Rust

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is a formidable combination for Rust, placing in the top third of all tested systems. According to the database, this combo ranks 1256 out of 3723 tested combinations, putting it ahead of roughly two-thirds of all systems tested for this game. This percentile position signals that while it is not at the absolute high-end, it is firmly in the upper echelon of hardware capable of delivering a smooth experience in Rust. The data reveals a system that can handle the game at high settings across most resolutions, with performance scaling predictably as resolution and graphical demands increase.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 1256 out of 3723 tested configurations places this pairing firmly in the upper third of all systems benchmarked for Rust. This is a strong showing, indicating that the combination of the Intel Core i5-11400F and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is well-matched for the game's demands. The percentile data suggests that this system outperforms the majority of tested setups, making it a reliable choice for players who want high frame rates without needing to compromise heavily on visual quality.

Looking at the individual components, the CPU sits at the 71st percentile among all processors, while the GPU is at the 85th percentile among all graphics cards. The GPU being significantly higher in percentile ranking than the CPU hints that in most scenarios, the processor is the limiting factor, though both components are capable. The CPU's average benchmark score of 17177 places it in close competition with several other processors. The nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7H12, has an average score of 17120, just 0.3% lower. The Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17239, a 0.4% advantage, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is 0.6% ahead at 17278. The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U trails slightly at 17074, 0.6% behind. These differences are minimal, indicating that the i5-11400F's compute performance is very much in line with these alternatives.

On the graphics side, the RX 6800 XT's average benchmark score of 48477 is competitive with its nearest rivals but slightly below some of them. The NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile scores 47743, putting it 1.5% behind. The Intel Arc A550M is ahead by 2.5% with a score of 49737. Both the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 score higher, at 49957 and 50001 respectively, each with a 3% delta. This means the RX 6800 XT is positioned just below these alternatives in raw synthetic benchmarks, but its real-world gaming performance, as shown in the Rust data, is still substantial.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Rust at 4K resolution?

A: Yes, but with limitations. At 3840x2160, the only setting that clears the 60 FPS threshold is Low, which averages 83.6 FPS. Medium drops to 56.8 FPS, and High falls to 48.5 FPS, both below the playable threshold. Ultra is not viable at this resolution, averaging only 35 FPS.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to play at Ultra settings?

A: The only resolution where Ultra settings maintain a playable frame rate is 1920x1080, where the average is 88.8 FPS. At 2560x1440, Ultra drops to 59.7 FPS, just below the 60 FPS playable threshold, and at 4K, it falls to 35 FPS.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F has an average benchmark score of 17177. Its closest rival, the AMD EPYC 7H12, scores 17120, a negligible 0.3% difference. The Intel Core i5-12450H is 0.4% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is 0.6% faster. The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U is 0.6% slower.

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

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT has an average benchmark score of 48477. The NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile is 1.5% slower, while the Intel Arc A550M is 2.5% faster. Both the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 are 3% faster than the RX 6800 XT in these benchmarks.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings produce an average of 142.2 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 59.7 FPS. This represents a significant 82.5 FPS difference, showing that graphical presets have a major impact on performance at this resolution.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more important for Rust performance?

A: The data suggests the GPU plays a larger role at higher resolutions. The RX 6800 XT is at the 85th percentile for GPUs, while the CPU is at the 71st percentile. The performance scaling across resolutions, such as the drop from 177.2 FPS at 1080p Low to 83.6 FPS at 4K Low, points to the GPU being the primary driver of frame rates as resolution increases.

CPU and GPU Roles

The recorded data illustrates a clear division of labor between the CPU and GPU in Rust. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, provides a solid foundation, but the GPU is what carries the system at higher resolutions. This is evident from the performance scaling when moving from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 177.2 FPS at 1080p to 142.2 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 83.6 FPS at 4K. This steep decline as resolution increases is a classic sign of GPU-bound performance; the RX 6800 XT's workload becomes more demanding with each pixel count increase.

The CPU's role is more pronounced at lower resolutions and higher settings. At 1920x1080 Ultra, the system achieves 88.8 FPS, which is not much lower than the 118.2 FPS at High settings. This relatively small gap between High and Ultra at 1080p suggests that the CPU can keep up with the GPU's output at this resolution. However, at 4K, the difference between High (48.5 FPS) and Medium (56.8 FPS) is more significant, indicating that the GPU is struggling to maintain frame rates regardless of the CPU's capabilities. The GPU's high percentile rank of 85 versus the CPU's 71 reinforces that the RX 6800 XT is the stronger component, and the system's overall performance is more dependent on the GPU when pushing higher resolutions.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i5-11400F and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT can run Rust, with the answer varying by resolution and desired settings. At 1920x1080, this system is fully capable, clearing the 60 FPS threshold at every preset tested. The best settings at this resolution are Ultra, which averages 88.8 FPS, providing a smooth and visually rich experience. Moving up to 2560x1440, the system remains playable at High, Low, and Medium settings, with High being the best option at 80.3 FPS. Ultra at this resolution falls just short of the playable threshold at 59.7 FPS, making it a borderline choice for those who prioritize frame rate over visuals.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more restrictive. The only playable setting is Low, which averages 83.6 FPS. Medium dips to 56.8 FPS, and High to 48.5 FPS, both below the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra is not viable at 4K, with an average of only 35 FPS. For players targeting 4K, the data suggests that playing on Low is the only way to maintain a comfortable frame rate. Overall, this system is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, where it can run Rust at high settings without issue.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a detailed look at performance across all settings and resolutions.

1920x1080:

• Low: 177.2 FPS
• Medium: 138.4 FPS
• High: 118.2 FPS
• Ultra: 88.8 FPS

At 1080p, the system shows excellent headroom. Even at Ultra, the frame rate remains far above the 60 FPS threshold, indicating that the GPU is not fully taxed at this resolution. The difference between Low and Ultra is 88.4 FPS, showing a wide range of performance depending on visual fidelity.

2560x1440:

• Low: 142.2 FPS
• Medium: 97.4 FPS
• High: 80.3 FPS
• Ultra: 59.7 FPS

At 1440p, the frame rates begin to compress. Low still offers a very high 142.2 FPS, but Ultra drops to just under the playable threshold at 59.7 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 82.5 FPS, indicating that the GPU is starting to feel the pressure from higher resolutions.

3840x2160:

• Low: 83.6 FPS
• Medium: 56.8 FPS
• High: 48.5 FPS
• Ultra: 35 FPS

At 4K, the performance drops significantly. Only Low settings remain above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium and High both fall short, and Ultra is nearly half the playable frame rate. The difference between Low and Ultra is 48.6 FPS, showing that the GPU is heavily taxed at this resolution.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is the recommended choice.

• 1920x1080: Ultra is the best setting, with an average of 88.8 FPS. This provides the highest visual quality while maintaining a comfortable margin above the playable threshold.

• 2560x1440: High is the best setting, averaging 80.3 FPS. While Ultra is close at 59.7 FPS, it falls just below the threshold, making High the optimal choice for a consistent experience.

• 3840x2160: Low is the only playable setting, with an average of 83.6 FPS. Medium and above all dip below 60 FPS, so Low is the recommended preset for 4K gaming.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the Intel Core i5-11400F's closest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are the AMD EPYC 7H12, Intel Core i5-12450H, AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G, and Intel Core Ultra 7 164U. The AMD EPYC 7H12 is nearly identical in score, just 0.3% lower, meaning it would likely deliver very similar frame rates in Rust. The Intel Core i5-12450H is 0.4% faster, and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is 0.6% faster, both of which could offer a marginal improvement in CPU-bound scenarios. The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U is 0.6% slower, so it might show a slight performance dip in the same situations.

On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile, Intel Arc A550M, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti, and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64. The NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile is 1.5% slower, which could translate to a few frames per second less in Rust. The Intel Arc A550M is 2.5% faster, and both the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 are 3% faster. These alternatives could provide slightly higher average frame rates, particularly at higher resolutions where the GPU is the limiting factor. However, the differences are small enough that the overall gaming experience would be very similar across these options.