Rust

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT delivers a wide spread of frame rates in Rust, depending heavily on the resolution and graphics preset chosen. The recorded data shows that this combination can handle the game smoothly at standard monitor resolutions, though 4K gaming requires careful settings selection. The following analysis breaks down the measured performance across all tested configurations, compares this combo to similar hardware, and identifies where the CPU or GPU exerts more influence on the final frame rate.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Ultra, with an average of 73 FPS. This is the highest quality setting available in the test suite, and the system clears the 60 FPS threshold with a comfortable margin. Lower presets at this resolution deliver even higher frame rates, but Ultra represents the best visual quality while maintaining playable performance.

Moving to 2560x1440, the best settings shift down. Ultra drops to 51.3 FPS average, which falls below the 60 FPS playability threshold. High becomes the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, with an average of 66.4 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra at this resolution is significant, suggesting that the Ultra preset imposes a heavy load that this combination cannot sustain smoothly.

At 3840x2160, the situation tightens considerably. High produces only 39.3 FPS average, and Medium is not much better at 44.6 FPS. Low is the only preset that clears 60 FPS, with an average of 67.7 FPS. This is the best settings choice for 4K, but it requires a substantial visual quality reduction compared to lower resolutions. The data indicates that 4K gaming on this combo is possible only at Low settings, and even then the frame rate is not exceptionally high, sitting just above the playable threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU each have nearby rivals based on their average benchmark scores. For the Intel Core i5-11400F, the nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 7H12, which scores 0.3% higher on average. The Intel Core i5-12450H is 0.4% lower, the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is 0.6% lower, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U is 0.6% higher. These differences are tiny, meaning any of these processors would likely produce very similar performance in Rust, assuming the GPU stays the same. The i5-11400F sits in the 71st percentile among all CPUs, so it is a mid-to-upper tier processor for gaming workloads.

For the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT, the nearest rivals are all older or mobile parts. The AMD Radeon R9 M395X scores 0.5% higher, the AMD FirePro W7100 is 0.6% higher, the AMD FirePro D700 is 0.7% higher, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile is 1.1% higher. These deltas are all under 2%, so a user swapping the RX 6750 XT for any of these would see nearly identical frame rates in Rust. The GPU also sits in the 71st percentile among all GPUs, matching the CPU's relative standing. This suggests the combo is well balanced in terms of overall hardware tier, though the specific game workload may favor one component over the other.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database records average FPS only, with no minimum or maximum values available for any resolution or preset. All numbers below reflect average frame rates across the test run.

At 1920x1080, the full range of settings was tested. Low delivers 173 FPS, which is the highest recorded average for this combo at any resolution or preset. Medium drops to 113.7 FPS, High to 97.1 FPS, and Ultra to 73 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a clear progression: each step up in quality reduces performance, but even the heaviest preset stays well above 60 FPS. The delta between Low and Medium is 59.3 FPS, between Medium and High is 16.6 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 24.1 FPS. The largest single drop occurs when going from Low to Medium, suggesting that Medium introduces significant graphical effects that tax the GPU.

At 2560x1440, the same four presets were tested. Low averages 119.2 FPS, Medium 78.3 FPS, High 66.4 FPS, and Ultra 51.3 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 40.9 FPS, which is a larger absolute drop than at 1080p. Medium to High costs 11.9 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 15.1 FPS. Here, Ultra falls below the 60 FPS threshold, making it unplayable by the database's standard. High remains playable but with a narrower margin than at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the performance drops sharply. Low averages 67.7 FPS, Medium 44.6 FPS, High 39.3 FPS, and Ultra 28 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 23.1 FPS, Medium to High is 5.3 FPS, and High to Ultra is 11.3 FPS. Only Low clears 60 FPS. The jump from 1440p Low (119.2 FPS) to 4K Low (67.7 FPS) represents a 51.5 FPS loss, which is a massive hit from increasing resolution alone. This indicates that the GPU is heavily stressed at 4K, even on the lowest settings.

Comparing the same preset across resolutions reveals the overall scaling. For High, 1080p gives 97.1 FPS, 1440p gives 66.4 FPS, and 4K gives 39.3 FPS. For Medium, the values are 113.7, 78.3, and 44.6 FPS. For Low, they are 173, 119.2, and 67.7 FPS. For Ultra, they are 73, 51.3, and 28 FPS. The resolution penalty is roughly consistent across presets, with 4K costing about 60-70% of the 1080p frame rate in every case.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Rust? The answer depends entirely on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, the verdict is a clear yes. All four presets, Low, Medium, High, and Ultra, stay at or above 60 FPS, with Ultra averaging 73 FPS. This means a user can enable maximum visual quality and still enjoy smooth gameplay. The recorded data confirms that 1080p is the sweet spot for this combination.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is yes with conditions. Three of the four presets, High, Low, and Medium, clear 60 FPS. High averages 66.4 FPS, which is above the threshold but not by a huge margin. Ultra falls to 51.3 FPS and is therefore not playable by the database's standard. Users who want Ultra at 1440p would need to accept frame rates below 60, or they could dial back to High and maintain smooth performance.

At 3840x2160, the verdict is marginal. Only Low clears 60 FPS, with an average of 67.7 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall below the threshold, with Ultra bottoming out at 28 FPS. This means 4K gaming is technically possible but only at the lowest preset, and even then the frame rate is just barely above playable. The data suggests that this combo is not well suited for 4K Rust unless the user is willing to make significant visual sacrifices.

Overall, the database verdict lists 1920x1080 as fully playable across all settings, 2560x1440 as playable on High and below, and 3840x2160 as playable only on Low. The playable threshold is set at 60 FPS, and the measured averages show this combo can meet that standard for most configurations, with 4K Ultra being the most extreme exception.

CPU and GPU Roles

Determining which component matters more requires examining how frame rates scale with resolution and preset changes. At lower resolutions like 1920x1080, the CPU often plays a larger role because the GPU can render frames quickly, and the processor must keep up with game logic and draw calls. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo hits 173 FPS, which is very high. The drop to Ultra at 73 FPS is a 100 FPS reduction, and this scaling is primarily driven by GPU load as more visual effects are enabled. However, the fact that even Ultra stays above 60 FPS suggests the CPU is not a bottleneck at this resolution; if it were, frame rates would plateau regardless of preset.

At 2560x1440, the GPU begins to take on more responsibility. The frame rates drop across all presets compared to 1080p, with Low falling from 173 to 119.2 FPS, a 53.8 FPS loss. This resolution increase adds pixel count, which directly taxes the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth. The CPU's workload does not scale with resolution in the same way, so the larger frame rate drops at 1440p indicate the GPU is becoming the limiting factor. The fact that Ultra drops below 60 FPS while High stays above it further supports this, as the Ultra preset likely adds GPU-intensive effects like higher shadow quality and texture filtering.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is clearly the dominant constraint. Low averages 67.7 FPS, which is just above the threshold, while every other preset falls far below. The reduction from 1440p Low (119.2 FPS) to 4K Low (67.7 FPS) is a 51.5 FPS loss, purely from resolution. This is a massive GPU workload increase. The CPU, meanwhile, is likely underutilized at 4K because the GPU cannot produce frames fast enough to demand more from the processor. The evidence is clear: at 1080p, the CPU and GPU share the load, but as resolution rises, the GPU becomes the sole bottleneck.

The preset scaling also reveals component roles. At 1080p, going from Low to Ultra costs 100 FPS, which is a large drop but still keeps the game playable. At 4K, the same preset change costs 39.7 FPS, but the starting point is so low that Ultra becomes unplayable. This asymmetry suggests that at 1080p, the GPU has headroom to absorb heavier settings, while at 4K it is already saturated. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for Rust at all resolutions, as evidenced by the fact that the frame rate never becomes CPU-limited in a way that would cap performance regardless of preset. Instead, the GPU's 12 GB of memory and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are the determining factors at high resolutions.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Rust at 1920x1080 on Ultra settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS for Ultra at 1920x1080 is 73, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: What is the best preset for 2560x1440?

A: High is the best preset that stays at or above 60 FPS, with an average of 66.4 FPS. Ultra drops to 51.3 FPS and is not playable.

Q: Is 4K gaming possible with this hardware?

A: Only at Low settings. The average FPS for Low at 3840x2160 is 67.7, while Medium (44.6), High (39.3), and Ultra (28) all fall below 60 FPS.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its nearest rival?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F scores within 0.6% of its nearest rivals. The AMD EPYC 7H12 is 0.3% higher, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U is 0.6% higher, while the Intel Core i5-12450H and AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G are 0.4% and 0.6% lower, respectively.

Q: Which component limits performance at 4K?

A: The GPU. The frame rate drops sharply when moving from 1440p to 4K, even on Low settings, indicating the Radeon RX 6750 XT is the bottleneck at that resolution.

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

A: The highest recorded average is 173 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

How This Combo Ranks

Among all tested combinations in the database, this pairing of Intel Core i5-11400F and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 1828 out of 3723 combos for Rust. This places it in the upper half, specifically around the 49th percentile of all recorded systems. The rank reflects the overall performance across all tested resolutions and presets, weighted by the playability criteria.

The percentile standings of the individual components are both 71, meaning each part outperforms 71% of all CPUs and GPUs respectively. However, the combo rank is lower than the component percentiles might suggest, which indicates that Rust's specific demands do not fully align with the strengths of this hardware. The game appears to favor raw GPU throughput at higher resolutions, and while the RX 6750 XT is capable, it is not a top-tier card. The CPU, while solid for gaming, does not compensate for the GPU's limitations at 4K.

The rank of 1828 out of 3723 means there are 1895 combos that perform worse and 1827 that perform better. This is a middle-of-the-pack result. The data shows that for 1080p gaming, this combo is well above average, but for 4K, it falls to the lower end of playable systems. The overall rank reflects this mixed performance profile. Users targeting 1080p or 1440p will find this combo to be a strong performer, while those expecting 4K capability will be disappointed. The ranking confirms that this is a capable mainstream gaming setup, but not an enthusiast-level one.