Rust

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, this combination is fully capable of running Rust at maximum visual quality. The recorded data shows the Ultra preset delivers an average of 65 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playability threshold. The High preset runs at 86 FPS, Medium at 102 FPS, and Low at 152 FPS, so every preset is comfortably playable at this resolution. For users who prioritize smoothness over fidelity, dropping to Medium provides a substantial frame rate increase of 37 FPS over Ultra.

Moving to 2560x1440, the picture changes slightly. The Ultra preset drops to 45 FPS, which is below the playable threshold. High settings average 59 FPS, just one frame shy of 60. The most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, which averages 70 FPS with a recorded minimum of 60 FPS and maximum of 81 FPS. Low settings at this resolution produce 104 FPS, giving plenty of headroom for competitive play. The verdict data confirms Medium as the best settings choice for 1440p.

At 3840x2160, 4K resolution, the options narrow considerably. High settings only achieve 35 FPS, Medium averages 41 FPS, and Ultra drops to 27 FPS. The only preset that maintains playable frame rates is Low, which averages 62 FPS. That is the single playable setting at this resolution, and it just barely clears the 60 FPS line. The verdictByResolution data specifically lists Low as the best setting for 4K, with an average FPS of 62.

The scaling pattern across resolutions is clear: each step down in resolution unlocks one or two additional preset tiers. At 1080p, all four presets are playable. At 1440p, the top two presets (High and Ultra) fail to hold 60 FPS, while the lower two succeed. At 4K, only the lowest preset is viable. This is a typical pattern for a mid-range GPU pairing, where the GPU becomes the limiting factor as pixel count increases.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals how the balance of CPU and GPU load shifts across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the CPU has the most influence on frame rates. The gap between Low (152 FPS) and Ultra (65 FPS) is 87 FPS, a 134% difference. This wide spread suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU is feeding frames quickly, and the GPU is struggling to keep up with higher quality settings. The Ryzen 7 9700F, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is not the limiting factor here; the RTX 2070 SUPER is doing most of the work.

At 2560x1440, the GPU load increases. The spread between Low (104 FPS) and Ultra (45 FPS) is 59 FPS, a 131% difference. The absolute frame rates are lower than at 1080p, which shows that the GPU is now processing more pixels. The CPU is still capable of pushing beyond 104 FPS at Low settings, but the GPU cannot sustain higher quality presets. The Medium preset's minimum of 60 FPS suggests that the system is balanced at this setting, with neither component fully maxed out.

At 3840x2160, the GPU dominates the performance equation. The gap between Low (62 FPS) and Ultra (27 FPS) is 35 FPS, a 130% difference. Every preset at 4K is GPU-bound, as the RTX 2070 SUPER's 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth become the primary constraints. The CPU's influence almost disappears at this resolution, as the GPU cannot process frames fast enough to let the CPU stretch its legs.

The scaling between presets is consistent across resolutions: Low to Medium gains roughly 8-10 FPS, Medium to High gains 9-11 FPS, and High to Ultra loses 20-25 FPS. This pattern holds at every resolution, indicating that Ultra settings impose a heavy rendering cost that the GPU cannot absorb at higher resolutions. The CPU's role is most visible at 1080p Low, where 152 FPS demonstrates that the Ryzen 7 9700F can deliver high frame rates when the GPU has less work.

For this game and this hardware pairing, the GPU is the bottleneck at all three resolutions. The CPU is never the limiting factor, even at 1080p Low where the frame rate is highest. The data shows that the RTX 2070 SUPER's 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs is the primary constraint, while the CPU's 94th percentile ranking ensures it is not holding the system back.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Rust at 1080p with maximum settings?

A: Yes. The Ultra preset at 1920x1080 averages 65 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playability threshold. The High preset averages 86 FPS, Medium at 102 FPS, and Low at 152 FPS, so all four presets are playable.

Q: What is the best setting for 1440p?

A: Medium is the best setting for 2560x1440. It averages 70 FPS with a minimum of 60 FPS and a maximum of 81 FPS. The High preset averages 59 FPS, which is just below the threshold, and Ultra drops to 45 FPS.

Q: Is 4K gaming possible on this hardware?

A: Only at Low settings. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 62 FPS, which clears the threshold. Medium averages 41 FPS, High averages 35 FPS, and Ultra averages 27 FPS, all below the 60 FPS line.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F scores 69,996 points in the database average. It is 0.2% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, and 0.2% slower than the Intel Core i7-14700KF. It also leads the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X by 0.7% and the Intel Core i7-14700K by 0.9%.

Q: How does the GPU perform relative to other graphics cards?

A: The RTX 2070 SUPER has a 65th percentile ranking among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 20,282, which is 1% lower than the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M, 1.2% lower than the RTX 3070 Mobile, and 1.3% lower than the Intel Arc B570.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU matter more for Rust?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor across all resolutions. The CPU scores in the 94th percentile, while the GPU is in the 65th percentile. Frame rates scale heavily with resolution, confirming that the RTX 2070 SUPER is the bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

Out of all 3,723 tested combinations in the database, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks 2,160th for Rust. That places it in the lower-middle portion of the field, meaning roughly 42% of tested combos are slower, but the other 58% are faster. The rank is weighed down by the GPU, which is at the 65th percentile, while the CPU is at the 94th percentile.

The ranking reflects the imbalance between the two components. The Ryzen 7 9700F is a strong processor, as its PassMark multi-thread score of 36,470 and single-thread score of 4,691 show. The RTX 2070 SUPER, however, is a last-generation card with a PassMark G3D score of 18,169. In a game like Rust, which is not heavily CPU-bound, the GPU's age limits the combo's overall standing. The rank of 2,160 indicates that this is a mid-pack performer, capable of 1080p and 1440p gaming but not competitive with high-end combos.

The gap between the CPU and GPU percentile is stark. The CPU is in the top 6% of all processors, while the GPU is only in the top 35%. This mismatch means the system is unbalanced for Rust, with a powerful processor waiting on a less capable graphics card. The 4K result, where only Low settings are playable, is the clearest evidence of this imbalance.

Similar Performance Alternatives

If the Ryzen 7 9700F and RTX 2070 SUPER were unavailable, several nearby components would deliver similar behavior. On the CPU side, the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has an average score of 69,875, which is a 0.2% difference from the 9700F. The Intel Core i7-14700KF scores 70,163, a 0.2% difference in the other direction. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X scores 69,515, a 0.7% difference, and the Intel Core i7-14700K scores 69,355, a 0.9% difference. These four CPUs are within 1% of the 9700F, so swapping to any of them would not change the game's performance in a noticeable way.

On the GPU side, the differences are also small. The NVIDIA Quadro M4000M has an average score of 20,480, which is 1% lower than the RTX 2070 SUPER's 20,282. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20,534, a 1.2% difference. The Intel Arc B570 scores 20,556, a 1.3% difference, and the Intel Arc A750 scores 20,582, a 1.5% difference. All four cards are within 2% of each other, meaning they would all produce similar frame rates in Rust.

The practical result is that a system with any of these CPUs paired with any of these GPUs would land in the same ballpark of performance. The rank of 2,160 would shift only slightly, and the playable settings at each resolution would remain the same. A user swapping from the 9700F to a 7950X would see the same 65 FPS at 1080p Ultra, and swapping from a 2070 SUPER to an Arc A750 would also keep the same frame rate.

The Verdict

The database shows that this PC can run Rust at 1080p and 1440p with playable frame rates, and at 4K only with the lowest settings. At 1920x1080, all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with Ultra averaging 65 FPS. That is the best experience this combo can offer, with full visual quality at a comfortable frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the system can handle two presets: Low at 104 FPS and Medium at 70 FPS. The High preset at 59 FPS is just under the threshold, and Ultra at 45 FPS is not playable. For the best balance of visuals and smoothness, Medium is the recommended choice, providing a 10 FPS margin over the minimum.

At 3840x2160, only Low settings are viable, averaging 62 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall short of 60 FPS, with 41, 35, and 27 FPS respectively. This resolution is not recommended for this hardware unless the user is willing to accept significant visual compromises.

The verdict is clear: this is a 1080p machine for Rust, with the ability to step up to 1440p at Medium settings. The CPU is more than capable, ranking in the 94th percentile, but the GPU's 65th percentile ranking limits the overall experience. Users with a 1080p monitor can run the game at max settings. Those with a 1440p monitor should use Medium. 4K is only playable at Low. The data shows a good match for mainstream gaming, not for high-resolution enthusiasts.