Undisputed

The Intel Core i5-9400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 combination lands near the bottom of the tested pool for Undisputed, holding the 1488th spot out of 1580 combos. This places it in the lower 6% of all tested configurations, indicating that this pairing is strictly for entry-level play. The data shows a system that can handle the game at lower settings, but it will struggle to deliver a consistently smooth experience at higher presets or resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 1488 out of 1580 tested combinations is a clear signal of its position in the performance hierarchy. This is not a mid-pack result; it is a bottom-tier placement. The benchmark results indicate that while the system is capable of running Undisputed, it does so with significant compromises. The CPU, with an average benchmark score of 2305, sits at the 50th percentile of all CPUs, placing it squarely in the middle of the pack for processing power. However, the GPU, with an average score of 8713 and a percentile rank of 43, is also an entry-level part. When paired, they do not boost each other's performance in this game; instead, they form a baseline configuration.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile, which scores 0.4% higher, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100, which scores 0.5% higher. The differences are minimal, showing that the GTX 1650 is firmly in its performance class. The CPU's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i3-10305 (0.2% higher) and the Intel Core i7-8809G (0.6% lower), also show a very tight cluster of performance. This suggests that the combo's low rank in Undisputed is not due to one severely underperforming component, but rather the result of both parts being entry-level options that together lack the headroom needed for demanding settings.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Undisputed at 1080p?

A: Yes, it can. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the measured average FPS is 112.1. This is the only setting at this resolution where the frame rate is exceptionally high.

Q: What is the best resolution for this system?

A: The data suggests 1920x1080 is the only viable option for a smooth experience. At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops to 49.8 on High settings and 30.8 on Ultra, which will be noticeable. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only yield 52.2 FPS average.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its direct rivals?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2305. Its closest rivals are the Intel Core i3-10305, which is 0.2% faster, and the Intel Core i7-8809G, which is 0.6% slower. The performance difference is negligible.

Q: Is the GPU the limiting factor in this system?

A: The benchmark results indicate the GPU is a significant constraint. For example, at 1080p, the average FPS drops from 112.1 on Low to 42.4 on Ultra, a massive 62% decrease, showing the GPU struggles as settings increase.

Q: What is the launch MSRP for the GPU?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 had a launch MSRP of 149 USD.

Q: What kind of performance can I expect at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, performance is playable but not ideal. The average FPS on High settings is 49.8, and on Medium it is 59.7. For a competitive edge, you would need to use Low settings, which yields 76.6 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor based on the Coffee Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. In synthetic benchmarks, it posts a multi-core score of 7969 in Cinebench R23 and a single-core score of 1125 in the same test. This places it in the 50th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it is an average performer in general compute tasks.

In the context of Undisputed, a sports game, the CPU's role is less about raw multi-threaded power and more about maintaining a stable frame pipeline. The data shows that the CPU is likely not the primary bottleneck at lower settings. For instance, at 1080p Low, the system achieves 112.1 FPS, which is high enough that the GPU is clearly the limiting factor. However, the CPU's modest single-core performance (472 in Cinebench R20 single-core) could become a factor at very high frame rates or in complex simulation scenarios, but the measured data does not show a scenario where the CPU holds back the system to a greater degree than the GPU.

The CPU's 9 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support are standard for its generation. Its 65W TDP makes it an efficient part, and its performance in the benchmark data shows it is a capable, if unspectacular, partner for the GTX 1650. The system's overall rank is a direct result of this pairing; neither component is a standout, and together they form a baseline experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system's capabilities across different resolutions and settings.

At 1920x1080, the system shows its best performance:

• Low: 112.1 FPS average
• Medium: 81.1 FPS average
• High: 65.7 FPS average
• Ultra: 42.4 FPS average

At 2560x1440, the frame rates drop significantly, indicating the GPU is being pushed harder:

• Low: 76.6 FPS average
• Medium: 59.7 FPS average
• High: 49.8 FPS average
• Ultra: 30.8 FPS average

At 3840x2160, the system is clearly overmatched for smooth gameplay:

• Low: 52.2 FPS average
• Medium: 37.4 FPS average
• High: 30.0 FPS average
• Ultra: 21.2 FPS average

The data shows a consistent pattern. The system's sweet spot is 1080p, where even High settings can maintain a playable 65.7 FPS. At 1440p, you must drop to Medium or Low to stay above 60 FPS. At 4K, the system cannot maintain 60 FPS on any setting, and even Low settings dip to 52.2 FPS, which is a significant compromise.

Resolution Scaling

The scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a system that is heavily GPU-bound. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 on High settings, the average FPS drops from 65.7 to 49.8, a 24% reduction. This is a typical scaling factor for a GPU with 4 GB of memory and a 128-bit memory bus, as the increased pixel count puts more strain on the render output units (ROPs) and memory bandwidth.

The drop from 1440p to 4K is even more severe. On High settings, the average FPS falls from 49.8 to 30.0, a 40% reduction. This steep decline is a strong indicator that the 4 GB frame buffer and the GPU's raw compute power are insufficient for the demands of 3840x2160. The GTX 1650's 128.1 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 2.984 TFLOPS of FP32 performance are simply not enough to feed the high pixel count.

This scaling behavior confirms that the limiting component is the GPU. The CPU's performance is relatively constant across resolutions, so it is not causing the frame rate to collapse at higher resolutions. The data points to the GTX 1650 as the bottleneck, which is why the system's performance degrades so sharply as resolution increases. For a smoother experience at higher resolutions, the GPU would need to be upgraded; the CPU has enough headroom to support a more powerful graphics card.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with High settings, which yields an average of 65.7 FPS. This provides a good balance between visual quality and smoothness, as it is above the 60 FPS threshold that is generally considered playable for most users. Pushing to Ultra drops the average to 42.4 FPS, which can feel less fluid in a fast-paced sports game.

For players who prioritize a high frame rate, the Low preset at 1080p is the best option, delivering an average of 112.1 FPS. This is a significant jump from High and could be beneficial for competitive play, but it comes with a substantial visual downgrade. The Medium preset at 81.1 FPS is a good middle ground, offering a solid frame rate with better visuals than Low.

At 2560x1440, the system is less capable. The Medium preset is the highest setting that maintains an average above 60 FPS (59.7 FPS), making it the only viable option for smooth gameplay at this resolution. The High preset at 49.8 FPS is playable but will show noticeable frame pacing issues. At 3840x2160, the system is not recommended for any setting, as even Low only achieves 52.2 FPS, and the visual quality is poor enough that it is better to lower the resolution instead. In summary, the data clearly shows that 1080p is the intended resolution for this hardware, and the High preset offers the best overall experience.