Undisputed

The Intel Core i5-14600KF is a 14-core, 20-thread desktop processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 10 nm process. It carries a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a 24 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB per core L2 cache. This combination of high boost clocks and substantial cache is well-suited for Undisputed, a sports title where frame pacing and consistent physics simulation matter as much as raw throughput.

In synthetic benchmarks, the i5-14600KF scores 32,889 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4,643 in single-core, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 49,367 sits within a tight cluster of rivals: it trails the AMD EPYC 4345P by 0.5%, but leads the Intel Core i5-14600K by 0.4%, the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X by 0.6%, and the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H by 1.4%. These margins are negligible for gaming, meaning the CPU is unlikely to be the bottleneck in Undisputed at most settings.

The measured frame rates confirm this. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo hits 312.9 FPS, and even at 4K with Low settings, it maintains 146.8 FPS. The CPU’s 20 threads handle the game’s background simulation and AI without breaking a sweat, allowing the GPU to be the primary driver of performance. Given that the processor’s single-thread score of 4,643 in Cinebench R23 is strong, the data suggests that Undisputed rarely stresses the CPU to its limits; instead, the system’s performance scales with graphical load, pointing to the GPU as the key component for higher resolutions and presets.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 32 chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 5 nm process. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s boost clock is rated at 2544 MHz, with a game clock of 2171 MHz, and it houses 3,456 shading units alongside 54 ray accelerators. These specs position it as a mid-to-high-range card, and its 73rd percentile ranking among all GPUs reflects a solid standing for 1440p and entry-level 4K gaming.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 30,097, which places it virtually tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (0.0% deltaPct), while it trails the AMD Radeon RX 570 by 0.2% and leads the NVIDIA Tesla M60 by 0.4% and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile by 0.6%. In Undisputed, the GPU’s role becomes evident when comparing frame rates across settings. At 1080p Ultra, the combo produces 120.3 FPS, but dropping to High yields 186.4 FPS—a massive jump that highlights how sensitive the game is to GPU shading and memory bandwidth. At 4K, the gap widens further: Ultra delivers just 52.9 FPS, while Low reaches 146.8 FPS.

The 12 GB VRAM buffer is sufficient for the game’s textures at all tested presets, but the data shows that the GPU’s compute throughput, not memory capacity, is the limiting factor at higher settings. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,316 and the Passmark G3D score of 22,547 both indicate a GPU that can handle Undisputed’s demands, but the steep FPS drops from Low to Ultra suggest that the card’s 35.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance is stretched thin when all visual features are enabled.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the High preset offers the best balance of visual quality and performance across all resolutions. At 1080p, High delivers 186.4 FPS, which is well above the 120.3 FPS seen at Ultra but still maintains a smooth experience. Moving to 1440p, High yields 138 FPS, comfortably exceeding the 88.9 FPS of Ultra. Even at 4K, High produces 85.2 FPS, which is playable on most displays and far superior to the 52.9 FPS of Ultra.

The Medium preset provides a fallback for users with higher refresh rate monitors at 1440p or those wanting extra headroom at 4K. At 1440p Medium, the combo hits 160.5 FPS, and at 4K Medium it achieves 104.9 FPS. However, the visual downgrade from High to Medium is not justified by the FPS gains, which are modest compared to the jump from High to Ultra. The Low preset is capable of extreme frame rates—312.9 FPS at 1080p and 228.4 FPS at 1440p—but it should be reserved for competitive play where every millisecond counts, as the graphical fidelity loss is significant.

The Ultra preset is the only option that dips below 60 FPS at 4K (52.9 FPS), making it unsuitable for that resolution. At 1080p and 1440p, Ultra remains playable, but the data suggests that the visual enhancements over High do not translate to a proportional performance cost. For the majority of users, High is the recommended preset, offering a 35% to 45% FPS improvement over Ultra across all resolutions while still providing a rich visual experience.

FAQ

*Q: Can this combo run Undisputed at 4K with playable frame rates?*

A: Yes, but not at the highest settings. At 4K High, the average FPS is 85.2, and at 4K Medium it is 104.9. However, at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 52.9, which is below the 60 FPS threshold many players prefer. The Low preset achieves 146.8 FPS at 4K.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-14600KF has an average benchmark score of 49,367. It leads the Intel Core i5-14600K by 0.4%, the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X by 0.6%, and the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H by 1.4%, while trailing the AMD EPYC 4345P by 0.5%. These differences are minimal for gaming.

*Q: Is the GPU the bottleneck in Undisputed?*

A: Yes, the data indicates the GPU is the primary limiter. At 1080p, FPS scales from 312.9 at Low to 120.3 at Ultra, a 2.6x difference. This pattern holds at 1440p and 4K, where Ultra settings consistently produce the largest FPS drops, suggesting the GPU’s shading units and memory bandwidth are the constraining factors.

Q: What is the performance difference between the RX 7700 XT and the RTX 5060?

A: The RX 7700 XT has an average benchmark score of 30,097, while the RTX 5060 scores 30,109. The deltaPct is 0.0%, meaning they are statistically identical in synthetic performance. In Undisputed, no direct comparison is available, but their overall scores suggest similar capabilities.

Q: How does frame rate scale from 1080p to 4K at High settings?

A: At High settings, the combo delivers 186.4 FPS at 1080p, 138 FPS at 1440p, and 85.2 FPS at 4K. This represents a 26% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 54% drop from 1080p to 4K, illustrating the GPU’s increasing load at higher pixel counts.

Q: Does the 12 GB VRAM limit performance at 4K?

A: No, the 12 GB frame buffer appears sufficient. At 4K Ultra, the GPU achieves 52.9 FPS, which is a compute limitation rather than a memory one, as the Low preset at 4K reaches 146.8 FPS. The VRAM capacity does not cause a sudden performance cliff at any tested resolution.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling as resolution increases. At Low settings, the combo produces 312.9 FPS at 1080p, 228.4 FPS at 1440p, and 146.8 FPS at 4K. This represents a 27% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a 53% reduction from 1080p to 4K. The declines are consistent, suggesting that even at Low, the GPU is doing meaningful work per frame.

At High settings, the scaling is steeper: 186.4 FPS at 1080p drops to 138 FPS at 1440p (a 26% decrease) and then to 85.2 FPS at 4K (a 54% decrease from 1080p). The 1080p-to-4K drop of 101.2 FPS is larger than the Low preset’s 166.1 FPS drop, indicating that the High preset’s additional shading and texture work amplify the resolution penalty.

The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic scaling. At 1080p, it achieves 120.3 FPS, but this falls to 88.9 FPS at 1440p (a 26% drop) and 52.9 FPS at 4K (a 56% drop from 1080p). The 4K Ultra result is the only sub-60 FPS number in the entire dataset, underscoring that this preset is designed for lower resolutions. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p across all presets is remarkably consistent at 26-27%, which points to a uniform GPU workload increase per pixel. However, the 1080p-to-4K penalty varies from 53% at Low to 56% at Ultra, suggesting that the extra pixel count interacts with the preset’s complexity—likely via memory bandwidth saturation—to create a slightly larger performance hit at higher settings.

The limiting component is unambiguously the GPU. The CPU’s 20 threads and 5.30 GHz boost clock are more than adequate to feed the RX 7700 XT, as evidenced by the 312.9 FPS at 1080p Low, which is far beyond the refresh rate of most monitors. If the CPU were the bottleneck, frame rates would plateau or fluctuate less predictably with resolution changes. Instead, the linear scaling with pixel count confirms that the GPU’s 432.0 GB/s bandwidth and 35.17 TFLOPS compute are the deciding factors, making the RX 7700 XT the component to upgrade for higher resolution or preset targets.