Undisputed

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

The measured FPS data for Undisputed shows a steep, predictable decline as resolution climbs from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, but the shape of that curve reveals which component is doing the heavy lifting. At Low settings, the frame rate falls from 241 FPS at 1080p to 174 FPS at 1440p—a 27.8% drop—and then further to 110 FPS at 4K, which is 54.4% below the 1080p figure. That is a substantial loss, yet the absolute numbers remain high enough to suggest the GPU is still not fully saturated at 1080p in this preset.

Switching to High settings tells a different story: 144 FPS at 1080p drops to 104 FPS at 1440p (a 27.8% reduction) and then to 66 FPS at 4K (a 54.2% drop from 1080p). The percentage declines are nearly identical between Low and High presets, which implies the scaling is resolution-driven rather than settings-driven. The limiting factor here is clearly the GPU, as the frame rate penalty from adding pixels is consistent regardless of how much shading work is being asked of the card.

The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic scaling: 92 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p (27.2% lower), and 42 FPS at 4K (54.3% lower). Again, the drop pattern is uniform. What this tells us is that the Intel Core Ultra 5 225, with its 10 cores and 10 threads, is not the bottleneck at any resolution tested. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect the 1080p-to-1440p gap to shrink or disappear as the GPU becomes busier; instead, the consistent percentage losses indicate the RTX 5050 is the primary constraint across all settings.

The Medium preset at 4K shows a min FPS of 67 and a max of 91, with an average of 79. At 1440p Medium, the range is 107 to 144, averaging 125. The spread between min and max grows as resolution drops, which is typical of GPU-bound scenarios: at higher resolutions, the card is working near its limit so variance compresses; at lower resolutions, headroom allows spikes. The 4K Ultra result of 42 FPS is the only measured average below 60, marking the point where this combo ceases to be comfortably playable.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. Its 20 MB of shared L3 cache is split across the cores, and it supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. For a sports game like Undisputed, which typically relies on a few heavily utilized threads for physics and AI rather than scaling across many cores, the 10-core layout is more than sufficient.

Benchmark data places the Ultra 5 225 in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 36938. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F at 36945 (a 0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D at 37018 (−0.2%), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 at 37093 (−0.4%), and the Intel Core i9-12900T at 37112 (−0.5%). The differences are negligible—under 0.5% across the board—which means the Ultra 5 225 sits in a tightly packed performance tier. The single-thread score of 3655 in Cinebench R23 and 4412 in Passmark indicates strong per-core performance, which matters more for Undisputed's gameplay logic than raw multi-threaded throughput.

Given that the measured FPS drops are uniform across resolutions, the data strongly suggests the CPU is never the limiting factor in this pairing. At 1080p Low, the 241 FPS average is far beyond what any display typically refreshes, and even the 92 FPS Ultra result at 1080p shows the GPU is doing the work. The CPU's 10 threads are likely idle or lightly loaded during most frames, leaving headroom for background tasks or streaming. The 65 W TDP and 3 nm process node indicate an efficient chip that does not need exotic cooling, though the data does not speak to thermal behavior under sustained load.

The L3 cache of 20 MB is shared, and the L2 is 3 MB per core, which is generous for a mid-range desktop part. For a game like Undisputed, where boxer positions and punch physics update at high frequencies, cache hits reduce memory latency and can smooth frame pacing. The Passmark data compression score of 302811 and integer math score of 65345 suggest the CPU can handle game logic threads without causing hitches. In short, the Ultra 5 225 provides ample compute headroom, and the measured FPS deltas across settings are not attributable to CPU limitations.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB207 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The core runs at a base clock of 2317 MHz and boosts to 2572 MHz, with 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores provide ray tracing and AI acceleration, though Undisputed's measured results do not explicitly test those features.

The GPU's benchmark profile places it in the 66th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 21035. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL at 21153 (−0.6%), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M at 21237 (−1%), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT at 20713 (+1.6%), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile at 21379 (−1.6%). These deltas are small, but the 1.6% advantage over the RX 5600 XT is the largest gap in the group, suggesting the RTX 5050 is competitive with that older desktop card.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is the most likely constraint at higher settings. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS of 42 is below playable thresholds, and the combination of high resolution and high settings likely exceeds the memory bandwidth or capacity. The 320 GB/s bandwidth is modest for 4K workloads, and the 128-bit bus limits how much data can be moved per clock. The measured data shows that at 1080p, even Ultra settings achieve 92 FPS, which indicates the GPU can handle the shading work when the pixel count is lower. The steep drop to 42 FPS at 4K Ultra points to memory bandwidth saturation rather than raw compute limits, as the FP32 throughput of 13.17 TFLOPS should theoretically sustain more frames if memory kept up.

The pixel rate of 82.30 GPixel/s and texture rate of 205.8 GTexel/s are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K the fill rate requirements quadruple relative to 1080p. The 4K High average of 66 FPS shows the card is still viable if settings are moderated, but Ultra pushes it over the edge. The GPU's 130 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU are modest, and the dual-slot cooler with a single 8-pin connector suggests this is not a power-hungry card—yet the data shows it is the bottleneck in this system.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 1722 out of 2813 tested combos in Undisputed, placing it in the bottom half of the database. This ranking reflects all measured configurations, and the percentile position (approximately the 38.8th percentile, since 1722 divided by 2813 is about 0.612) indicates that most other CPU-GPU pairings achieve higher average frame rates in this game.

Given the CPU's 85th percentile standing and the GPU's 66th percentile, the combo rank of 1722 is heavily dragged down by the GPU. The Ultra 5 225 is a strong processor, but the RTX 5050 is only mid-pack, and in a game like Undisputed that is GPU-bound at higher resolutions, the combo's overall performance is capped by the graphics card. The nearest CPU rivals—all within 0.5% of the Ultra 5 225—would likely produce nearly identical results if paired with the same RTX 5050, since the CPU is not the limiting factor.

Comparing to other combos, the data does not list specific alternatives, but the rank suggests that pairing the Ultra 5 225 with a higher-tier GPU would move the combo significantly up the list. Conversely, pairing the RTX 5050 with a weaker CPU might drop the rank only marginally, because the GPU is the constraint. The 42 FPS at 4K Ultra is the worst measured result, and that single data point likely pulls the combo's average down relative to systems that can sustain 60+ FPS at that preset.

The ranking also implies that for 1080p and 1440p gaming, this combo is competitive—the 144 FPS at 1080p High and 104 FPS at 1440p High are excellent numbers—but the database ranking weights all resolutions equally, and the 4K Ultra failure hurts the overall position. Users targeting 1080p or 1440p would find this combo performing above its rank suggests, while 4K enthusiasts would be disappointed.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in Undisputed?

A: The measured data shows 1920x1080 delivers the highest frame rates, with 144 FPS at High and 241 FPS at Low, making it the smoothest experience. At 2560x1440, High still achieves 104 FPS, which is playable, while 3840x2160 High drops to 66 FPS.

Q: Can this combo handle 4K gaming in Undisputed?

A: At 4K High, the average FPS is 66, which is above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth play. However, at 4K Ultra, the average falls to 42 FPS, which is below that threshold. Medium at 4K averages 79 FPS, so 4K is possible with settings reduced.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 scores 36938 on average, essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F at 36945 (0% delta) and within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D, AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, and Intel Core i9-12900T. The differences are negligible.

Q: Is the GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The data indicates yes. The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are uniform across all settings (approximately 54% reduction), which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU's high single-thread score and 10-core layout provide ample headroom.

Q: What is the worst measured performance for this combo?

A: The lowest average FPS recorded is 42 at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings. This is the only measured preset that falls below 60 FPS average, making it the least playable configuration in the dataset.

Q: How does the GPU rank against its competitors?

A: The RTX 5050 scores 21035 on average, sitting in the 66th percentile. It is 1.6% faster than the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, but 1.6% slower than the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile, and within 1% of the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and HD 8970M.

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

At 1920x1080, the lowest settings yield the highest frame rates: Low averages 241 FPS, Medium averages 173 FPS (with a min of 147 and max of 200), High averages 144 FPS, and Ultra averages 92 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 149 FPS, which is a 61.8% reduction. The Medium preset shows the largest variance between min and max (53 FPS), indicating that scenes with more action can dip significantly.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain strong: Low averages 174 FPS, Medium averages 125 FPS (min 107, max 144), High averages 104 FPS, and Ultra averages 67 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 107 FPS, a 61.5% drop—nearly identical to the 1080p percentage. This consistency again points to GPU-bound scaling.

At 3840x2160, the performance falls off sharply: Low averages 110 FPS, Medium averages 79 FPS (min 67, max 91), High averages 66 FPS, and Ultra averages 42 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra gap is 68 FPS, a 61.8% reduction. The Medium preset at 4K has a min of 67 FPS, which is exactly the same as the High preset's average, suggesting that the GPU's memory subsystem is nearing its limit around the 66-67 FPS mark.

The data shows that across all three resolutions, the percentage drop from Low to Ultra is remarkably consistent (61.5-61.8%), which is a strong indicator that the GPU's compute and memory resources scale linearly with pixel count. The 1080p Medium min of 147 FPS and 1440p Medium min of 107 FPS are the only min/max data provided, but they show that even at lower resolutions, frame times can spike during intense moments. The 4K Medium max of 91 FPS is higher than the 4K High average of 66 FPS, which suggests that High settings add enough shading work to reduce peak performance significantly.

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

For the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, the Medium preset at 2560x1440 stands out as the sweet spot. It averages 125 FPS with a minimum of 107 FPS, ensuring that even the most demanding scenes stay well above 60 FPS. Compared to High at the same resolution (104 FPS average), Medium offers a 20% higher frame rate while presumably sacrificing some visual fidelity—though the exact visual differences are not quantified in the data.

At 1920x1080, High is the recommended choice for users with 144 Hz displays, as it averages exactly 144 FPS. This matches common high-refresh monitors, and the 241 FPS Low result is unnecessary for most displays. For users with 240 Hz displays, Low at 241 FPS is the only preset that fully saturates that refresh rate, but Medium at 173 FPS is close enough for most. Ultra at 1080p (92 FPS) is playable but not ideal for competitive play, as the frame rate drops below 100.

For 4K gaming, Medium is the best option, averaging 79 FPS with a minimum of 67 FPS. This keeps gameplay above the 60 FPS threshold in most scenes. High at 4K (66 FPS) is marginally playable but risks dropping below 60 FPS in heavy moments, while Ultra at 42 FPS is not recommended for smooth play. The data suggests that Medium provides the most consistent experience at 4K, as its min FPS of 67 is higher than High's average of 66, indicating better frame pacing.

If the goal is maximum visual quality regardless of frame rate, Ultra at 1440p (67 FPS) is the highest preset that remains above 60 FPS. This provides a significant graphical upgrade over Medium at the same resolution while still being playable. The 4K Ultra preset is the only measured configuration that averages below 60 FPS, so it should be avoided for serious gameplay. Overall, the recommendation is Medium at 1440p for the best experience, with High at 1080p as an alternative for high-refresh displays.