Undisputed

The Intel Core i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination delivers a playable experience at 1080p in Undisputed, but the data clearly shows the GPU as the primary bottleneck as resolution increases. The combo ranks 1519th out of 1580 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 5% of all tested hardware pairings for this title. This is a pairing where CPU headroom exists, but the graphics card’s 4 GB VRAM and 128-bit memory interface limit overall performance ceilings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F provides substantial processing capacity that is not fully utilized in this game. With 10 cores, 16 threads, a 2.50 GHz base clock, and a 4.70 GHz boost clock, this Raptor Lake-R architecture chip sits in the 88th percentile of all CPUs tested. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21914 and single-core score of 3093 indicate strong computational throughput, while the PassMark single-thread score of 3723 confirms solid per-core performance that sports titles typically leverage for physics and AI calculations.

Benchmark results show the i5-14400F performs essentially identically to its nearest rivals. The Intel Core i7-12800H, AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645, AMD Ryzen 7 250, and Intel Core i7-13705H all score within 0.2% of the i5-14400F’s average benchmark score of 32508. This suggests that in CPU-bound scenarios, Undisputed would see no meaningful difference between these processors. The CPU’s 20 MB shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support provide adequate bandwidth for feeding the GPU, but the measured FPS data reveals that CPU performance is rarely the limiting factor here.

The 65 W TDP and 10 nm process node indicate an efficient design, though these specifications matter less than the actual gameplay results. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 106.8 FPS average, which demonstrates that the CPU can drive high framerates when the GPU is not heavily taxed. However, the fact that Ultra settings at 1080p drop to 43.9 FPS — a 59% reduction from Low — points to GPU limitations rather than CPU constraints, as a CPU-bound scenario would show smaller performance deltas across graphics settings.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the decisive factor in this combo’s performance. Built on the Turing architecture with a 12 nm process node, this card features 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its 4 GB GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth, which proves insufficient for higher resolutions and quality presets in Undisputed. The GPU’s 1485 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost clocks, combined with 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 performance, place it in the 43rd percentile of all GPUs — a mid-to-low tier position that aligns with its measured results.

The GTX 1650’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, AMD Radeon 550X, NVIDIA Quadro P2200, and AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100, all within 0.5% of its average benchmark score of 8713. The PassMark G3D score of 7880 and DirectX 12 score of 35 highlight modest DirectX 12 capabilities, which matters for a 2023 release like Undisputed. The 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors indicate this card was designed for low-power systems, but the performance data shows it struggles with modern game loads at higher settings.

The GPU’s memory configuration is the most significant weakness. The 4 GB VRAM capacity becomes a hard constraint at 4K resolution, where even Low settings only produce 49 FPS average. This is not a compute limitation but rather a memory bandwidth and capacity issue, as the 128-bit bus cannot sustain the data throughput required for 3840x2160 rendering. The 8 Gbps effective memory speed provides adequate bandwidth for 1080p but falls short at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Undisputed?

A: The data shows 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combo consistently exceeds 60 FPS, with Low settings hitting 106.8 FPS and Medium reaching 81.8 FPS. At 2560x1440, only Low settings (77.1 FPS) remain above 60 FPS, while 3840x2160 never achieves playable framerates.

Q: How does the GTX 1650’s VRAM affect 4K performance?

A: The 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 128.1 GB/s bandwidth is the primary limiting factor at 3840x2160. Ultra settings produce only 20.1 FPS average, and even Low settings cap at 49 FPS, indicating the memory subsystem cannot handle 4K textures and geometry.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this configuration?

A: The GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The i5-14400F ranks in the 88th percentile of CPUs, while the GTX 1650 sits in the 43rd percentile of GPUs. The FPS drop from 106.8 at 1080p Low to 43.9 at 1080p Ultra demonstrates GPU-side limitations, as the CPU maintains consistent performance across settings.

Q: How does this combo rank against other tested systems?

A: The combo ranks 1519th out of 1580 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 4% of all configurations. This reflects the GTX 1650’s age and memory limitations rather than CPU inadequacy, as the processor is competitive with much higher-ranked systems.

Q: What settings provide the most balanced experience?

A: Medium settings at 1080p deliver 81.8 FPS average, which offers a good balance between visual quality and smoothness. High settings at 1080p drop to 66.9 FPS, still playable, while Ultra at 43.9 FPS falls below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: Can this combo handle competitive play?

A: For competitive play requiring stable 60+ FPS, 1080p Low (106.8 FPS) or Medium (81.8 FPS) are the only viable options. At 1440p, Low settings provide 77.1 FPS, but any higher settings or 4K resolution will result in sub-60 FPS performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent pattern across all tested resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 106.8 FPS on Low, 81.8 FPS on Medium, 66.9 FPS on High, and 43.9 FPS on Ultra. This represents a 59% reduction from Low to Ultra, showing that each quality tier progressively taxes the GPU more heavily. The 1080p results are the only resolution where the combo maintains playable framerates across multiple settings.

At 2560x1440, performance drops significantly. Low settings produce 77.1 FPS, Medium yields 56 FPS, High delivers 50.1 FPS, and Ultra falls to 32 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra here is 58%, similar to 1080p, but the absolute numbers are 28-30% lower across the board. This indicates that the GPU’s compute and memory resources are being stretched beyond their comfortable operating range.

The 3840x2160 results are marginal at best. Low settings achieve 49 FPS, Medium drops to 36.3 FPS, High falls to 28.6 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 20.1 FPS. None of these are playable for a sports game requiring smooth motion. The 4K data shows that the GTX 1650 simply lacks the memory bandwidth and VRAM capacity for this resolution, regardless of quality preset.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic and reveals the limiting component clearly. At Low settings, performance falls from 106.8 FPS at 1080p to 77.1 FPS at 1440p (a 28% reduction) and further to 49 FPS at 4K (a 54% reduction from 1080p). At High settings, the drop is even steeper: 66.9 FPS at 1080p, 50.1 FPS at 1440p (25% reduction), and 28.6 FPS at 4K (57% reduction from 1080p).

This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the limiting factor, resolution increases would have minimal impact on framerates since the CPU’s workload remains relatively constant across resolutions. Instead, the FPS halves or nearly halves at each resolution step, which is exactly what happens when the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth become saturated. The 4 GB VRAM capacity is particularly problematic at 4K, where texture data exceeds available memory and forces constant swapping.

The data also shows that settings have a compounding effect at higher resolutions. At 1080p, Ultra is 59% slower than Low. At 4K, Ultra is 59% slower than Low as well, but the absolute difference is smaller (28.9 FPS vs 62.9 FPS). This suggests that the GPU hits a hard performance ceiling at 4K regardless of settings, where even Low cannot maintain playable framerates.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience with this combo, the data clearly points to 1080p with Medium settings as the optimal balance. The 81.8 FPS average provides smooth gameplay that meets the 60 FPS threshold for sports titles, while Medium quality offers noticeably better visuals than Low without the severe performance penalty of High or Ultra. At 1080p Low, the 106.8 FPS is excellent for competitive play but sacrifices visual fidelity that Medium recovers.

At 1440p, Low settings (77.1 FPS) are the only viable option for playable performance. Medium at 56 FPS and High at 50.1 FPS are borderline, but for a game like Undisputed where smooth motion is critical, sub-60 FPS is not recommended. Ultra at 1440p (32 FPS) and all 4K settings are not viable for actual gameplay.

High settings at 1080p (66.9 FPS) are acceptable for players who prioritize visual quality over framerate stability. The 43.9 FPS at 1080p Ultra is too low for consistent gameplay, as the framerate will likely fluctuate during intense boxing sequences. The recommendation is to prioritize framerate stability over maximum visual fidelity, making 1080p Medium the clear choice for this hardware combination.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 1519 out of 1580 tested combinations places it in the bottom 4% of all configurations tested in Undisputed. This low ranking is almost entirely attributable to the GTX 1650’s limitations. The CPU’s 88th percentile ranking among all processors demonstrates that the i5-14400F is a capable component that performs on par with much more expensive mobile and desktop chips. The GPU’s 43rd percentile ranking, however, drags the overall combo down significantly.

The measured FPS data corroborates this ranking. While the CPU can deliver 21914 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3723 in PassMark single-thread, these capabilities translate to minimal real-world benefit in Undisputed because the GPU cannot translate CPU performance into framerate at higher settings. The combo’s performance is consistently GPU-bound, meaning that upgrading the graphics card would yield substantial improvements, while upgrading the CPU would provide negligible gains.

For context, the combo’s 1080p Low performance of 106.8 FPS is respectable and likely places it near the middle of the pack for that specific configuration. However, the inability to maintain playable framerates at 1440p Ultra (32 FPS) or any 4K setting highlights the GPU’s fundamental limitations. The rank of 1519 reflects a system that can handle entry-level 1080p gaming but struggles with modern game demands at higher resolutions and quality presets. This is a balanced assessment for a budget-conscious build that prioritizes CPU longevity over GPU performance.