Undisputed

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 pairing delivers a remarkably consistent 1080p and 1440p experience in Undisputed, though 4K Ultra demands compromises. The data indicates a combo that is clearly CPU-capable and GPU-bound at higher resolutions, making it a practical choice for high-refresh-rate boxing at mainstream resolutions.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, backed by a 30 MB shared L3 cache and a dual-channel DDR5 memory interface providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. This is not a chip that will bottleneck a mid-range GPU in a sports title; the benchmark data supports that conclusion.

Looking at the measured FPS, the CPU’s headroom becomes obvious. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo produces an average of 271 FPS. That is a massive number, and it indicates the processor is feeding the GPU more than enough data to work with. Even at High settings at 1080p, the average stays at 162 FPS. These figures suggest that in Undisputed, the Core Ultra 7 265K is rarely the limiting factor; the frame rate scales primarily with GPU load as resolution increases.

The processor’s synthetic benchmarks reinforce its position. In Cinebench R23, it scores 35850 multi-core and 2020 single-core. The single-core score is particularly relevant for game physics and AI calculations, which are often single-threaded. The Geekbench multicore score of 23085 and single-core score of 2713 further indicate strong per-thread performance. The PassMark single-thread score of 4928 confirms that this chip has the IPC and clock speed to handle the logical calculations in a sports simulation without dragging down frame times.

When compared to its nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database, the Core Ultra 7 265K sits just ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F by 1.3% in average benchmark score, while trailing the Intel Xeon 6511P by a negligible 0.2%. The Intel Core i7-14700KF is 1% behind this chip. These deltas are tiny, meaning that in a game like Undisputed, swapping between these CPUs would likely produce imperceptible differences in FPS. The 265K’s 20 cores and 20 threads are more than sufficient for a sports game that does not typically scale beyond a handful of threads, so the extra core count is future-proofing rather than a necessity for this title.

The TDP of 125 W and the use of DDR5 memory mean the platform is modern, but the benchmark results do not show any thermal throttling or memory bandwidth constraints that would limit performance in this specific game. The measured FPS at 4K Low (124 average) versus 1080p Low (271 average) shows a drop that is almost entirely attributable to the GPU, not the CPU. The processor is doing its job; the GPU is the variable.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is the other half of this equation. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 272.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU clock runs at a base of 1830 MHz and boosts to 2460 MHz. With 3072 shading units and 24 RT cores, it is a capable 1080p-class card, and the measured data shows it holds up well at 1440p too.

The 8 GB VRAM is the first thing to scrutinize. In Undisputed, the data shows that at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 48. This is a clear sign that the GPU is running out of resources, either memory bandwidth or raw compute. The 128-bit memory bus is narrow for 4K, and the 8 GB frame buffer is likely being stressed by high-resolution textures. At 4K Medium, the average jumps to 89 FPS, which is a huge improvement, suggesting that dropping from Ultra to Medium significantly reduces the memory and compute pressure.

The RTX 4060’s performance tier is evident from its benchmark scores. It holds a PassMark G3D score of 19545 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2302. In the GPU database, it ranks at the 61st percentile, placing it above the AMD Radeon 780M integrated graphics by 0.3% but below the AMD Radeon HD 7790 by 0.2%. These are close calls, indicating that the 4060 is right at the edge of a performance class boundary. For a sports game, this is generally more than enough, but the 4K Ultra result shows its limits.

The GPU’s role in the measured FPS is clear when comparing resolutions. At 1920x1080, the card can push 271 FPS on Low and 195 FPS on Medium. At 2560x1440, those numbers drop to 196 FPS and 141 FPS respectively. The trend is linear with pixel count, which is typical for a rasterization-heavy title. The RTX 4060 is not a 4K card, and the data confirms this: even at 4K Low, the average FPS is 124, which is playable but not high-refresh-rate territory. The 4K Ultra average of 48 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold that most competitive players would consider acceptable.

The GPU’s 115 W TDP and dual-slot cooler mean it runs cool and quiet, which is a practical benefit for a system that might be used for long gaming sessions. The PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is not a bottleneck in this game, as the FPS numbers at lower resolutions are high enough to prove that the data transfer rate is sufficient. The 8 GB VRAM is the critical spec here; it is the reason why 4K Ultra fails to hold 60 FPS.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

*Q: Can this combo run Undisputed at 4K with playable frame rates?*

A: At 4K with Medium settings, the combo averages 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS, which is playable. However, at 4K Ultra, the average drops to 48 FPS, which is not ideal for a smooth experience. For 4K, stick to Medium or lower settings.

Q: What is the best resolution for high-refresh-rate monitors?

A: At 1920x1080 with High settings, the average FPS is 162. With Medium settings at 1080p, it reaches 195 FPS. If you have a 144Hz monitor, 1080p High is a solid choice, while 2560x1440 High still delivers 117 FPS, which is close to the 120Hz mark.

Q: Is the 8 GB VRAM on the RTX 4060 a problem for this game?

A: The data suggests it is a limiting factor only at the highest settings. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 48, indicating the GPU is struggling with memory or compute demands. At 1440p and 1080p, the VRAM is sufficient, as shown by the high average FPS at those resolutions.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 265K compare to its direct rivals in synthetic tests?

A: The CPU is 1.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and 1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-14700KF in average benchmark score. It trails the Intel Xeon 6511P by 0.2%. These differences are negligible for gaming.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset produces an average of 196 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 75 FPS. That is a 121 FPS difference, showing that the Ultra preset is much more demanding on the GPU.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this pairing?

A: At 1080p Low, the combo hits 271 FPS, which is very high. The drop to 124 FPS at 4K Low indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. The CPU has enough headroom to support higher frame rates if the GPU could keep up.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 ranks 2014 out of 3718 tested combos in Undisputed. This places it in the 54th percentile of all systems tested, meaning it outperforms more than half of the configurations but is far from the top. This rank is a reflection of the GPU’s mid-range status rather than the CPU’s capability; the 265K is a high-end processor that is being paired with a mainstream graphics card.

Looking at the rank, it is important to interpret what this means for a builder. A rank of 2014 out of 3718 suggests that this combo is squarely in the middle of the pack. Systems with higher-end GPUs like the RTX 4070 or RX 7800 XT would rank higher, while those with older or weaker cards would rank lower. The data indicates that the CPU is not the reason for this mid-pack ranking; the RTX 4060’s 61st percentile GPU score is the limiting factor.

The measured FPS in the game tells a more nuanced story than the raw rank. At 1080p, this combo performs like a top-tier system, with average FPS well above 144 in most settings. At 1440p, it remains competitive, with High settings averaging 117 FPS. The rank of 2014 likely reflects the average performance across all resolutions and settings, and the 4K Ultra result of 48 FPS drags the overall standing down. If the benchmark were limited to 1080p, this combo would likely rank much higher.

For context, the CPU’s nearest rivals in the benchmark database, such as the Intel Core i7-14700KF and AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, would likely produce similar in-game results when paired with the same GPU. The 1% to 1.3% differences in CPU scores are within the margin of error for game performance. The GPU’s nearest rivals, like the AMD Radeon 780M, are integrated graphics, which would perform far worse in a discrete GPU scenario. This shows that the RTX 4060 is a distinct step above integrated solutions, but the combo’s rank is held back by the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM and 128-bit bus at higher resolutions.

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

At 1920x1080, the combo shows its best performance. On Low settings, the average FPS is 271, which is extremely high and indicates a CPU-bound scenario. Medium settings produce an average of 195 FPS, with a minimum of 166 and a maximum of 225 FPS. High settings yield an average of 162 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to an average of 104 FPS. The step from High to Ultra is a 58 FPS loss, which is substantial and suggests that Ultra settings enable effects that heavily tax the GPU.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates scale down as expected. Low settings average 196 FPS, which is still very high and shows the CPU is not a bottleneck. Medium settings average 141 FPS, with a minimum of 120 and a maximum of 162 FPS. High settings drop to 117 FPS, and Ultra settings average only 75 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 121 FPS, showing that the Ultra preset is nearly 2.6 times more demanding than Low.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. Low settings average 124 FPS, which is playable but not high-refresh. Medium settings average 89 FPS, with a minimum of 76 and a maximum of 103 FPS. High settings drop to 74 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 48 FPS. The difference between 1440p and 4K at the same settings is significant: for example, High settings at 1440p (117 FPS) versus High at 4K (74 FPS) is a 43 FPS drop. This is a 37% reduction in performance, which is typical for a 4K workload on a mid-range GPU.

The minimum FPS data is only available for Medium settings across all resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 166 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it is 120 FPS; and at 4K Medium, it is 76 FPS. These minimums are all above 60 FPS, indicating that the combo maintains smooth frame pacing even under load, without severe stutters. The absence of minimum FPS data for other settings suggests that the benchmark tool only captured this metric for Medium, but the averages for Low and High are high enough to imply stable performance.

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

For a 1080p monitor, the data strongly favors High settings. The average of 162 FPS is well above the 144Hz refresh rate of most gaming monitors, and it is a significant improvement over Ultra’s 104 FPS. The visual difference between High and Ultra in a sports game is often minor, such as shadow quality or ambient occlusion, but the 58 FPS cost is not worth it. Medium settings at 195 FPS are only useful if you have a 240Hz monitor and want to maximize frame rate, but High offers a better balance of visual fidelity and speed.

For 1440p users, High settings are again the sweet spot. The average of 117 FPS is close to the 120Hz mark, and it provides a crisp image without the performance penalty of Ultra. Ultra at 1440p averages 75 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for competitive play. Medium settings at 141 FPS are a good option if you prefer higher frame rates over visual quality, but High is recommended for the best balance. Low settings at 1440p (196 FPS) are unnecessary unless you are chasing maximum refresh rates on a 165Hz or 240Hz panel.

At 4K, the recommendation is to use Medium settings. The average of 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS is smooth and playable, and it is a massive improvement over Ultra’s 48 FPS. High settings at 4K average 74 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS, but the margin is thinner. Medium offers a comfortable buffer above the 60 FPS threshold, making it the safest choice for a consistent experience. Low settings at 4K (124 FPS) are viable if you prioritize frame rate, but Medium provides a much better visual presentation for only a 35 FPS cost.

In summary, the data suggests that High settings at 1080p and 1440p, and Medium settings at 4K, provide the best combination of visual quality and performance. Avoid Ultra settings at all resolutions unless you have a VRR display and can tolerate frame rates below 60 FPS at 4K, or below 100 FPS at 1440p. The RTX 4060 is capable, but it is not an Ultra-settings card for this title at higher resolutions.