Call of Duty: Warzone
A popular competitive game featuring high-intensity action and tactical gameplay.
Actual FPS may vary based on RAM speed, background processes, and other system factors
Performance Report
At 1080p, frame rates range from 34 to 73 FPS depending on quality settings. At 1440p, frame rates range from 31 to 68 FPS. At 4K, frame rates range from 19 to 32 FPS.
The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is 5% above the recommended GPU (Unknown GPU) for Call of Duty: Warzone. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D is 400% above the recommended CPU (Unknown CPU).
The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design sets the FPS ceiling at all 1080p settings, all 1440p settings, all 4k settings, while the Ryzen 7 9800X3D still has additional frame-generation headroom.
Approximated average price on current market:
Combo price: $565.38. At 1080p Ultra, this combo delivers 34 FPS, equivalent to 0.06 FPS per dollar.
| Resolution | Low | Medium | High | Ultra |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1080p | 0.129 fps/$ | 0.099 fps/$ | 0.076 fps/$ | 0.060 fps/$ |
| 1440p | 0.120 fps/$ | 0.092 fps/$ | 0.071 fps/$ | 0.055 fps/$ |
| 4k | 0.057 fps/$ | 0.050 fps/$ | 0.039 fps/$ | 0.034 fps/$ |
* Table values represent FPS per Dollar (higher is better)
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
This chart answers a simple question: which upgrade is more likely to increase FPS first? In this case, the answer is clearly the GPU.
The largest gap appears at 1080p Ultra, where the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design reaches about 34 FPS, while the Ryzen 7 9800X3D still has headroom up to roughly 195 FPS.
That means the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is hitting its performance ceiling first, leaving a 83% gap versus the Ryzen 7 9800X3D's available headroom in the most unbalanced scenario. Across all tested settings, this pairing is GPU-limited in 12 out of 12 cases, with 0 CPU-limited and 0 balanced results.
Overall, this is a clearly GPU-bound combination in this game.
The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is consistently the limiting part in this game, so upgrading the GPU is more likely to deliver a larger FPS gain than upgrading the CPU.
This chart shows which upgrade is more likely to unlock more FPS in each tested setting. The lower line represents the part that reaches its limit first. When the CPU and GPU lines stay close together, the system is more balanced. When the gap widens, one component is more clearly holding the other back. Hover any setting to inspect it.
The lower line is the current limiter. The closer the two lines are, the more balanced the CPU and GPU are for this game.
Each line represents an estimated FPS ceiling for one component, rather than live usage alone.
To estimate the CPU ceiling, we pair the Ryzen 7 9800X3D with GeForce RTX 5090, our current GPU anchor. To estimate the GPU ceiling, we pair the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design with Ryzen 9 9950X3D, our current CPU anchor.
The lower line indicates the current limiter, since that component reaches its FPS ceiling first. In most scenarios, that is also the part most likely to deliver the bigger performance uplift if upgraded first.
The percentage shown represents the gap between the two ceilings. In practical terms, it shows how much of the stronger component's potential is left unused because the weaker one becomes the bottleneck first.
See how your processor and graphics card compare against the game official minimum and recommended system specs. The placement of your hardware is calculated using relative synthetic performance scores to help you gauge overall playability.
Your CPU is 400% above and your GPU is 5% above the recommended specs. High/Ultra at 1080p. Lower settings for higher resolutions.
+400%vsrecommended
+5%vsrecommended
+1232%vsminimum
+531%vsminimum
The Ryzen 7 9800X3D and GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design will struggle to run Call of Duty: Warzone at smooth framerates. At 1080p Ultra, you can expect around 34 FPS which is classified as "playable". Consider lowering settings or upgrading your hardware.
This CPU + GPU combo costs approximately $565.38 ($465.38 CPU + $100 GPU). Since the GPU is the main limiting factor, investing in a stronger GPU will improve your framerates and overall value. For example, upgrading to the Radeon RX 5600 for around $229 (Rank #347 for value) could deliver noticeably better performance.
For Call of Duty: Warzone, upgrading the GPU would usually give you the most noticeable improvement. In the Performance Limiter Analysis, the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is the side that most often caps the frame rate, while the Ryzen 7 9800X3D still has additional headroom in the tested presets. The main bottleneck appears on the GPU side. The largest gap shows up at 1080p Ultra, where the GPU reaches about 34 FPS while the CPU still has headroom up to roughly 195 FPS. Across all tested settings, the distribution is 12/12 GPU-limited, 0/12 CPU-limited, and 0/12 balanced.
Call of Duty: Warzone does not currently support Frame Generation technologies like DLSS 3 or FSR 3. Your performance is based entirely on native rendering. If the game adds support in a future update, newer GPUs will benefit the most.
Call of Duty: Warzone requires at minimum a Unknown CPU (CPU) and Unknown GPU (GPU) with 8GB RAM and Unknown storage. For the recommended experience, you need a Unknown CPU and Unknown GPU with 16GB RAM. Your Ryzen 7 9800X3D and GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design both exceed the recommended specs, so you're well-positioned for a great experience.
These Call of Duty: Warzone FPS results are not arbitrary numbers. They come from calculations informed by thousands of real gaming benchmarks, and the typical accuracy range is around 10% to 15%. That makes them far more useful than generic FPS calculators that simply invent values without a benchmark foundation. Actual in-game performance can still vary with drivers, updates, RAM configuration, cooling, and the exact scene being rendered.
Performance estimates are based on synthetic benchmarks and hardware capabilities.
Results may vary based on drivers, OS, and background processes.
