Undisputed

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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus sits at the top of Intel's Core Ultra Series 2 lineup, built on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture with a 3 nm process from TSMC. This processor packs 24 cores and 24 threads, a configuration that emphasizes parallel throughput over simultaneous multithreading. The base clock of 3.70 GHz and boost clock of 5.80 GHz provide the single-thread headroom that sports titles often leverage for physics, AI opponent logic, and frame pacing. With 36 MB of shared L3 cache and a dual-channel DDR5 memory interface delivering 115.2 GB/s, the CPU has ample bandwidth for feeding the GPU in fast-paced combat scenarios.

In synthetic workloads, the chip demonstrates balanced strength. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 51,731 points and single-core score of 7,303 points indicate that both heavily threaded and lightly threaded tasks are handled with authority. PassMark's multithread score of 60,860 and single-thread score of 4,823 reinforce this pattern. The data shows that this processor ranks in the 96th percentile against all CPUs, placing it firmly in the high-end desktop segment. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, posts an average benchmark score of 83,807, just 0.2% behind the 290K Plus's 84,003 average. The AMD EPYC 7F72 sits slightly ahead at 85,072 with a -1.3% delta, while the EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9135 trail by 1.1% and 1.2% respectively.

For Undisputed, the CPU's role becomes clear when examining the measured frame rates. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves 542 FPS average. This is a resolution and settings combination where the CPU often becomes the limiting factor, and the 290K Plus's high boost clock and robust single-core performance keep the frame pipeline saturated. The 24 cores also ensure that background tasks, streaming, or recording software do not starve the game of processing resources. While boxing games are not typically considered CPU-bound at high resolutions, the data shows that at 1080p Low, the processor is doing substantial work to push frame rates past the 500 FPS mark.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 achieves a rank of 86 out of 2,813 tested combos in Undisputed. This places the pairing in the top 3.1% of all configurations evaluated by the benchmark database. The rank reflects the aggregate performance across all resolutions and settings tested, weighted toward the measured average frame rates. Given the sheer number of possible CPU-GPU pairings, a rank of 86 indicates that this duo outperforms the overwhelming majority of alternatives, though it does not claim the top spot.

The ranking makes sense when considering the individual components' percentile positions. The CPU sits in the 96th percentile among all processors, while the GPU lands in the 92nd percentile among all graphics cards. When two top-decile components are paired, the resulting combo rank tends to be high, but not automatically number one. The gap between the combo's rank (86th) and the theoretical ceiling suggests that some other pairings—perhaps those with even higher GPU percentiles or more favorable CPU-GPU balance for this specific title—edge ahead. The RTX 5090's nearest rivals, including the Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB with a 0.3% delta and the RX 6850M XT with a 1.1% delta, indicate that the GPU's raw compute is strong but not uniquely dominant in this database's scoring.

Undisputed's sports genre places specific demands on hardware. Boxing animations, crowd rendering, and arena lighting all contribute to the frame rate profile. The combo's rank of 86 suggests that the RTX 5090's 32 GB of VRAM and the CPU's 24 threads combine to handle these workloads without major bottlenecks, but the title may not scale perfectly with the extreme hardware on offer. The data indicates diminishing returns at the very top of the performance stack—going from a 95th percentile combo to a 99th percentile combo may yield only marginal FPS gains in this particular game.

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

Examining the measured frame rates across resolutions reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling at higher pixel counts. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo produces 323 FPS average. Moving to 2560x1440 at High settings drops the average to 233 FPS, a reduction of 27.9%. Jumping to 3840x2160 at High settings further reduces the average to 148 FPS, which is 54.2% below the 1080p figure. These proportional drops align with the pixel count increases: 1440p has 1.78 times the pixels of 1080p, and 4K has 4 times the pixels. The frame rate does not scale linearly with pixel count, but the steady decline indicates that the GPU is taking on progressively more rendering work.

The Low settings row tells an even more interesting story. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 542 FPS average. At 1440p Low, it drops to 392 FPS, a 27.7% reduction. At 4K Low, it falls to 248 FPS, a 54.2% drop from 1080p. The consistency of these percentage drops across settings—27.9% and 54.2% at High versus 27.7% and 54.2% at Low—strongly suggests that the GPU is the primary limiter at all resolutions tested. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would stay relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU's workload remains constant regardless of pixel count. Instead, the frame rates scale down almost exactly with the pixel load, a hallmark of GPU-bound performance.

The Medium settings rows provide additional confirmation. At 4K Medium, the average FPS is 178 with a minimum of 152 and maximum of 205. At 1440p Medium, the average rises to 282 with a minimum of 240 and maximum of 324. At 1080p Medium, the average reaches 390 with a minimum of 332 and maximum of 449. The min-to-max spread grows wider at lower resolutions, which is typical when the CPU has more headroom to deliver frames in bursts. The data shows that the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is never the limiting factor in this pairing; even at 1080p Low with 542 FPS average, the processor keeps up without issue, and the GPU takes over as the performance ceiling.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to hit 240 FPS in Undisputed?

A: The measured data shows that at 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the combo achieves 282 FPS average, which comfortably exceeds 240 FPS. At 4K with Low settings, the average drops to 248 FPS, still above 240 but with less headroom. For a guaranteed 240 FPS experience, 1440p Medium or 1080p High (323 FPS average) are the safest choices.

Q: How does the CPU's single-core performance compare to its multi-core performance in the context of this game?

A: The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7,303 and multicore score of 51,731 show a ratio of roughly 1:7. In Undisputed, the single-core strength matters more for frame pacing, as evidenced by the 542 FPS average at 1080p Low. The multi-core capacity becomes relevant when other applications run concurrently, but the game itself does not appear to scale with all 24 threads.

Q: Is the RTX 5090's 32 GB VRAM necessary for this game?

A: The data does not include VRAM usage measurements, but the frame rates at 4K Ultra (95 FPS average) suggest that memory capacity is not the limiting factor at any tested setting. The GPU's percentile rank of 92 and its benchmark scores, such as the PassMark G3D score of 39,650, indicate that raw compute power drives the results more than memory size in this title.

Q: Why does the combo rank 86th if both components are in the top percentile?

A: The combo rank of 86 out of 2,813 reflects the specific performance of this pairing in Undisputed, not the individual component percentiles. Other combos may achieve higher frame rates due to more favorable CPU-GPU balance for this game's engine. The CPU's 96th percentile and GPU's 92nd percentile are based on general benchmark averages across many workloads, while the game-specific ranking measures only Undisputed performance.

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

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 392 FPS average, while Ultra settings produce 150 FPS average. This represents a 61.7% reduction in frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset. The Medium setting at 282 FPS and High at 233 FPS fill out the middle of the spectrum.

Q: Does the CPU hold back the GPU at any resolution in this game?

A: The resolution scaling data shows consistent percentage drops in frame rate as pixel count increases, which indicates the GPU is the limiting component at all tested resolutions. Even at 1080p Low with 542 FPS, the CPU's boost clock of 5.80 GHz and single-core performance keep pace, so no CPU bottleneck is evident in the measured results.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB202 chip, brings formidable specifications to this pairing. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2017 MHz and boosts up to 2407 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). The 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus provides a staggering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth, ensuring that texture streaming and geometry data never starve the rendering pipeline. With 21,760 shading units, 680 texture mapping units, and 176 raster output units, the card is equipped for both traditional rasterization and the ray tracing demands that modern sports titles increasingly incorporate.

The GPU's benchmark results show strong but not unprecedented performance. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18,355 and PassMark G3D score of 39,650 place it in the 92nd percentile among all GPUs. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 334,370 and Vulkan score of 376,728 demonstrate compute capability that extends beyond gaming into content creation workloads. The nearest rivals, including the Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB with a 0.3% delta and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X with a -1.4% delta, highlight that the RTX 5090's overall benchmark average of 79,842 is competitive but not categorically dominant.

In Undisputed specifically, the GPU's role becomes apparent through the measured frame rates. At 4K Ultra, the combo produces 95 FPS average, which is the most demanding configuration tested. The jump from Ultra to High at 4K—from 95 to 148 FPS—represents a 55.8% improvement, showing that the Ultra preset imposes significant rendering overhead. The GPU's 32 GB VRAM is unlikely to be a constraint in a boxing game, where asset sizes are moderate compared to open-world titles. The 1.79 TB/s bandwidth ensures that even at 4K with high-resolution textures, the memory subsystem delivers data faster than the shading units can consume it. The launch MSRP for this GPU is 1,999 USD.

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

The measured data provides a clear picture of how each settings preset affects performance. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset delivers 208 FPS average, which is more than sufficient for smooth gameplay on high-refresh-rate monitors. The High preset pushes this to 323 FPS, and Medium reaches 390 FPS. The Low preset achieves 542 FPS, which exceeds the refresh rate of virtually all gaming monitors. At this resolution, even the Ultra preset maintains a frame rate well above the 144 Hz threshold that most competitive players target, making the visual quality upgrade from High to Ultra worthwhile.

At 2560x1440, the picture changes slightly. The Ultra preset drops to 150 FPS average, which still clears 144 Hz but with less margin. The High preset at 233 FPS and Medium at 282 FPS provide comfortable buffers. Given that the drop from Medium to Ultra at 1440p costs 132 FPS (from 282 to 150), players with 144 Hz or 165 Hz monitors might prefer High settings to maintain headroom for demanding scenes. The Medium preset's minimum FPS of 240 at 1440p ensures that even the most chaotic moments in the ring stay fluid.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset averages 95 FPS, which is below the 120 Hz threshold some players prefer. The High preset at 148 FPS and Medium at 178 FPS offer better experiences for 4K displays with higher refresh rates. The Low preset at 248 FPS proves that even at 4K, this combo can push well beyond standard 60 Hz displays. The data suggests that for 4K gaming, High settings strike the optimal balance—the 148 FPS average provides smooth motion while retaining most visual fidelity. The Medium preset, with its measured minimum of 152 FPS and maximum of 205 FPS at 4K, also delivers a rock-solid experience for those who prioritize frame rate consistency over the highest quality textures.

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

1920x1080: The lowest resolution tested shows the full extent of this combo's capabilities. At Low settings, the average FPS reaches 542, delivering frame rates that push far beyond the refresh limits of even the fastest gaming monitors. Medium settings produce 390 FPS average, with a minimum of 332 and maximum of 449, indicating tight frame pacing under load. High settings yield 323 FPS average, still exceptionally smooth for competitive play. Ultra settings reduce the average to 208 FPS, which remains well above the 144 Hz standard and provides the highest visual quality at this resolution.

2560x1440: The jump to 1440p brings expected performance reductions across all presets. Low settings average 392 FPS, a 27.7% drop from the 1080p figure. Medium settings average 282 FPS, with a minimum of 240 and maximum of 324, keeping every frame above the 240 Hz threshold that esports monitors offer. High settings average 233 FPS, which still allows for 144 Hz and 165 Hz displays to run at their full refresh rate. Ultra settings average 150 FPS, dropping just below the 144 Hz line in some scenes but remaining playable for most users.

3840x2160: At 4K, the combo demonstrates its high-end credentials. Low settings average 248 FPS, proving that even at the highest pixel count, this pairing can drive ultra-high refresh rates when visual fidelity is lowered. Medium settings average 178 FPS, with a minimum of 152 and maximum of 205, delivering a smooth experience on 144 Hz 4K displays. High settings average 148 FPS, which sits right at the 144 Hz boundary and offers a strong balance of quality and speed. Ultra settings average 95 FPS, prioritizing visual fidelity over frame rate, and will satisfy players who prefer maximum quality on 60 Hz or 120 Hz 4K screens. The progression from 1080p to 4K shows consistent GPU-bound scaling, with each resolution step reducing frame rates proportionally to the increase in pixel count.