Rust

How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 ranks 3437 out of 3723 tested combinations in Rust. This places the combo in the 8th percentile of all tested systems, meaning roughly 92% of recorded configurations deliver higher frame rates. The ranking reflects a substantial imbalance: the CPU is a strong modern desktop processor, while the GPU sits in the 5th percentile of all tested graphics cards, a very low position. The data shows that this pairing is heavily constrained by the graphics subsystem, and the overall rank is consistent with what one would expect from a system where the GPU is the dominant bottleneck in every tested scenario.

The CPU itself, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F, ranks in the 83rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32750. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14600T (average score 32707, 0.1% behind), the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (average score 32697, 0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (average score 32812, 0.2% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (average score 32662, 0.3% behind). These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, indicating that the 7400F delivers compute performance essentially identical to those four processors. The GPU, however, has an average benchmark score of only 1184, with its nearest rivals being the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (average score 1186, 0.2% ahead), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (average score 1190, 0.5% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (average score 1192, 0.7% ahead), and the AMD FirePro M2000 (average score 1168, 1.4% behind). Those are all legacy or low-end parts, which puts the Arc B370's performance into sharp perspective.

CPU and GPU Roles

Benchmark results indicate that the Intel Arc B370 is the limiting factor at every resolution and preset in Rust. The CPU's compute potential, as measured by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21765 and single-core score of 3072, is more than sufficient for modern gaming workloads, but the GPU's raw throughput (6.144 TFLOPS FP32, 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate) is very modest. The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases, frame rates drop steeply, which is a classic sign of GPU-bound performance.

At 1920x1080, the combo achieves 69 FPS on Low, 46 FPS on Medium, 39 FPS on High, and 30 FPS on Ultra. Moving to 2560x1440, the same presets yield 48, 32, 27, and 20 FPS respectively. At 3840x2160, the numbers fall to 28, 19, 16, and 12 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is roughly a 30% drop in average FPS across all presets, and from 1440p to 4K another 40% drop. This consistent degradation with resolution strongly suggests that the GPU is saturated even at the lowest settings. The CPU's role is secondary; it has enough headroom to feed the GPU at 1080p Low, but the GPU cannot push beyond its limits regardless of the CPU's capability.

Interestingly, the gap between Low and Ultra at each resolution is relatively narrow in absolute terms. At 1080p, Low nets 69 FPS and Ultra nets 30 FPS, a difference of 39 FPS. At 1440p, the spread is 28 FPS (48 to 20), and at 4K it is 16 FPS (28 to 12). This indicates that the GPU's limited shading units (1280) and texture units (40) are the primary constraint; raising settings increases load but the GPU is already near its ceiling. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads, with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, are not the bottleneck in any recorded measurement.

Best Settings per Resolution

For a 60 FPS target, the data shows that this combo can only reach that threshold at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. The recorded average FPS at 1080p Low is 69, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 46 FPS, below the threshold, so Low is the only playable preset at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best result is Low at 48 FPS average, followed by Medium at 32, High at 27, and Ultra at 20. At 3840x2160, the situation is worse: Low yields 28 FPS, Medium 19, High 16, and Ultra 12. The verdict data confirms this: for 2560x1440 and 3840x2160, the playable settings list is empty, meaning no preset achieves the 60 FPS target. For 1920x1080, the best settings are Low with an average FPS of 69.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Based on the nearest rivals in the database, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F's compute performance is effectively matched by four other processors. The Intel Core i5-14600T is 0.1% slower, the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H is 0.2% slower, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H is 0.2% faster, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 is 0.3% slower. In practical terms, swapping the 7400F for any of these would yield nearly identical CPU-bound behavior in Rust, meaning the GPU would remain the limiting factor and frame rates would stay within a fraction of a percent.

For the Intel Arc B370, the nearest GPU rivals are all older or lower-tier parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 is 0.2% faster, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 is 0.5% faster, the AMD Radeon HD 7650M is 0.7% faster, and the AMD FirePro M2000 is 1.4% slower. These deltas are tiny, so any of these GPUs would produce nearly identical FPS numbers in Rust. The data suggests that the Arc B370 behaves like a very low-end graphics solution, and users with any of these alternative GPUs would see essentially the same performance profile: playable only at 1080p Low, with sub-60 FPS at all other settings and resolutions.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Rust at 60 FPS on a 1440p monitor?

A: No. At 2560x1440, the highest average FPS recorded is 48 on Low settings. Medium averages 32 FPS, High 27 FPS, and Ultra 20 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1080p?

A: The only preset that clears 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 69 FPS. Medium drops to 46 FPS, High to 39 FPS, and Ultra to 30 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F has an average benchmark score of 32750. The Intel Core i5-14600T scores 32707 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H scores 32697 (0.2% lower), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H scores 32812 (0.2% higher), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 scores 32662 (0.3% lower). Performance is effectively identical.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% lower). These are all within 1.5% of the Arc B370.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in Rust?

A: The GPU is the bottleneck at every resolution and preset. Evidence includes the steep FPS drops as resolution increases (from 69 FPS at 1080p Low to 28 FPS at 4K Low) and the fact that even the lowest settings cannot push frame rates above 48 FPS at 1440p, despite the CPU's high compute scores.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 12 on Ultra to 28 on Low. Medium averages 19 FPS, and High averages 16 FPS. No preset comes close to the 60 FPS threshold.

The Verdict

The recorded data answers clearly: this PC can run Rust, but only at 1920x1080 with the Low preset, where it achieves an average of 69 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 2560x1440 and 3840x2160, no settings preset reaches 60 FPS, so the game is not playable at those resolutions according to the database's threshold. The best settings at 1080p are Low, and the verdict by resolution confirms that 1920x1080 is the only resolution with any playable settings.

The system will deliver playable frame rates only under the most modest configuration. Users who require higher visual fidelity or higher resolutions will need a more powerful GPU, as the CPU is not the limiting factor. The Arc B370's performance, as measured by its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 and its 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs, simply cannot sustain 60 FPS in Rust beyond 1080p Low.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the recorded average FPS values are as follows: Low settings produce 69 FPS, Medium produces 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 and a maximum of 53, High produces 39 FPS, and Ultra produces 30 FPS. The Medium preset is the only one with recorded min/max data, showing a 14 FPS range between the lowest and highest frame rates.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS values are: Low at 48, Medium at 32 with a minimum of 27 and a maximum of 37, High at 27, and Ultra at 20. The Medium preset again shows a 10 FPS range, from 27 to 37.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS values are: Low at 28, Medium at 19 with a minimum of 16 and a maximum of 22, High at 16, and Ultra at 12. The Medium preset has a 6 FPS range, from 16 to 22.

The data shows a consistent pattern: each step up in resolution reduces average FPS by roughly 30-40%, and each step up in settings reduces FPS by 20-30% within a given resolution. The minimum FPS values, where recorded, stay within a narrow band of the average, indicating relatively stable frame pacing rather than occasional severe drops. For example, at 1080p Medium, the minimum of 39 FPS is 85% of the average of 46 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 27 FPS is 84% of the average of 32 FPS. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 16 FPS is 84% of the average of 19 FPS. This consistency suggests the GPU's performance is uniformly limited rather than subject to spikes or stutters.