Rust

The Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 delivers a strong performance profile for Rust, landing in the top percentile of tested combinations. The database places this combo at rank 770 out of 3723 tested configurations, meaning it outperforms roughly 79% of all recorded CPU-GPU pairings in this specific game. This is a notable result given the age gap between the two components, and it suggests that Rust’s engine scales effectively with the raw GPU power of the RTX 5080 while remaining tolerant of the older Comet Lake processor. The data indicates a system that is firmly above the playable threshold across most settings, though the most demanding 4K preset does push it below the 60 FPS line.

How This Combo Ranks

The recorded rank of 770 out of 3723 combos places this pairing in the upper fifth of all tested systems for Rust. This is a strong showing, but it is not at the very top, which implies that there are still meaningful gains to be found from pairing the RTX 5080 with a more modern CPU. The CPU itself sits at the 68th percentile among all processors in the database, while the GPU is at the 87th percentile among all graphics cards. The gap between these two percentile figures is telling: the RTX 5080 is a high-end component by global standards, while the i5-10400F is a mid-range part from its generation. Despite this imbalance, the combo still achieves a rank that suggests the GPU is doing the heavy lifting, and the CPU is not bottlenecking the experience to a severe degree in Rust.

Looking at the raw benchmark scores, the CPU has an average benchmark score of 14185, which is close to its nearest rivals such as the Intel Xeon 6756E with a score of 14163 (only 0.2% lower) and the AMD EPYC 7552 at 14115 (0.5% lower). On the GPU side, the RTX 5080 has an average score of 56083, which places it just ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE at 57367 (which is 2.2% faster) and behind the AMD Radeon 8060S at 55757 (0.6% slower). These benchmark scores are synthetic, but they correlate with the in-game FPS results, which show that the combo handles Rust well at high resolutions and settings.

The fact that the combo rank is 770 out of 3723, rather than closer to the top, suggests that while the GPU is powerful enough for very high frame rates, the CPU limits the absolute ceiling. For instance, at 1080p Low settings, the system reaches 147.8 FPS, but a stronger CPU might push that number higher. The data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases, the CPU becomes less of a limiting factor, and the GPU’s dominance becomes more apparent. This is a classic sign of a balanced mid-range CPU with a high-end GPU, and the rank reflects that dynamic.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Xeon 6756E, Intel Core 7 160UL, AMD EPYC 7552, and AMD Ryzen 3 7320C. The Intel Xeon 6756E has an average score of 14163, which is just 0.2% below the i5-10400F’s score of 14185. This means that in synthetic multi-threaded tests, these two processors are virtually interchangeable. The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 14115, which is 0.5% lower, while the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 14232, which is 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C scores 14277, which is 0.6% higher. These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, indicating that any of these CPUs would deliver nearly identical performance in Rust when paired with the same GPU.

On the GPU side, the RTX 5080’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon 8060S, AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, AMD Radeon Pro W5700X, and AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE. The AMD Radeon 8060S scores 55757, which is 0.6% lower than the RTX 5080’s 56083, so it would be a very close match in gaming FPS. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB scores 55698, which is 0.7% lower, again a negligible difference. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 54828, which is 2.3% lower, a slightly larger gap but still within a few percent. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE scores 57367, which is 2.2% higher, making it a marginally faster alternative.

For a user with this exact CPU-GPU combo, swapping the i5-10400F for any of the listed rival CPUs would not change the Rust experience in any meaningful way, as the performance deltas are all under 1%. Similarly, swapping the RTX 5080 for an AMD Radeon 8060S or RX 6750 GRE 12 GB would result in nearly identical frame rates. The only alternative that would show a small improvement is the RX 9070 GRE, which is 2.2% faster on average. This information is useful for understanding that the system’s performance is well-characterized and that minor component changes would not yield significant gains.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals how the balance between CPU and GPU shifts across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the system delivers 147.8 FPS on Low settings, 125.3 FPS on Medium, 119.9 FPS on High, and 109.2 FPS on Ultra. The spread from Low to Ultra is 38.6 FPS, which shows that settings have a significant impact at this resolution. The fact that even Ultra clears 100 FPS indicates that the CPU is not holding back the GPU at 1080p, but it is likely the primary constraint on reaching even higher frame rates. The RTX 5080 is capable of much more than 147.8 FPS in less demanding titles, so the i5-10400F is probably limiting the peak.

Moving to 2560x1440, the FPS values are 132.5 on Low, 113.2 on Medium, 108.9 on High, and 92.1 on Ultra. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is noticeable but not steep, with Low settings losing 15.3 FPS and Ultra losing 17.1 FPS. This suggests that the GPU is starting to become more of a factor, but the CPU still has enough headroom to keep frame rates high. At this resolution, the gap between Low and Ultra is 40.4 FPS, slightly larger than at 1080p, which indicates that the GPU is being stressed more by the higher pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the FPS values are 111.4 on Low, 82.6 on Medium, 71.8 on High, and 54.2 on Ultra. The drop from 1440p to 4K is substantial, with Low losing 21.1 FPS and Ultra losing 37.9 FPS. This is where the GPU’s role becomes dominant. The CPU is no longer the bottleneck; instead, the RTX 5080 is working hard to push all those pixels. The data shows that at 4K, the difference between Low and Ultra is 57.2 FPS, which is a much larger spread than at lower resolutions. This confirms that the GPU is the primary driver of performance at 4K, and the CPU’s contribution is minimal beyond ensuring a stable frame delivery.

The scaling between presets also tells a story. At 1080p, going from Low to Ultra reduces FPS by 38.6 (26.1% drop), while at 4K, the same preset change reduces FPS by 57.2 (51.3% drop). This indicates that the GPU is increasingly taxed at higher resolutions, and the settings have a larger relative impact. For this combo, the CPU is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but at 4K, the GPU is the clear limiting factor, with the CPU having almost no influence on the final FPS.

The Verdict

Based on the recorded data, this PC can run Rust with excellent playability at 1080p and 1440p, and it is also capable of a solid 4K experience, though not at the highest settings. The database defines a playable threshold of 60 FPS, and the verdict by resolution is clear. At 1920x1080, all four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with the best settings being Ultra at 109.2 FPS average. This means a user can max out the game at 1080p and still have a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold.

At 2560x1440, all four settings are also playable, with Ultra achieving 92.1 FPS. This is a strong result, as it allows for high visual quality without sacrificing smoothness. The best settings at this resolution are Ultra, which is rare for a mid-range CPU paired with a high-end GPU. At 3840x2160, the situation changes. The playable settings are Low, Medium, and High, with High achieving 71.8 FPS. Ultra falls to 54.2 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and therefore not considered playable. The best playable settings at 4K are High, with an average of 71.8 FPS.

The verdict is that this system is fully capable of running Rust at 60 FPS or higher at 1080p and 1440p with maximum settings, and at 4K with High settings. The only scenario where it fails to hit 60 FPS is 4K Ultra, which is an extreme combination that would challenge even the most powerful hardware. For most users, this combo offers a great experience across the board, with the caveat that 4K Ultra should be avoided in favor of High or lower settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database provides average FPS values for each resolution and settings combination, with no minimum or maximum frame time data recorded. The measurements are as follows:

At 3840x2160, the average FPS is 111.4 on Low, 82.6 on Medium, 71.8 on High, and 54.2 on Ultra. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady decline, with the largest drop occurring between Medium and Ultra (28.4 FPS). This indicates that the Ultra preset introduces significant GPU load, likely due to increased draw distances and shadow quality, which the RTX 5080 cannot fully handle at 4K.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS is 132.5 on Low, 113.2 on Medium, 108.9 on High, and 92.1 on Ultra. The gap between Low and Ultra is 40.4 FPS, which is smaller than at 4K, showing that the GPU has more headroom at this resolution. The difference between Medium and High is only 4.3 FPS, suggesting that the Medium and High presets are not vastly different in terms of GPU demand.

At 1920x1080, the average FPS is 147.8 on Low, 125.3 on Medium, 119.9 on High, and 109.2 on Ultra. The drop from Low to Ultra is 38.6 FPS, which is the smallest absolute difference among the three resolutions. This shows that at 1080p, the CPU is more of a limiting factor, as the GPU has plenty of power to spare, and the settings have a relatively smaller impact on the final FPS.

The data shows a consistent pattern: for each resolution, the Low preset offers the highest FPS, followed by Medium, then High, and finally Ultra. The differences between presets become more pronounced at higher resolutions, confirming that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at 4K. The lack of min and max FPS data means that frame pacing and stutter cannot be assessed, but the average FPS values are all above 54 FPS, with the majority well above 60 FPS.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Rust at 60 FPS at 4K?

A: Yes, the database shows that at 3840x2160, the High settings achieve an average of 71.8 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. The Low and Medium presets also clear 60 FPS, but Ultra falls to 54.2 FPS, which is not playable.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, all four presets are playable, and the best settings are Ultra, which achieves an average of 92.1 FPS. This allows for maximum visual quality while maintaining a high frame rate.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F has an average benchmark score of 14185, which is within 0.6% of its nearest rivals. The Intel Core 7 160UL is 0.3% faster, while the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C is 0.6% faster, and the Intel Xeon 6756E is 0.2% slower.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more important for Rust at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the data shows that the CPU is more likely to be the limiting factor, as the FPS values are high across all settings, suggesting the GPU has headroom. The CPU’s single-thread performance is key for Rust’s simulation logic.

Q: What is the highest FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 147.8, which occurs at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the maximum value in the measured FPS data.

Q: Does the RTX 5080 have any GPU rivals that are notably faster?

A: The nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE, which has an average benchmark score 2.2% higher than the RTX 5080. All other rivals are within 0.7% or slower, so the performance difference is minimal.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the most demanding preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS is identified as the best settings. At 3840x2160, the best settings are High, which delivers 71.8 FPS. This is the highest quality preset that stays above the playable threshold, as Ultra drops to 54.2 FPS. Users at 4K should choose High to balance visual fidelity with smooth performance.

At 2560x1440, the best settings are Ultra, with an average of 92.1 FPS. This is the highest preset available, and it comfortably exceeds the 60 FPS threshold, making it the recommended choice for 1440p displays. The margin of 32.1 FPS above the threshold provides a buffer for demanding scenes.

At 1920x1080, the best settings are also Ultra, with an average of 109.2 FPS. This is the highest preset, and it offers a significant margin above 60 FPS, ensuring a smooth experience even in intense firefights or when many players are on screen. The data indicates that this combo is well-suited for high-refresh-rate 1080p monitors, as the FPS is close to the 120-144 Hz range.