Undisputed

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i7-13700K paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT secures rank 403 out of 1,580 tested combos in Undisputed, placing it comfortably in the top quarter of all configurations. This is a strong showing for a sports title that typically rewards raw frame throughput over exotic multi-GPU setups or niche hardware optimizations. The combo's position suggests it outperforms roughly 74% of all tested pairings, which is notable given that Undisputed launched in 2023 and has since seen a wide variety of hardware tested against it.

The CPU itself carries a percentile rank of 93 against all processors, meaning it sits above 93% of all CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 47,282 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i7-13700KF, which posts 47,334 and a delta of -0.1%, indicating the two chips are effectively interchangeable in synthetic workloads. The AMD EPYC 4364P trails by a razor-thin 0.3%, while the Intel Core i9-12900F sits 0.4% behind. On the GPU side, the RX 9070 XT holds an 82nd percentile rank among all graphics cards, with an average benchmark score of 39,647. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro 575, scores 39,703, a delta of -0.1%, while the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile is 0.2% ahead at 39,568. These margins are negligible in real-world gaming, but they contextualize where this hardware sits in the broader ecosystem.

What matters more for Undisputed is the combination's measured frame rates, which show a system that scales aggressively with settings and resolution. The data indicates this pairing is never CPU-bound in a way that cripples performance; instead, the GPU becomes the primary governor as visual fidelity climbs. For a boxing sim where timing and responsiveness are critical, the frame rates on offer here range from playable at maximum settings to exceptionally high at lower presets, giving users genuine flexibility.

# GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a Navi 48 chip fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It packs 53,900 million transistors into a 357 mm² die, with a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². The GPU operates at a base clock of 1660 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2970 MHz. Memory runs at 2518 MHz, translating to 20.1 Gbps effective, across a 256-bit bus. This configuration yields 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with a bandwidth of 644.6 GB/s, which is generous for a sports title like Undisputed that does not typically demand massive texture pools at moderate resolutions.

The GPU's 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 raster operation units deliver a pixel rate of 380.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 760.3 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is rated at 48.66 TFLOPS for FP32 and 97.32 TFLOPS for FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. There are 64 ray tracing cores, though Undisputed does not rely heavily on ray tracing, so this hardware resource remains largely untapped in this specific title. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring full compatibility with modern APIs.

In the context of Undisputed, the GPU's role becomes evident in the measured frame rates. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 372 FPS, which is far beyond what any display can show, indicating the GPU is not the bottleneck at that setting. But as resolution and quality scale upward, the GPU's workload increases proportionally, and the frame rates drop accordingly. The 16 GB VRAM buffer is sufficient for even the Ultra preset at 4K, where the game draws heavily on texture memory without causing stutter or texture pop-in. The card's power draw is rated at 304 W TDP, with a suggested PSU of 700 W, but those are hardware specifications rather than gameplay metrics.

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of how this combo scales across resolutions. Moving from 1080p to 1440p to 4K produces predictable frame rate drops, but the magnitude varies significantly by settings preset. At Low settings, the transition from 1080p (372 FPS) to 1440p (270.4 FPS) represents a 27.3% reduction, while moving from 1440p to 4K (173.9 FPS) costs another 35.7%. These are steep drops, indicating that even at Low settings, the GPU is being pushed harder as pixel count rises.

At Medium settings, the scaling is slightly less aggressive. The 1080p result of 266.8 FPS falls to 192.2 FPS at 1440p, a 28% decrease, and then to 125 FPS at 4K, a 35% drop from 1440p. High settings show a similar trend: 222.4 FPS at 1080p, 163.5 FPS at 1440p (26.5% less), and 100.5 FPS at 4K (38.5% less from 1440p). The Ultra preset exhibits the most pronounced scaling penalty, with 145 FPS at 1080p dropping to 106.1 FPS at 1440p (26.8% less) and then to 68.9 FPS at 4K (35.1% less).

These numbers suggest that the CPU is not the limiting factor at any resolution. The Intel Core i7-13700K with 16 cores and 24 threads, boosting to 5.40 GHz, provides ample headroom to feed the GPU. Instead, the RX 9070 XT becomes the bottleneck as resolution increases, which is typical for a high-refresh gaming setup. The fact that 4K Ultra still holds above 60 FPS at 68.9 FPS reflects the GPU's raw throughput, but the scaling curve indicates that users targeting 4K should consider the High preset for a smoother experience.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 372 FPS, which is far beyond any monitor's refresh rate and indicates a GPU that is barely taxed. Medium settings yield 266.8 FPS, still exceptionally high, while High settings drop to 222.4 FPS. Ultra settings at 1080p produce 145 FPS, which is still well above the 144 Hz threshold and offers a smooth experience for competitive play. These numbers show that at 1080p, the system is GPU-bound only at the Ultra preset, and even then, the frame rate is more than sufficient.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high but begin to show the GPU working harder. Low settings average 270.4 FPS, which is a 27.3% drop from 1080p but still extremely fast. Medium settings hit 192.2 FPS, while High settings produce 163.5 FPS. Ultra settings at 1440p yield 106.1 FPS, which is above the 100 FPS mark and provides a solid balance between visual quality and smoothness. The delta between High and Ultra at 1440p is 57.4 FPS, indicating that the Ultra preset imposes a significant additional load on the GPU.

At 3840x2160, the system's performance becomes more moderate. Low settings average 173.9 FPS, which is still high and indicates that even at 4K, the GPU has plenty of headroom when visual effects are minimized. Medium settings drop to 125 FPS, while High settings produce 100.5 FPS, which is right at the 100 FPS milestone. Ultra settings at 4K yield 68.9 FPS, which is playable but falls short of the 144 Hz refresh rates that high-end monitors often target. The gap between High and Ultra at 4K is 31.6 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional visual features come at a steep performance cost.

# Settings Recommendations

The data points to High settings as the sweet spot for this combo across all resolutions. At 1080p, High delivers 222.4 FPS, which is more than enough for any competitive scenario. At 1440p, High produces 163.5 FPS, comfortably above 144 Hz and providing a fluid experience. At 4K, High still manages 100.5 FPS, which is excellent for a sports title and nearly 32% faster than the Ultra preset's 68.9 FPS. The visual difference between High and Ultra in a boxing game is unlikely to justify the performance hit, especially at higher resolutions.

Ultra settings are only recommended for users with 1080p displays who prioritize maximum visual fidelity over frame rate. The 145 FPS at 1080p Ultra is still very playable, and the 106.1 FPS at 1440p Ultra is acceptable for those who want the best image quality. However, at 4K, the 68.9 FPS Ultra result may feel less responsive, particularly in a game where reaction time matters. For 4K users, High settings are the clear choice, offering a 31.6 FPS improvement over Ultra while maintaining most of the visual enhancements.

Medium settings provide a fallback for those seeking higher frame rates on 4K displays. The 125 FPS at 4K Medium is a significant jump from High's 100.5 FPS, and the visual trade-off in a sports title is often minimal. Low settings are unnecessary on this hardware, as even the most demanding preset remains playable at all resolutions. The measured data indicates that this combo is versatile enough to handle any settings configuration, but the optimal balance of performance and visual quality lies at the High preset, with 4K users potentially dropping to Medium if they prioritize frame rate above all else.