Rust

The pairing of a Comet Lake six-core with NVIDIA's flagship Blackwell card is an unusual one for Rust, but the recorded data answers the playability question decisively: at every tested resolution and every preset, this combination clears the 60 FPS threshold. The Intel Core i5-10400F sits in the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database with an average benchmark score of 14185, while the GeForce RTX 5090 D ranks in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs with an average score of 77712. The GPU is, by a wide margin, the stronger half of this pairing, and the frame rate data reflects that imbalance.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For CPUs that would deliver a comparable experience, the database points to a tight cluster around the i5-10400F's average score. The Intel Xeon 6756E averages 14163, a difference of just 0.2 percent, effectively identical in aggregate throughput. The Intel Core 7 160UL averages 14232, 0.3 percent ahead, while the AMD EPYC 7552 averages 14115, 0.5 percent behind. The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C averages 14277, 0.6 percent ahead. Any of these processors would land within a fraction of a percent of the 10400F in overall benchmark terms, so a system built around one of them paired with a comparable GPU should behave similarly in Rust.

On the graphics side, the RTX 5090 D's nearest rivals by average score are the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT at 76904 (1.1 percent behind), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT at 78940 (1.6 percent ahead), and the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe variants at 79396 and 79605 (2.1 and 2.4 percent ahead respectively). A machine using any of these GPUs alongside a similar CPU would be expected to produce Rust frame rates close to those recorded here, since the aggregate scores differ by only a couple of percent. The 5090 D's raw specifications are formidable: 21760 shading units, 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth, and 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die.

CPU and GPU Roles

The scaling data indicates that Rust, in this configuration, is GPU-bound at higher resolutions and approaches a CPU ceiling at lower ones. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at Medium costs 15 FPS on average (128 down to 113), and stepping up to 3840x2160 costs another 18 FPS (113 down to 95). That is a total drop of 33 FPS from 1080p to 4K on the same preset, a decline that tracks with rising pixel counts and therefore points to the GPU absorbing the additional load.

At 1920x1080 the picture changes. Low returns 149 FPS, Medium 128, High 121, and Ultra 109. The spread between Low and Ultra is 40 FPS, but the ceiling at Low is well below what a card of this class could theoretically push, which suggests the six-core, twelve-thread i5-10400F is the limiting factor once the resolution is low enough. The CPU's own results support this reading: a single-thread Passmark score of 2541, a Geekbench single-core result of 1420, and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1451 are modest by current standards, while multi-thread results (10283 in R23, 6257 in Geekbench multi-core) show the chip scaling reasonably within its 65 W envelope. For a survival title with heavy simulation load, that per-core throughput is the constraint that matters at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

All figures below are average frame rates from measured runs, with minimum and maximum values recorded where available.

At 1920x1080: Low averages 149 FPS, Medium 128 FPS (minimum 109, maximum 147), High 121 FPS, and Ultra 109 FPS. The Medium preset's recorded range is tight, with the minimum staying above the 60 FPS playability line by a comfortable 49 frames.

At 2560x1440: Low averages 131 FPS, Medium 113 FPS (minimum 96, maximum 130), High 106 FPS, and Ultra 96 FPS. Even the Ultra preset holds an average 36 frames above the threshold, and the Medium preset never dips below 96.

At 3840x2160: Low averages 110 FPS, Medium 95 FPS (minimum 81, maximum 109), High 80 FPS, and Ultra 61 FPS. Ultra at 4K is the single closest call in the entire dataset, clearing 60 FPS by a single frame on average. Medium remains the safer choice here, with its measured minimum of 81 providing headroom.

The pattern is consistent: each preset step from Low to Ultra costs roughly 10 to 20 FPS depending on resolution, and each resolution step up costs roughly 15 to 20 FPS depending on preset. No recorded minimum, where captured, falls below 81 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

Across the database, this CPU and GPU pairing ranks 742nd out of 3723 tested combinations in Rust, placing it in roughly the top fifth of all measured setups for this game. That rank is respectable but notably lower than the GPU's standalone percentile (92nd against all GPUs) would imply, which is a direct consequence of the CPU-side bottleneck. The i5-10400F's 68th percentile standing among all CPUs means many rival combinations pair comparable or faster graphics with stronger processors, and those combinations outscore this one in the game rankings. In short: the rank reflects a balanced verdict on an unbalanced build, strong but not elite for Rust.

The Verdict

Yes, this PC can run Rust at every tested resolution and preset. The verdict data confirms that at 1920x1080 all four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable, with Ultra delivering 109 FPS on average. At 2560x1440, all four presets again clear the threshold, with Ultra at 96 FPS. At 3840x2160, all four presets remain playable, and even Ultra sustains a 61 FPS average. The only caveat worth stating plainly: 4K Ultra's margin is a single frame over the 60 FPS line, so players wanting guaranteed smoothness at 4K should drop to High (80 FPS) or Medium (95 FPS). At 1080p and 1440p there are no caveats at any setting.

Best Settings per Resolution

• 1920x1080: Ultra, 109 FPS average. The most demanding preset stays 49 frames above the threshold.
• 2560x1440: Ultra, 96 FPS average. A 36-frame margin over the playability line.
• 3840x2160: Medium, 95 FPS average. While Ultra technically clears 60 FPS at 61, Medium is the most demanding preset with a genuinely comfortable buffer, holding a measured minimum of 81 FPS.

For players who insist on maximum fidelity at 4K, Ultra at 61 FPS does satisfy the 60 FPS criterion, but the recorded data shows effectively no headroom. Medium at 4K delivers nearly the same average as 1440p Ultra (95 versus 96) with much stronger frame floor behavior.

FAQ

Q: Can the i5-10400F and RTX 5090 D run Rust at 4K?

A: Yes. All four presets at 3840x2160 are playable: Low at 110 FPS, Medium at 95, High at 80, and Ultra at 61 FPS average.

Q: Which component is the bottleneck in this pairing?

A: The CPU. The RTX 5090 D ranks in the 92nd percentile of GPUs while the i5-10400F sits in the 68th percentile of CPUs, and frame rates at 1080p top out at 149 FPS on Low, indicating a processor ceiling at lower resolutions.

Q: Does Rust stay above 60 FPS at Ultra on this system?

A: At every tested resolution. Ultra averages 109 FPS at 1080p, 96 FPS at 1440p, and 61 FPS at 4K.

Q: How does this combination rank against other tested setups for Rust?

A: It ranks 742nd out of 3723 combinations, placing it in roughly the top fifth of the database for this game.

Q: What is the frame rate range at 1440p Medium?

A: The measured average is 113 FPS, with a minimum of 96 and a maximum of 130.

Q: Are there CPUs that would perform similarly to the i5-10400F?

A: Yes. The Xeon 6756E (0.2 percent difference), Core 7 160UL (0.3 percent), EPYC 7552 (0.5 percent), and Ryzen 3 7320C (0.6 percent) all sit within a fraction of a percent of its average benchmark score of 14185.