Rust

Similar Performance Alternatives

The Intel Core i5-11400F sits in a well-populated performance tier, with its nearest rivals all landing within a narrow band of the average benchmark score. The recorded data shows the i5-11400F scoring 17,177 points on average, which places it just 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7H12 (17,120 points) and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U (17,074 points). Meanwhile, the Intel Core i5-12450H trails by 0.4% (17,239 points) and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G sits 0.6% behind (17,278 points). In practical terms, any of these five processors would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound behavior in Rust, so users upgrading from one to another should expect no meaningful frame-rate shift.

For the Intel Arc B370, the situation is more constrained. This GPU scores only 1,184 points in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all older or lower-tier parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1,186 (0.2% above), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190 (0.5% above), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192 (0.7% above), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1,168 (1.4% below). Since the Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution (IGP) with system-shared memory, its performance profile closely matches these legacy discrete parts, meaning the recorded frame rates in Rust will be similarly limited. Users coming from any of those GPUs should see essentially identical gameplay smoothness.

Because the Arc B370 is the bottleneck in this pairing, the CPU alternatives listed above will not meaningfully change the measured FPS. Instead, the GPU's nearest rivals define the practical performance envelope. The data indicates that the Arc B370 is closer in score to the HD 5770 than to any modern discrete GPU, so expectations for Rust should be set accordingly: playable only at lower resolutions and settings.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Rust at 60 FPS on a 1920x1080 monitor?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The measured average FPS at 1080p Low is 69, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. At Medium, High, or Ultra, the average drops to 46, 39, or 30 FPS respectively, so those presets fall short of 60 FPS.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 2560x1440?

A: There is no playable setting at 1440p. The database lists no playable settings for this resolution, meaning even the Low preset fails to reach 60 FPS. The recorded average at 1440p Low is 48 FPS, which is below the playable threshold.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1,184 points in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. That is 0.2% below the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1,186), 0.5% below the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1,190), 0.7% below the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1,192), and 1.4% above the AMD FirePro M2000 (1,168). Performance is effectively identical to these older parts.

Q: What is the CPU's standing among all processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F scores in the 71st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17,177. It sits within 1% of four nearest rivals, including the AMD EPYC 7H12 and Intel Core Ultra 7 164U, confirming it is a mid-to-upper-tier processor for gaming workloads.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the low frame rates in Rust?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU ranks in the 71st percentile. As resolution increases, GPU load grows, and the measured FPS drops sharply (from 69 at 1080p Low to 28 at 4K Low), which points to GPU-bound behavior throughout.

Q: What is the highest resolution at which this PC can maintain 60 FPS?

A: Only 1920x1080 with Low settings achieves 60 FPS (69 average). At 2560x1440 and 3840x2160, no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold. The best 1440p result is 48 FPS on Low, and the best 4K result is 28 FPS on Low.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data provides average FPS for all resolutions and settings, with min/max values available only for Medium presets. At 3840x2160, the results are consistently low. High settings produce an average of 16 FPS with no min/max recorded. Medium settings average 19 FPS, with a minimum of 16 and a maximum of 22. Low settings improve to 28 FPS, while Ultra drops to 12 FPS. None of these approach the 60 FPS playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the pattern improves but remains below playable. High settings average 27 FPS, Low averages 48 FPS, Medium averages 32 FPS (min 27, max 37), and Ultra averages 20 FPS. The jump from 4K to 1440p yields roughly 70% higher FPS on Low (from 28 to 48), but the absolute numbers still miss the mark.

At 1920x1080, the data shows the only playable result. Low settings average 69 FPS, comfortably above 60. Medium averages 46 FPS (min 39, max 53), High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The scaling from 1440p to 1080p is substantial: Low goes from 48 to 69 FPS, a 44% improvement, while Medium goes from 32 to 46 FPS, a 44% gain as well. High and Ultra improve by 44% and 50% respectively (27 to 39, and 20 to 30).

Across all resolutions, the gap between Low and Ultra is large. At 1080p, Ultra delivers only 43% of the Low preset's FPS (30 vs 69). At 1440p, that ratio is 42% (20 vs 48). At 4K, it is 43% (12 vs 28). This consistency suggests the GPU is the dominant constraint at every resolution, with no preset able to overcome the hardware limit.

The Verdict

This PC cannot run Rust at a consistent 60 FPS in most configurations. The verdict by resolution is clear: at 3840x2160, no settings are playable, meaning every preset falls below 60 FPS. At 2560x1440, the same applies, no playable settings exist. Only at 1920x1080 does the system find a playable configuration, and that is limited to Low settings, which produce an average of 69 FPS.

The data shows that the Arc B370 is simply too weak for higher resolutions. Even the best case at 1440p, Low settings at 48 FPS, misses the threshold by 12 FPS. At 4K, the best case is 28 FPS, which is less than half of the target. Users who want to play Rust at 1080p with visual quality above Low will need a stronger GPU. The CPU, by contrast, is not the primary issue; its 71st percentile ranking indicates ample headroom for this game's CPU demands.

The verdict is straightforward: 1080p Low is the only acceptable configuration, and even that is marginal. For anyone expecting Medium or High at 1080p, or any playable experience at 1440p or 4K, this system will not deliver.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS scaling reveals which component drives performance at each resolution. Starting at 1080p Low, the system achieves 69 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low, the average drops to 48 FPS, a 30% reduction. Moving further to 4K Low, the average falls to 28 FPS, a 59% reduction from 1080p. This severe scaling with resolution is a hallmark of GPU-bound performance: the CPU is capable of feeding frames, but the integrated graphics cannot keep up as pixel count rises.

The CPU's role is comparatively minor here. The i5-11400F scores in the 71st percentile of all CPUs, with strong multi-threaded results (14,340 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 16,908 in PassMark multi-thread). In Rust, which is known to be CPU-sensitive in populated servers, this processor would likely hold its own. But the measured FPS does not show CPU limitation, because the GPU saturates first. Evidence: at 1080p Low, the system hits 69 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra it drops to 30 FPS. If the CPU were the bottleneck, raising graphics settings would have little effect on FPS. Instead, the 57% drop from Low to Ultra at the same resolution confirms the GPU is the limiting factor.

At higher resolutions, the GPU's dominance grows. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 39 FPS (69 to 30). At 1440p, that delta is 28 FPS (48 to 20). At 4K, it is 16 FPS (28 to 12). The absolute FPS gap shrinks as resolution rises, but the percentage drop remains consistent around 57-58%. This indicates that the GPU is doing proportionally more work at each step, and the CPU is never the bottleneck.

For users considering upgrades, the data points to the GPU as the first priority. Swapping the Arc B370 for a stronger discrete card would yield immediate FPS gains across all resolutions. Replacing the CPU with a faster model would not change the measured results unless the GPU is also upgraded, because the current GPU cannot utilize the CPU's full potential.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, there is no best setting that maintains 60 FPS. The database lists no playable settings for this resolution, so even the least demanding preset (Low, 28 FPS average) falls far short. The recommended action is to avoid 4K entirely on this hardware.

At 2560x1440, the same verdict applies: no playable settings. The closest option is Low at 48 FPS average, which is 12 FPS below the threshold. Medium (32 FPS), High (27 FPS), and Ultra (20 FPS) are progressively worse. Users should lower the resolution to 1080p if they want a playable experience.

At 1920x1080, the best playable setting is Low, which delivers an average of 69 FPS. This is the only preset that clears 60 FPS. Medium averages 46 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS, all below the threshold. For users who prioritize smoothness over visuals, Low at 1080p is the definitive choice. There is no headroom for raising settings while staying above 60 FPS, since the next step (Medium) drops by 23 FPS.

The data suggests a hard ceiling: this PC can play Rust, but only at the lowest visual preset and only at 1080p. Any attempt to increase quality or resolution results in sub-60 FPS performance. The 69 FPS at 1080p Low is also close enough to the threshold that demanding server scenes with many players could push it lower, though the recorded average does clear the mark.