Undisputed

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 pairing delivers a remarkably smooth experience in Undisputed, with benchmark data showing this combo consistently hitting high frame rates across most settings and resolutions. The data indicates that this setup is particularly well-suited for high-refresh-rate gaming at 1080p and 1440p, though 4K Ultra settings will require compromises to maintain playable performance.

FAQ

*Q: What is the overall ranking of this CPU and GPU combo in Undisputed?*

A: This pairing ranks 1722 out of 2813 tested combinations, placing it in the upper-middle tier of all tested systems for this game.

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

A: Yes, but with limitations. At 4K High settings, the average FPS is 66, which is playable. However, at 4K Ultra, the average drops to 42 FPS, which is below the smoothness most players expect.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve 144 FPS?

A: At 1920x1080 with High settings, the average FPS is exactly 144, making this the sweet spot for high-refresh-rate monitors. Even at Medium settings, the average is 173 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235 scores 46062 on average, which is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030) and 0.1% behind the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098). It also leads the AMD EPYC 4364P by 0.2% and the AMD EPYC 7303 by 0.2%.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 5050 averages 21035, which is 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21153) and 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20713). It also trails the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile by 1.6%.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: The difference is substantial. At Low settings, the average FPS is 174, while at Ultra settings, it drops to 67 FPS. This represents a 107 FPS difference between the lowest and highest quality presets.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a 5 nm process node. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2317 MHz and boosts up to 2572 MHz, with memory running at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). These specifications place the RTX 5050 in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it outperforms roughly two-thirds of the market.

In Undisputed, the GPU's memory capacity and bandwidth play a crucial role in maintaining consistent frame rates. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for this sports title at most settings, as evidenced by the measured FPS data. The game's demands scale predictably with resolution and quality presets, and the RTX 5050's performance characteristics are clearly visible in the results. At 1080p, the GPU has ample headroom, pushing average FPS to 241 at Low settings. This suggests the game is not heavily VRAM-limited at this resolution, allowing the GPU to focus on raw rendering throughput.

The RTX 5050's 2560 shading units and 80 texture mapping units provide solid rasterization performance for a game like Undisputed, which relies more on traditional rendering than advanced ray tracing effects. The GPU's 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores are present but likely underutilized in this title, given the genre. The data supports this interpretation: the frame rate scaling between Low, Medium, High, and Ultra settings shows a clear pattern of diminishing returns at higher quality levels, which is typical for a GPU that is not bottlenecked by its memory subsystem.

At 4K, the GPU's 320.0 GB/s bandwidth becomes a more significant factor. The 66 FPS average at High settings shows the GPU can handle the resolution, but the drop to 42 FPS at Ultra indicates that the memory bandwidth and 8 GB capacity are stressed by the combination of high resolution and maximum quality effects. The performance gap between 4K Medium (79 FPS) and 4K High (66 FPS) is 13 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 24 FPS, showing that the Ultra preset imposes a disproportionately heavy load on this GPU.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates at a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boosts up to 5.00 GHz, with a 65W TDP. The CPU features 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

This processor's benchmark scores show a strong balance between single-threaded and multi-threaded performance. In Cinebench R23, it scores 2085 in single-core and 14769 in multi-core tests. The PassMark single-thread score of 4516 places it well above average, while the multi-thread score of 37816 demonstrates solid parallel processing capability. The CPU's overall percentile ranking of 89 means it outperforms 89% of all CPUs in the benchmark database.

For Undisputed, a sports simulation game, the CPU's single-thread performance is particularly relevant. The game's physics and AI calculations typically rely on fewer threads, and the Core Ultra 5 235's 5.00 GHz boost clock provides the responsiveness needed for consistent frame pacing. The measured FPS data shows no obvious CPU bottleneck at 1080p, where the GPU achieves 241 FPS at Low settings. This suggests the CPU can feed frames faster than the RTX 5050 can render them at lower quality settings.

The CPU's 14 threads are distributed across the Arrow Lake architecture, which uses a hybrid design. This configuration handles the background tasks and game logic efficiently, preventing stutters that could arise from thread contention. The 24 MB of shared L3 cache helps keep frequently accessed game data close to the cores, reducing latency. The 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is adequate for this title, as the GPU's frame rates scale smoothly across resolutions without signs of CPU-induced stalls.

The Core Ultra 5 235's nearest rival data shows it is nearly identical in performance to the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (0.1% ahead) and the Intel Core i9-13900HX (0.1% behind). This indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor in this combo; the GPU's capabilities dictate the frame rates at higher resolutions and settings.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 ranks 1722 out of 2813 tested combos in Undisputed, placing it in the 61st percentile of all tested systems. This ranking reflects a balanced pairing where the GPU is the primary determinant of gaming performance, while the CPU provides sufficient headroom to avoid bottlenecks.

The ranking position suggests that this combo sits in the middle of the pack for this game. The data shows that the CPU's benchmark scores are competitive with much more expensive processors, but the GPU's 66th percentile ranking anchors the overall performance. In practical terms, this means the combo will deliver smooth gameplay at 1080p and 1440p, but will struggle with 4K Ultra settings where the GPU's limitations become apparent.

Looking at the measured FPS data, the combo's ranking is justified. At 1080p, it achieves playable-to-excellent frame rates across all settings, from 92 FPS at Ultra to 241 FPS at Low. At 1440p, the performance remains strong, with 174 FPS at Low and 67 FPS at Ultra. The 4K results show a clear drop-off, with only the Low preset (110 FPS) and Medium preset (79 FPS) providing smooth experiences, while High (66 FPS) is borderline and Ultra (42 FPS) is not recommended for competitive play.

The combo's rank of 1722 out of 2813 indicates that there are many faster systems, but also many slower ones. The data suggests that this pairing is well-matched for its intended market segment, offering a balance of CPU and GPU performance that maximizes frame rates in CPU-light, GPU-bound scenarios like Undisputed. The CPU's 89th percentile ranking ensures it can keep up with the GPU's output, preventing the common issue of a weak processor limiting a strong graphics card.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend heavily on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For players with 1080p monitors, the High preset at 144 FPS provides the best balance of visual quality and smoothness, hitting the exact refresh rate of most gaming monitors. The Medium preset at 173 FPS offers higher frame rates with a slight visual compromise, while the Ultra preset at 92 FPS remains playable but sacrifices the high-refresh-rate experience.

At 1440p, the High preset at 104 FPS is the recommended choice for a smooth experience on 100Hz or 120Hz monitors. The Medium preset at 125 FPS is also viable for those prioritizing frame rate over visual fidelity. The Low preset at 174 FPS will appeal to competitive players seeking maximum responsiveness, but the visual downgrade is substantial. The Ultra preset at 67 FPS is playable but does not take full advantage of the hardware's potential.

For 4K gaming, the Medium preset at 79 FPS is the best option, providing a good balance between visual quality and playability. The Low preset at 110 FPS offers a smoother experience but with noticeably reduced detail. The High preset at 66 FPS is playable for casual sessions but may feel less consistent. The Ultra preset at 42 FPS should be avoided for any serious play, as it falls below the 60 FPS threshold that most players consider minimum for a smooth experience.

The data shows a clear pattern: the Medium preset consistently delivers the best frame rate-to-quality ratio across all resolutions. At 1080p, it offers 173 FPS, at 1440p it provides 125 FPS, and at 4K it maintains 79 FPS. This preset balances the GPU's workload, avoiding the heavy effects that tank performance at Ultra while providing better visuals than Low.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest performance. The Low preset achieves an average of 241 FPS, which is exceptionally high and indicates the game is not demanding at this resolution. The Medium preset averages 173 FPS with a minimum of 147 FPS and maximum of 200 FPS, providing a tight frame time distribution that will feel smooth on any monitor. The High preset averages exactly 144 FPS, matching the refresh rate of most gaming displays. The Ultra preset averages 92 FPS, which is playable but shows a significant drop from High, indicating that the Ultra preset's additional effects exact a heavy toll on the GPU.

At 2560x1440, performance remains strong but the gap between presets widens. The Low preset averages 174 FPS, nearly matching the 1080p result, showing that the GPU has enough headroom to handle the increased pixel count at lower quality. The Medium preset averages 125 FPS with a minimum of 107 FPS and maximum of 144 FPS, providing a solid experience for 120Hz monitors. The High preset averages 104 FPS, which is smooth on 100Hz displays but leaves some headroom unused on 144Hz monitors. The Ultra preset averages 67 FPS, a significant drop that makes it less desirable for fast-paced gameplay.

At 3840x2160, the GPU's limits become clear. The Low preset averages 110 FPS, which is surprisingly playable at 4K and suggests the game's low-quality settings reduce the rendering load substantially. The Medium preset averages 79 FPS with a minimum of 67 FPS and maximum of 91 FPS, providing a playable experience with some frame rate variability. The High preset averages 66 FPS, which is borderline smooth but may feel inconsistent during intense gameplay moments. The Ultra preset averages 42 FPS, which is below the threshold for comfortable play and should only be used for screenshots or non-competitive sessions.

The frame rate scaling across resolutions follows a predictable pattern. The Low preset shows the smallest drop when moving from 1080p to 1440p (241 to 174 FPS, a 28% decrease) and then to 4K (174 to 110 FPS, a 37% decrease). The Ultra preset shows the largest drops, falling from 92 FPS at 1080p to 67 FPS at 1440p (27% decrease) and then to 42 FPS at 4K (37% decrease). This indicates that the Ultra preset's effects are more resolution-sensitive, likely due to increased memory pressure at higher pixel counts.