, the scaling is similar but with lower absolute numbers: 150 FPS at 1080p, 108 FPS at 1440p, and 69 FPS at 4K. This represents a 28% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 36% drop from 1440p to 4K. The consistent percentage drops across Low and High settings suggest that the GPU's workload scaling is proportional to the resolution increase, which is expected. The fact that the frame rate at 1080p High (150 FPS) is significantly higher than at 4K Low (115 FPS) reinforces that the GPU is the bottleneck at 4K; even with the lowest graphical settings, the sheer number of pixels to render limits the output.

The Medium settings data provides min and max FPS values. At 1080p Medium, the average is 181 FPS with a min of 154 and max of 208. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 131 FPS with a min of 111 and max of 151. At 4K Medium, the average is 83 FPS with a min of 70 and max of 95. The min FPS values are consistently above 60 FPS even at 4K, indicating that the frame pacing remains stable and the experience is smooth. This data confirms that the CPU handles the game's logic without introducing stutter, and the frame rate is dictated almost entirely by the GPU's ability to process the increasing pixel count.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combination to achieve a smooth 60+ FPS experience?

A: The data shows that all tested settings at 1080p and 1440p exceed 60 FPS, with the lowest average being 70 FPS at 1440p Ultra. At 4K, the Ultra setting drops to 44 FPS, but Medium settings still achieve 83 FPS.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 9060 compare to its nearest rival in raw performance?

A: The RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16014, which is 0.7% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti's score of 16129. This indicates near-parity in compute performance.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-10400F a limiting factor at 1080p?

A: No. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 252 FPS, and at 1080p Ultra it achieves 97 FPS. This shows the CPU can support high frame rates, and the GPU is the primary component determining performance at these settings.

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

A: At 1440p, the average FPS drops from 182 on Low settings to 70 on Ultra settings. This represents a 61% decrease in frame rate when moving to the highest graphical preset.

Q: Does the system maintain stable frame pacing at 4K?

A: The Medium settings at 4K show a min FPS of 70 and a max FPS of 95, with an average of 83. This indicates that while the frame rate is lower than at 1080p, it remains consistent without major drops.

Q: How does the CPU's multi-threaded performance affect the game?

A: The i5-10400F's multi-threaded score of 10283 in Cinebench R23 ensures that the game's background physics and AI calculations are handled without causing frame drops, allowing for the high average FPS observed at lower resolutions.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture using a 4 nm process at TSMC. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The GPU has a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. With 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, it offers a theoretical FP32 performance of 21.43 TFLOPS. The GPU's benchmark scores include a Passmark G3D score of 17631 and a 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3322, placing it at the 59th percentile among all GPUs.

In Undisputed, the GPU's role is to handle the rendering of the boxing ring, character models, and lighting effects. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for the textures used in this game, as evidenced by the playable frame rates even at 4K Medium settings (83 FPS). The high boost clock of 2990 MHz allows for strong computational throughput, which is reflected in the high frame rates at 1080p. The GPU's performance scaling with resolution is the primary factor in the FPS drops observed. The gap between 1080p Ultra (97 FPS) and 4K Ultra (44 FPS) is 55%, directly attributable to the GPU's rendering load.

The GPU's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, with the RX 9060 trailing by 0.7% in average benchmark score. This suggests that in Undisputed, the RX 9060 should perform similarly to the RTX 3060 Ti, which is a known quantity for 1080p and 1440p gaming. The 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is adequate for the game's data streaming needs, preventing texture pop-in and maintaining frame consistency. The GPU's performance at 1440p High (108 FPS) and 4K Medium (83 FPS) indicates it is well-suited for high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming and capable of 4K at moderate settings.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the user's target resolution and refresh rate.

For 1080p users with a 144Hz or higher refresh rate monitor, the High preset is the recommended choice. It delivers an average of 150 FPS, which is well above the 144Hz threshold, providing a fluid and responsive experience. While the Low preset achieves 252 FPS, the visual quality improvement from Low to High is significant for a sports game where character detail and arena atmosphere matter, and the frame rate drop is acceptable.

For 1440p users, the High preset again offers the best balance. The 108 FPS average is smooth for most displays, and the visual fidelity is high. The Medium preset offers a higher 131 FPS average, but the jump to High is worth the 23 FPS loss for the improved graphics. The Ultra preset at 1440p drops to 70 FPS, which is playable but may not be ideal for fast-paced action; the High preset is the better choice for maintaining a higher frame rate.

For 4K users, the Medium preset is the clear recommendation. It is the only setting that consistently stays above 60 FPS, with an average of 83 FPS and a minimum of 70 FPS. The High preset averages 69 FPS, which is borderline and may dip below 60 in intense scenes. The Ultra preset at 44 FPS is not recommended for a competitive experience. Therefore, Medium at 4K provides the best playable experience. The Low preset at 4K (115 FPS) is viable, but the visual compromise is severe; Medium offers a substantial graphical upgrade for a 32 FPS average loss.

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

The measured data provides a complete picture of performance across all tested configurations.

1920x1080:

• Low: 252 FPS average
• Medium: 181 FPS average (min 154, max 208)
• High: 150 FPS average
• Ultra: 97 FPS average

At 1080p, the system is entirely GPU-bound at higher settings. The jump from Low to Medium is 71 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra is 53 FPS. The data indicates that the CPU can push well over 250 FPS, so the GPU is the sole determinant of performance here, with the Ultra preset being the most demanding.

2560x1440:

• Low: 182 FPS average
• Medium: 131 FPS average (min 111, max 151)
• High: 108 FPS average
• Ultra: 70 FPS average

At 1440p, the frame rates are still high but show a clear downward trend. The difference between Low and High is 74 FPS, showing the significant cost of increased graphical fidelity. The Ultra preset's 70 FPS is a 35% drop from High, indicating a steep performance penalty for the highest settings.

3840x2160:

• Low: 115 FPS average
• Medium: 83 FPS average (min 70, max 95)
• High: 69 FPS average
• Ultra: 44 FPS average

The 4K data confirms the GPU's workload becomes the dominant bottleneck. Even at Low settings, the frame rate drops below the 1080p Ultra result, showing the sheer pixel count is the limiting factor. The Medium preset's minimum of 70 FPS is the only configuration that ensures a stable experience above 60 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset's 44 FPS average is the worst result in the entire dataset, demonstrating a clear limitation of this GPU at the highest settings and resolution.