Undisputed

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 delivers exceptional performance in Undisputed, placing the combo at the 94th percentile of all 1,580 tested configurations for this title. The data shows a system capable of obliterating standard refresh-rate targets at every resolution, with the primary challenge being balancing the GPU's immense throughput against the CPU's 6-core/12-thread Rocket Lake architecture. The measured FPS figures reveal that this pairing is heavily GPU-limited at higher resolutions, but at 1080p, the CPU begins to constrain the ceiling, making settings selection critical for maximizing frame rates.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combo in Undisputed?*

A: Based on the measured data, 2560x1440 with High settings provides the most balanced experience, delivering 219.5 FPS. This is comfortably above high-refresh-rate thresholds (144Hz+) while maintaining a significant performance buffer. While 1920x1080 produces higher raw numbers, the 1440p result offers a better visual-to-performance ratio given the GPU's capability.

Q: How does the RTX 5080 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The RTX 5080's average benchmark score of 59,188 places it 1.6% ahead of the Intel Arc A570M and 2.5% ahead of the Intel Arc A580. It trails the Intel Arc Pro A60 by 1.9% in average score. This indicates the 5080 sits in a competitive performance band in general compute, though its actual Undisputed results show massive headroom.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-11400F a bottleneck for the RTX 5080 at 1080p?

A: The data strongly suggests yes. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo hits 466.4 FPS, but with Medium settings it drops to 365.7 FPS and High to 300.2 FPS. The scaling between resolutions at Low settings (466.4 at 1080p vs. 366.4 at 1440p vs. 230.8 at 4K) indicates that at 1080p Low, the rendering load is light enough that the CPU's single-thread performance (3DMark single-thread score of 868) becomes the limiting factor.

Q: What is the FPS penalty for Ultra settings at 4K compared to 1080p?

A: The penalty is severe. At 4K Ultra, the combo produces 88 FPS, which is 54.5% lower than the 193.4 FPS achieved at 1080p Ultra. This dramatic drop is primarily due to the GPU being fully saturated at 4K, as the RTX 5080's 16 GB GDDR7 memory and 960.0 GB/s bandwidth are pushed hard by the game's visual load.

Q: Does the CPU's 6-core/12-thread configuration hold back multi-threaded performance?

A: In synthetic tests, the i5-11400F's 3DMark 16-thread score of 5,619 is only 0.6% higher than its max-thread score of 5,652, suggesting diminishing returns beyond 12 threads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14,372 indicates solid throughput, but the 0% deltaPct compared to the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (avg score 17,189) shows it sits at parity with a mobile chip, hinting that desktop multi-core headroom is limited.

Q: Should users enable Ultra settings for the best experience?

A: Not for competitive play. The data shows Ultra settings reduce FPS by over 35% compared to High at the same resolution (e.g., 137 FPS vs. 88 FPS at 4K). For a sports title where frame consistency matters, High settings deliver better frame pacing and higher averages without the visual cost of Ultra being worth the performance hit.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is the dominant component in this pairing, and its specifications explain why it drives such extreme frame rates. The GPU's boost clock of 2617 MHz, combined with 10,752 shading units and 112 ROPs, provides the raw compute needed for high-resolution rendering. The 16 GB GDDR7 memory operates at 1875 MHz with a 30 Gbps effective rate, yielding a 960.0 GB/s bandwidth. This memory throughput is critical for Undisputed's boxing arenas, which feature detailed textures and crowd animations.

The RTX 5080's architecture (Blackwell 2.0, 5 nm process) delivers 56.28 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. In the measured Undisputed results, this translates to a massive performance envelope. At 4K High, the GPU sustains 137 FPS, showing it is not fully saturated. However, at 4K Ultra, the frame rate drops to 88 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset pushes the GPU's pixel rate (293.1 GPixel/s) and texture rate (879.3 GTexel/s) to their limits. The 84 RT cores are largely irrelevant for this sports title, but the tensor cores (336) could be utilized for DLSS if enabled, though the measured data does not include such settings.

The GPU's 360 W TDP and PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provide ample power and bandwidth, but the data shows that at lower resolutions, the GPU idles in terms of utilization. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 466.4 FPS, which is likely near the CPU's rendering ceiling rather than the GPU's maximum output. This means the RTX 5080's role shifts from being the primary performance driver at 4K to being underutilized at 1080p, where the CPU's 2.60 GHz base clock and 4.40 GHz boost clock become the limiting factor.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual fidelity and frame rate, the High preset is the clear choice across all resolutions. The measured FPS shows High settings deliver 300.2 FPS at 1080p, 219.5 FPS at 1440p, and 137 FPS at 4K. These numbers comfortably exceed 120Hz refresh rate requirements, and the jump from High to Ultra yields a significant performance loss—at 1440p, High produces 219.5 FPS versus Ultra's 141.3 FPS, a 35.6% reduction—for what is likely marginal visual improvement in a fast-paced sports title.

For users with 240Hz monitors, Medium settings at 1440p (264.1 FPS) provides the best path to maximizing refresh rate while maintaining acceptable visuals. At 1080p, even Ultra settings (193.4 FPS) exceed 144Hz, but the Low preset (466.4 FPS) is so high that it suggests the CPU is the bottleneck. The data indicates that High at 1440p (219.5 FPS) is the sweet spot for most high-refresh setups, as it stays above 200 FPS while retaining more graphical detail than Medium.

At 4K, the recommendation shifts to High (137 FPS) or Medium (169 FPS) depending on whether the user prioritizes frame rate or visuals. Ultra at 4K (88 FPS) is below the 90 FPS threshold that many consider minimum for smooth gameplay, making it unsuitable for competitive play. Low settings at 4K (230.8 FPS) are overkill for visual fidelity but demonstrate the GPU's headroom even at this resolution. The data strongly suggests avoiding Ultra settings unless the user has a 60Hz display and values maximum graphical quality over frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo produces extraordinary frame rates. Low settings yield 466.4 FPS, Medium 365.7 FPS, High 300.2 FPS, and Ultra 193.4 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 21.6% drop, from Medium to High an 18.0% drop, and from High to Ultra a 35.6% drop. This pattern suggests that the Ultra preset introduces effects (likely shadow quality and post-processing) that disproportionately tax the CPU, as the GPU should handle these with ease given its 4K Ultra score of 88 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but show a noticeable reduction. Low settings produce 366.4 FPS, Medium 264.1 FPS, High 219.5 FPS, and Ultra 141.3 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at Low settings is 21.4%, which is less than the pixel count difference (44% more pixels), indicating the CPU is still the limiting factor at Low settings. At Ultra, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is 26.9%, showing the GPU is now more engaged.

At 3840x2160, the GPU takes full control. Low settings yield 230.8 FPS, Medium 169 FPS, High 137 FPS, and Ultra 88 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 4K at Low settings is a 37.0% drop, which aligns closely with the 2.25x pixel increase, confirming GPU saturation. At Ultra, the drop from 1440p to 4K is 37.7%, showing consistent GPU-bound behavior. The 4K Ultra result of 88 FPS is the only measured configuration that falls below 90 FPS, making it the least desirable for smooth gameplay.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the bottleneck dynamics of this pairing. At Low settings, the combo drops from 466.4 FPS at 1080p to 230.8 FPS at 4K, a 50.5% reduction. This is less than the 4x pixel increase, which indicates that at 1080p Low, the CPU (with a 3DMark single-thread score of 868 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2029) limits the frame rate. The GPU has excess capacity that cannot be utilized because the CPU cannot feed it data fast enough.

At Medium settings, the drop from 1080p to 4K is 53.8% (365.7 to 169 FPS), and at High settings it is 54.3% (300.2 to 137 FPS). These consistent drops suggest that as settings increase, the GPU becomes more loaded, but the CPU remains a partial constraint at 1080p. The Ultra settings show a different pattern: the drop from 1080p to 4K is 54.5% (193.4 to 88 FPS), slightly higher than other settings, indicating that Ultra's additional effects (likely higher-resolution textures) begin to stress the GPU's 16 GB memory capacity and 960.0 GB/s bandwidth at 4K.

The resolution scaling analysis shows that the RTX 5080 is the primary limiter at 4K, as evidenced by the 230.8 FPS at Low settings (vs. 466.4 at 1080p Low). However, the CPU's limitation is exposed at 1080p Low, where the frame rate is 466.4 FPS—a figure that likely represents the CPU's maximum draw-call throughput rather than the GPU's capability. For users targeting 4K, the i5-11400F is sufficient, but for 1080p esports-style play, the data indicates that a stronger CPU would yield even higher frame rates, as the RTX 5080's 4K Low performance (230.8 FPS) suggests it could produce over 500 FPS at 1080p Low if not for the CPU bottleneck.