Undisputed

FAQ

Q: What is the combo rank of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 in Undisputed?

A: This combination ranks 1633 out of 2813 tested combos in the game, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the performance distribution.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 scores an average of 64,640 across all benchmarks. Its closest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, scores 64,823 (0.3% higher), while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64,438 (0.3% lower), making the differences negligible in real-world terms.

Q: What is the GPU’s performance percentile relative to all tested graphics cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 sits at the 59th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 16,014. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, scores 16,129 (0.7% higher).

Q: At which resolution and settings does the combo achieve its highest average FPS?

A: The highest recorded average is 252 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The lowest average is 44 FPS at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: Does the game show a larger performance drop from 1080p to 4K at High or Low settings?

A: At High settings, the average FPS drops from 150 at 1080p to 69 at 4K, a 54% reduction. At Low settings, the drop is from 252 to 115 FPS, a 54.4% reduction — nearly identical, indicating consistent scaling behavior.

Q: What is the memory configuration of the GPU, and how does it relate to the game’s demands?

A: The Radeon RX 9060 features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. Given the measurable FPS drops at 4K Ultra, this capacity appears sufficient for the tested presets, as the game still delivers playable averages at lower settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 brings 20 cores and 20 threads to the Undisputed benchmark, operating from a 2.40 GHz base clock up to a 5.30 GHz boost. This Arrow Lake-S architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC, includes 30 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode. For a sports title like Undisputed, the single-threaded performance often dictates responsiveness in simulation and physics calculations.

Benchmark results show the CPU’s single-core strength is solid but not exceptional: a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5960 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4689 place it in the 93rd percentile against all CPUs. In multi-threaded workloads, the R23 multi-core score reaches 42,216, which indicates ample headroom for background tasks while gaming. The 20-thread configuration ensures that any game engine threads are fully serviced without contention.

When compared to its nearest rivals, the Ultra 7 265’s average score of 64,640 is statistically tied with the AMD EPYC 4464P (64,823, -0.3%) and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64,438, +0.3%). The AMD EPYC 7343 (64,202, +0.7%) and AMD EPYC 9124 (65,104, -0.7%) also fall within a narrow band of less than 1.5% total spread. This suggests that for Undisputed, the CPU’s contribution to the measured FPS is unlikely to be a differentiating factor among these processors.

The Passmark physics score of 2923 indicates that the CPU handles rigid-body and collision calculations efficiently, which is relevant for a boxing game where character interactions are physics-driven. Data compression (522,983) and encryption (40,456) scores are high, but these are less gaming-relevant. The integer math score of 134,773 and floating-point math score of 172,776 show a balanced ALU/FPU design, which helps maintain consistent frame pacing in simulation-heavy scenes.

The 65 W TDP and active production status mean this CPU is a current-generation part, and the 20 lanes of PCIe Gen 5 from the CPU provide ample bandwidth for the GPU. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU is present but not used in this discrete GPU configuration. For Undisputed, the CPU role is primarily to maintain a stable frame delivery floor, and the data indicates no bottleneck at 1080p where the GPU is clearly the limiting factor.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is built on the Navi 44 chip with RDNA 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. With 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores, the GPU delivers 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 compute.

In the benchmark database, the RX 9060’s average score of 16,014 places it at the 59th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, scores 16,129 (0.7% higher), while the AMD Radeon R9 370X scores 15,862 (1% lower) and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 scores 15,852 (1% lower). These sub-1% deltas mean the RX 9060 effectively trades blows with these cards, though the R9 370X is a much older architecture.

For Undisputed specifically, the measured FPS across resolution and settings presets reveals a GPU that is capable at 1080p but struggles at 4K Ultra. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3322 and Passmark G3D score of 17,631 indicate mid-range DirectX 12 performance. The DirectX 11 score of 182 and DirectX 12 score of 44 on Passmark are low, but those tests are not directly representative of modern game engines.

The 8 GB VRAM capacity is a critical consideration at 4K. At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 44, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. At High settings, the average rises to 69 FPS, suggesting that texture quality and shading complexity are the primary VRAM consumers. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K the memory subsystem becomes a limiting factor, evidenced by the steep scaling curve from Medium to Ultra at that resolution.

The GPU’s PCIe 5.0 x16 interface ensures no bandwidth bottleneck from the CPU side. The 132 W TDP and single 8-pin power connector indicate a power-efficient design that does not require exotic cooling. For Undisputed, the RX 9060 delivers playable performance at 1080p and 1440p across all presets, but 4K Ultra is only viable for players who accept sub-60 FPS averages.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 9060 ranks 1633 out of 2813 tested combos in Undisputed. This places the pairing in the 58th percentile of all combinations tested, which is consistent with the GPU’s individual 59th percentile ranking. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking indicates that the processor is not the limiting factor in this pairing.

The rank distribution suggests that most of the 2813 combos tested include either faster GPUs or more balanced pairings. The 1633 rank means there are 1180 combos that perform worse, but also 1180 that perform better. For a sports title like Undisputed, where frame rates above 60 FPS are generally sufficient, this combo is adequate for all but the most demanding 4K Ultra scenarios.

The delta between the CPU and GPU percentiles (93 vs 59) highlights a potential imbalance: the CPU is far more capable than the GPU. In practice, this means the RX 9060 will be the bottleneck in nearly all scenarios, which is reflected in the measured FPS data. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 252 FPS, which is likely CPU-limited or engine-limited, but at 4K Ultra, the GPU drops to 44 FPS, clearly GPU-limited.

Compared to other combos that pair high-end CPUs with mid-range GPUs, this rank is expected. The data shows that the combo sits in the lower half of the upper-middle tier, which aligns with the GPU’s 59th percentile. Players seeking higher ranks would need to pair the Ultra 7 265 with a GPU in the 80th percentile or above, but for 1080p and 1440p gaming, this combo delivers a smooth experience.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS across resolutions reveals how the combo scales with pixel count and settings. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average is 252 FPS. At 2560x1440 Low, it drops to 182 FPS — a 27.8% reduction. At 3840x2160 Low, it falls to 115 FPS — a 36.8% further reduction from 1440p, totaling a 54.4% drop from 1080p to 4K.

At High settings, the scaling is similar but with lower absolute values. From 150 FPS at 1080p, it drops to 108 FPS at 1440p (28% reduction) and then to 69 FPS at 4K (36.1% reduction from 1440p), for a 54% total drop from 1080p to 4K. This consistent scaling pattern across Low and High suggests that the game’s rendering workload scales linearly with pixel count, and the GPU is the limiting component at all resolutions.

The Medium settings preset shows a slightly different pattern. From 181 FPS at 1080p to 131 FPS at 1440p (27.6% reduction) and then to 83 FPS at 4K (36.6% reduction from 1440p), the total drop is 54.1%. The Ultra preset shows the steepest absolute decline: from 97 FPS at 1080p to 70 FPS at 1440p (27.8% reduction) and then to 44 FPS at 4K (37.1% reduction from 1440p), totaling a 54.6% drop.

The near-identical percentage drops across all presets indicate that resolution scaling is uniform, with no single preset causing a disproportionate penalty. This behavior is typical of a GPU-bound scenario where fill rate and memory bandwidth are the primary constraints. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth and 8 GB VRAM are adequate for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the GPU’s 64 ROPs and 128-bit memory bus become limiting factors, as evidenced by the 44 FPS Ultra result.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers the following average FPS: Low 252, Medium 181, High 150, Ultra 97. The Medium preset also reports a min FPS of 154 and max of 208, indicating a stable frame delivery with no major dips. The 55 FPS gap between Medium and High, and the 53 FPS gap between High and Ultra, show consistent scaling across presets.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low 182, Medium 131, High 108, Ultra 70. The Medium preset shows a min of 111 and max of 151, which is a 40 FPS range, slightly tighter than at 1080p. The gap between Medium and High is 23 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 38 FPS, with Ultra showing a larger penalty relative to High at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the averages are: Low 115, Medium 83, High 69, Ultra 44. The Medium preset reports a min of 70 and max of 95, which is a 25 FPS range. The gap between Medium and High is 14 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 25 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 44 FPS is the only scenario where the average falls below 60 FPS, making it the least playable configuration.

The data shows that at every resolution, the step from High to Ultra incurs a larger FPS penalty than from Medium to High. At 1080p, Medium to High costs 31 FPS, while High to Ultra costs 53 FPS. At 1440p, the costs are 23 and 38 FPS respectively. At 4K, they are 14 and 25 FPS. This suggests that Ultra settings introduce effects that are disproportionately expensive relative to the visual fidelity gained.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal preset depends on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, all presets deliver playable averages, with Ultra at 97 FPS providing a smooth experience for players who prioritize visual quality. The Medium preset at 181 FPS offers headroom for high-refresh-rate displays, and its min FPS of 154 ensures consistent performance without dips.

At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset at 70 FPS is borderline for 60 Hz displays but may cause stutter on 144 Hz monitors. The High preset at 108 FPS is the recommended choice for 1440p, as it balances visual fidelity with a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 131 FPS is ideal for competitive play where higher frame rates are preferred over graphical detail.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset at 44 FPS is not recommended for most players, as it falls below the standard 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 69 FPS is the best option for 4K, offering a playable experience with moderate visual detail. The Medium preset at 83 FPS provides additional headroom for those who prefer smoother motion, while the Low preset at 115 FPS is suitable for players who prioritize frame rate above all else.

For the best overall experience, the High preset at 1440p (108 FPS) or 4K (69 FPS) offers the most balanced combination of visual quality and performance. The data indicates that Ultra settings provide diminishing returns across all resolutions, with the largest FPS penalty occurring at 4K. Players with 1080p displays can safely use Ultra at 97 FPS, but those with 1440p or 4K displays should consider High as the practical ceiling for this combo.