Undisputed

Undisputed, a sports title from 2023, proves remarkably forgiving on high-end hardware. The data for the Intel Core i9-14900K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 combination shows that even at 4K Ultra, the average frame rate remains well above playable thresholds, but the optimal settings depend heavily on your target refresh rate and resolution. This pairing is so potent that the primary challenge is not achieving high frame rates, but rather tailoring the graphics presets to match your display's capabilities without wasting performance.

Settings Recommendations

The measured results indicate that the Medium preset is the most balanced choice across all three tested resolutions, as it is the only preset that provides both an average and a minimum frame rate for every resolution. At 1080p, Medium delivers an average of 357 FPS with a minimum of 304 FPS, while at 1440p it maintains an average of 258 FPS and a minimum of 219 FPS. Even at the demanding 4K resolution, Medium sustains a robust 163 FPS average with a minimum of 139 FPS. This consistency suggests that the Medium preset is well-optimized for this hardware, avoiding the steep performance penalties seen at Ultra while offering a substantial visual upgrade over Low.

For competitive play on high-refresh-rate 1440p or 1080p monitors, the Low preset is the clear choice. The data shows staggering performance at these settings: 497 FPS at 1080p and 359 FPS at 1440p. This is over 90% faster than the High preset at 1440p, which achieves 214 FPS, and it provides the maximum possible frame rate to minimize input latency. The frame rates are so high that the CPU may become the limiting factor, but the sheer headroom ensures that even the most demanding scenes will not cause noticeable dips.

The High preset serves as a middle ground for those wanting better visuals without the extreme cost of Ultra. It delivers 296 FPS at 1080p, 214 FPS at 1440p, and a solid 135 FPS at 4K. The 1440p High result is particularly noteworthy, as it is the only 1440p setting other than Low and Medium that exceeds 200 FPS, making it viable for 144Hz and 165Hz displays. However, the jump from Medium to High is not always linear, with the 4K performance dropping from 163 FPS to 135 FPS, a 17% reduction.

The Ultra preset is the least efficient choice. It severely cripples frame rates, dropping the 4K average to just 87 FPS, which is only 64% of the High preset's 135 FPS. While this is still playable on a 60Hz display, the performance cost is immense. At 1080p, Ultra produces 190 FPS, which is 47% slower than the High preset's 296 FPS. For a sports game, the visual fidelity difference between High and Ultra is rarely worth such a dramatic loss in fluidity. The data strongly suggests that Ultra should be avoided unless you have a 4K 60Hz display and prioritize maximum visual quality above all else.

FAQ

Q: What is the best preset for a 4K 60Hz display?

A: The High preset is the most suitable option, as it delivers an average of 135 FPS at 3840x2160. This is more than double the 60Hz refresh rate, providing ample headroom to prevent frame drops. The Ultra preset also works, at 87 FPS, but it is less than two-thirds the speed of High, making the visual upgrade seem disproportionately expensive.

Q: How much faster is the Low preset compared to Ultra at 1440p?

A: The data shows that Low achieves 359 FPS at 2560x1440, while Ultra only manages 137 FPS. This means the Low preset is approximately 162% faster than Ultra. This massive difference highlights how the Ultra preset is heavily unoptimized for this hardware, likely due to excessive post-processing or shadow effects.

Q: Is the frame rate stable on the Medium preset?

A: Yes, the Medium preset is the only one that provides a complete minimum frame rate for all resolutions. At 1080p, the minimum is 304 FPS against a 357 FPS average; at 1440p, the minimum is 219 FPS against a 258 FPS average; and at 4K, the minimum is 139 FPS against a 163 FPS average. These figures show a consistent and narrow gap between average and minimum, indicating excellent frame pacing.

Q: Can this combo achieve 240 FPS at 1440p?

A: Yes, but only on the Low preset, which averages 359 FPS. The Medium preset falls short of the 240 FPS target with an average of 258 FPS, though its minimum of 219 FPS means it would occasionally drop below that threshold. The High and Ultra presets, at 214 FPS and 137 FPS respectively, cannot consistently hit 240 FPS.

Q: How does the 1080p performance compare to 4K performance?

A: The scaling is not linear. At the Low preset, 1080p yields 497 FPS, while 4K yields 227 FPS, a drop of 54%. At the High preset, 1080p yields 296 FPS, while 4K yields 135 FPS, a drop of 54%. At the Ultra preset, the reduction is steeper, with 1080p at 190 FPS and 4K at 87 FPS, a 54% decrease. This consistent percentage suggests that the GPU is the primary scaling factor at these settings.

Q: What is the refresh rate that the Ultra preset can support at 1080p?

A: The Ultra preset at 1920x1080 produces an average of 190 FPS. This makes it suitable for a 165Hz monitor, as the average is above the refresh rate, but it is not suitable for a 240Hz monitor, as the average falls below that threshold. The minimum frame rate for this preset is not listed, but the average suggests it would be a borderline experience on 240Hz panels.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is the dominant component in this pairing for Undisputed, as the game's frame rates are largely dictated by the graphics preset and resolution. The GPU's 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus provides a bandwidth of 960.0 GB/s, which is more than sufficient for a sports title at any of the tested settings. The 4K results, in particular, show a clear GPU bottleneck: the 87 FPS at Ultra versus 227 FPS at Low demonstrates how the GPU's shading units (10752) and texture units (336) are being taxed by the higher quality effects.

The GPU's boost clock of 2617 MHz and base clock of 2295 MHz are key to its performance. The data does not show a CPU bottleneck at any resolution, as even the lowest GPU-bound result (4K Ultra at 87 FPS) is far below the CPU's capability. The RTX 5080's 56.28 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is clearly being utilized, as the frame rates scale down predictably as the resolution and settings increase. The 5nm process node from TSMC allows these high clocks to be sustained, preventing thermal throttling that could otherwise reduce performance in longer sessions.

The card's 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores are present, but Undisputed does not appear to be a title that leverages ray tracing or DLSS heavily, as the frame rates are raw rasterization numbers. The performance difference between the High preset (135 FPS at 4K) and Ultra preset (87 FPS at 4K) points to a 55% performance cost for the Ultra preset's additional features, which are likely related to shadow quality, anti-aliasing, and ambient occlusion. The GPU's 112 ROPs are sufficient to handle the pixel throughput at 4K, as evidenced by the 135 FPS at High, but the Ultra preset's additional pixel work brings it down to 87 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of the Intel Core i9-14900K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 ranks 217th out of 3718 tested combos in Undisputed. This places it in the top 5.8% of all configurations, which is an excellent result. The CPU itself is a high performer, scoring 39399.5 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and it sits at the 95th percentile against all CPUs. The GPU also performs well, holding the 87th percentile against all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 56083.

The rank of 217 out of 3718 is a strong indicator of the combo's overall capability, but it is not the absolute top tier. This is because the game is not heavily CPU-bound, so a stronger GPU would likely yield a higher rank. The data shows that the RTX 5080 is the limiting factor, as the CPU's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i9-14900KF (with a delta of -0.3% in average score), would perform nearly identically. The GPU's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE, has an average score that is 2.2% higher, suggesting that a combo with that GPU could potentially rank slightly better.

The combo's rank is also affected by the fact that many other tested combos may feature higher-end GPUs like the RTX 5090 or RTX 4090, which would push them higher in the rankings. However, for a mid-to-high-end setup, this rank is very respectable. The 217th position means that the vast majority of tested systems are slower, and the performance data confirms that this combo can handle even the most demanding preset at 4K with playable frame rates. The only combos that would rank higher are those with more powerful GPUs, as the CPU is not the bottleneck.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is significant but consistent, indicating a clear GPU bottleneck. At the Low preset, the frame rate drops from 497 FPS at 1080p to 227 FPS at 4K, a 54% reduction. At the High preset, the frame rate drops from 296 FPS to 135 FPS, which is also a 54% reduction. The Medium preset shows a similar pattern, with 357 FPS at 1080p dropping to 163 FPS at 4K, a 54% decrease. The Ultra preset follows suit, with 190 FPS at 1080p dropping to 87 FPS at 4K, a 54% drop as well.

This consistent 54% reduction across all presets is a strong indicator that the GPU is the primary limiting component. The CPU, with its 24 cores and 32 threads, is not being saturated at any resolution, as the frame rates are all well above what a CPU-bound scenario would look like. The 4K resolution quadruples the pixel count from 1080p, but the frame rate does not drop by 75%, which it would if the scaling were purely linear. Instead, the 54% drop suggests that the GPU has enough memory bandwidth and processing power to mitigate some of the overhead, but the raw pixel fill rate is still the bottleneck.

The scaling from 1440p to 4K is less severe but still notable. At the Medium preset, the frame rate drops from 258 FPS to 163 FPS, a 37% reduction. At the Low preset, it drops from 359 FPS to 227 FPS, a 37% reduction. This shows that the GPU is still the limiting factor, but the transition from 1440p to 4K is less punishing than from 1080p to 4K. The data suggests that if you are aiming for a stable 144 FPS at 4K, the High preset is the best option, as it averages 135 FPS, which is close to that target. The Ultra preset is only suitable for 60Hz displays, as its 87 FPS average is not sufficient for higher refresh rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the performance is exceptionally high across all settings. The Low preset produces the maximum average frame rate of 497 FPS, which is the highest of any configuration tested. The Medium preset follows with an average of 357 FPS, and its minimum of 304 FPS is the highest minimum recorded in the dataset. The High preset achieves 296 FPS, which is still a very strong result for competitive play. The Ultra preset is the slowest at 1080p, with an average of 190 FPS, but this is still more than enough for a 144Hz display.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates remain very high. The Low preset delivers 359 FPS, which is a 28% performance loss compared to 1080p. The Medium preset averages 258 FPS, with a minimum of 219 FPS, which is a 28% loss. The High preset achieves 214 FPS, a 28% loss from its 1080p counterpart. The Ultra preset produces 137 FPS, a 28% loss. This consistent 28% reduction across all settings at 1440p further confirms the GPU-bound nature of the game, as the scaling is uniform.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates are lower but still very playable. The Low preset gives 227 FPS, which is a 54% loss from 1080p. The Medium preset provides 163 FPS, with a minimum of 139 FPS, which is a 54% loss. The High preset achieves 135 FPS, a 54% loss. The Ultra preset is the only one that dips below 100 FPS, with an average of 87 FPS, a 54% loss from 1080p. This 54% loss at 4K is a significant drop, but it is a predictable consequence of the pixel count increase, and the Medium preset at 163 FPS remains the best option for a smooth 4K experience on a high-refresh-rate monitor.