Undisputed

Undisputed is a boxing title that scales heavily with both CPU and GPU, but the data for this specific combo—Intel Core i7-14700F paired with AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT—shows a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound at higher resolutions and settings. The measured frame rates across all tested configurations are exceptionally high, with the only sub-100 FPS result occurring at 4K Ultra, indicating that this pairing is built for high-refresh-rate 1440p play and can even handle 4K with reasonable settings adjustments. The benchmark results consistently show that the i7-14700F provides ample headroom, allowing the RX 9070 XT to stretch its legs, particularly at 1080p where the CPU's robust multi-threading and high boost clocks prevent any bottleneck from forming.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i7-14700F is a 20-core, 28-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake Refresh architecture, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. For a game like Undisputed, which is a sports title with simulated physics and AI opponent logic, the high boost clock is critical for maintaining consistent frame pacing in single-threaded game logic, while the 28 threads ensure that background tasks and the game's broader simulation threads do not cause hitches. The processor's L3 cache is 33 MB shared, which is ample for the working set of a sports game, and its 10 nm process node allows for efficient operation within a 65 W TDP, though the benchmark scores suggest it punches well above its power envelope.

The benchmark data confirms the CPU's strength. In Cinebench R23, the i7-14700F scores 35,122 points in multi-core and 4,958 points in single-core. These are not merely high numbers; they represent a processor that sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms the vast majority of installed processors. Looking at its nearest rivals in the database, it is essentially neck-and-neck with the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X, which has an average score of 53,288 compared to the i7-14700F's 53,620, a delta of only 0.6% in favor of the Intel chip. This tight grouping with high-end desktop parts indicates that the CPU is not a limiting factor in Undisputed. Even at 1080p Low, where the frame rate soars to 374 FPS, the CPU's single-core performance is sufficient to feed the GPU with draw calls and physics calculations without creating a bottleneck.

The data strongly suggests that the i7-14700F's role in this combo is to provide a stable, high-frequency platform. The game's engine will leverage the 5.40 GHz boost clock for critical game thread work, and the 20 cores (8 performance and 12 efficiency) handle the ancillary tasks. When we see the frame rate drop from 374 FPS at 1080p Low to 143 FPS at 1080p Ultra, that is a ~62% reduction driven by GPU load, not CPU limits. The CPU's average benchmark score of 53,620 places it just 0.2% behind the Intel Xeon 6505P and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Xeon Phi 7290, showing it trades blows with server-class parts in multi-threaded tests, but its single-core advantage is what matters here. In practical terms, the CPU is a silent partner in this analysis; it never holds the system back, regardless of the resolution or settings preset.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is the clear workhorse of this pairing. Built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture with a 4 nm process, it features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. For a game like Undisputed, the 16 GB VRAM buffer is more than sufficient for 4K textures and high-detail character models, meaning the GPU will not be forced to swap assets to system memory, which would cause stutters. The GPU's clock speeds are notably high, with a boost clock of 2970 MHz and a game clock of 2400 MHz, which directly translates to raw fill rates: 380.2 GPixel/s and 760.3 GTexel/s.

The GPU's benchmark performance, however, presents a curious data point. Its average benchmark score is 13,543, which places it in the 55th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are older cards like the AMD Radeon HD 7770M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570, with deltas of 0.1% and 0.2% respectively. This is a statistical anomaly in the database, as the measured FPS in Undisputed clearly shows the RX 9070 XT performing at a level far beyond those legacy parts. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 7,260 is a more relevant metric for modern gaming, indicating strong DirectX 12 performance. The PassMark G3D score of 26,795 is also robust, but the database's percentile ranking seems to be skewed by a wide range of legacy entries.

In the context of Undisputed, the GPU's role is dominant. The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K at Ultra settings shows a clear GPU bottleneck: 143 FPS at 1080p drops to 104 FPS at 1440p and then to 66 FPS at 4K. This is a classic signature of a GPU-bound scenario where the render resolution increases the pixel shader load. The RX 9070 XT's 64 RT cores are not likely to be heavily utilized in a sports title, but its 4,096 shading units are, and they process the character animations and ring environments efficiently. The GPU's memory clock of 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective) ensures that texture reads are fast enough to keep the stream processors fed, which is evident in the consistent frame times at 1440p Medium where the min FPS is 165 and the max is 224.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

Analyzing the measured FPS across resolutions reveals a textbook example of GPU-bound scaling. At High settings, the average frame rate is 223 FPS at 1080p, which drops to 161 FPS at 1440p (a 27.8% reduction) and then to 102 FPS at 4K (a 36.6% reduction from 1440p). This pattern of diminishing returns as resolution increases indicates that the GPU is the limiting component; the CPU's frame generation capability is not changing, but the GPU's render time is increasing quadratically with pixel count. The scaling is even more pronounced at Ultra settings: 143 FPS at 1080p, 104 FPS at 1440p (a 27.3% drop), and 66 FPS at 4K (a 36.5% drop from 1440p).

This data points to a system that is perfectly balanced for 1440p gaming. At 1440p High, the 161 FPS average is well above the 144 Hz refresh rate of most high-end monitors, and the 4K Ultra result of 66 FPS is still playable but just below the 70 FPS threshold that many consider smooth. The jump from 1080p to 4K at Low settings is illuminating: 374 FPS to 171 FPS. This 54.3% drop is less severe than the drop at Ultra settings (53.8% from 143 to 66), which suggests that at Low settings, the CPU starts to play a more significant role in pushing frame rates to their absolute ceiling, but the GPU still dominates the scaling curve. The min FPS data at Medium settings reinforces this: at 1080p Medium, the min FPS is 229, while at 1440p Medium it is 165, and at 4K Medium it is 105. The gap between min and max FPS widens with resolution, indicating that occasional GPU spikes are the cause of frame time variance.

The limiting component is unequivocally the GPU. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a plateau in FPS as resolution decreases, but instead, we see consistent growth. The i7-14700F provides a high enough ceiling that the RX 9070 XT is the sole determinant of performance. For players targeting 4K, the data suggests that the High preset (102 FPS) is the sweet spot, as it offers a significantly higher frame rate than Ultra (66 FPS) with a relatively small visual compromise. The 4K Low result of 171 FPS shows the GPU is capable of high refresh rates even at 4K when the graphical load is reduced, but this is not a practical use case for a modern sports title.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the Intel Core i7-14700F and AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT holds a combo rank of 925 out of 3,718 total combos. This placement in the top 25% of all tested configurations is respectable, but it is not a top-tier result. The rank reflects the average performance across all settings and resolutions, which is dragged down by the relatively low 4K Ultra result of 66 FPS. However, the rank should be interpreted with nuance. This combo is clearly designed for high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming, where it excels, but it is not optimized for 4K Ultra settings in this title.

The combo's rank of 925 means there are 924 other CPU-GPU pairings that produce higher average frame rates in Undisputed. These likely include combinations with more powerful GPUs (like an RTX 4090 or RX 7900 XTX) that can maintain higher FPS at 4K Ultra. However, the data shows that this combo outperforms the median tested combination. The percentile placement is more indicative of the GPU's mid-range standing in the database (55th percentile) than the CPU's high standing (91st percentile). This suggests that if the GPU were paired with a weaker CPU, the rank would be similar, but if the CPU were paired with a stronger GPU, the rank would improve significantly. For the target audience of 1440p gamers, this rank is more than adequate, as it represents a system that can push 144+ FPS at that resolution with ease. The combo's strength is its consistency across settings; it does not have any catastrophic frame rate dips, as evidenced by the min FPS data at Medium settings, which remains above 100 FPS even at 4K.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured frame rates provide a comprehensive picture of performance. At 1920x1080, the system delivers exceptional results. Low settings produce an average of 374 FPS, Medium yields 269 FPS (with min and max of 229 and 310 FPS), High hits 223 FPS, and Ultra drops to 143 FPS. The 1080p results are almost absurdly high, indicating that the game is not graphically demanding at this resolution, and the CPU is feeding the GPU faster than it can render. The gap between Medium and High (46 FPS) is larger than the gap between High and Ultra (80 FPS), which suggests that High settings introduce a significant shader complexity increase.

Moving to 2560x1440, the data shows a more balanced profile. Low settings average 270 FPS, Medium averages 195 FPS (with min and max of 165 and 224 FPS), High averages 161 FPS, and Ultra averages 104 FPS. At 1440p, the frame rates are still very high, with the Ultra preset being the only one that dips below 120 FPS. The Medium preset's min FPS of 165 is particularly noteworthy, as it indicates that even in the most demanding scenes, the system maintains a frame rate above 165 Hz, making it ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's limits become apparent. Low settings average 171 FPS, Medium averages 123 FPS (with min and max of 105 and 142 FPS), High averages 102 FPS, and Ultra averages 66 FPS. The 4K results show a clear delineation: Low and Medium are playable at high refresh rates, High is playable at standard 60-100 Hz, and Ultra is borderline playable but will require adaptive sync to feel smooth. The min FPS at 4K Medium is 105, which is a solid floor, but the 66 FPS average at Ultra suggests that the GPU is being pushed to its absolute limit. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Medium settings (269 to 123 FPS) is a 54.3% reduction, which is consistent with the GPU's pixel throughput limitations.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured data, the optimal settings preset depends heavily on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1080p users, the High preset at 223 FPS is the recommended choice, as it offers a massive improvement over Medium (269 to 223 FPS is a 17% drop) but a much smaller visual difference compared to Ultra (223 to 143 FPS is a 36% drop). The High preset provides a balance of visual fidelity and performance that will easily saturate a 240 Hz monitor. For 1440p, the Medium preset at 195 FPS is the standout performer, offering a min FPS of 165 that guarantees a smooth experience on 165 Hz displays. The High preset at 161 FPS is also viable, but the 34 FPS difference between Medium and High is significant, and the visual gains are likely minimal in a fast-paced sports game.

For 4K, the recommendation is more nuanced. The High preset at 102 FPS is the best overall experience, as it provides a frame rate that is smooth on 100 Hz displays and is a 54.5% improvement over Ultra (102 vs 66 FPS). The Medium preset at 123 FPS is even smoother, but the visual quality reduction from High to Medium is noticeable on a large 4K display. The data clearly shows that the Ultra preset is not worth the performance cost at 4K, as the 66 FPS average is below the 70 FPS threshold for competitive play. The Low preset at 171 FPS is unnecessary unless the player is chasing the absolute highest frame rate, but it will make the game look significantly worse.

The best experience per the measured rows is achieved by selecting the High preset at 1440p or 4K, depending on the display. At 1440p, High yields 161 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate of most gaming monitors. At 4K, High yields 102 FPS, which is a playable and visually rich experience. The Medium preset is the fallback for those who prioritize frame rate over visuals, offering 195 FPS at 1440p and 123 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset should be avoided at 4K, as the 66 FPS result is not worth the visual upgrade over High. In summary, the data recommends High settings for the best balance, with Medium as a high-refresh-rate alternative and Ultra only for 1080p or 1440p users with 60 Hz displays.