Rust

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is a high-performance combination for running Rust, a survival game released on 2018-02-07. Benchmark data shows this combo achieves playable frame rates across all tested resolutions and presets, with the most demanding settings requiring a resolution drop to maintain 60 FPS. The measured performance data indicates that the RTX 5080 handles the graphical load effectively, while the i5-12400 provides sufficient single-threaded and multi-threaded throughput for the game’s mechanics. The following analysis details the ranking, component roles, and optimal settings based on the measured FPS data.

FAQ

Q: What is the combo's overall rank for running Rust?

A: This specific CPU-GPU pairing ranks 280th out of 3723 tested combinations in the database for Rust, placing it in the top 7.5% of all tested systems.

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

A: Yes, at 3840x2160 resolution, the combo achieves playable frame rates on High, Medium, and Low settings, with High providing an average of 67.9 FPS. Ultra settings at 4K fall below the 60 FPS threshold, averaging 52.5 FPS.

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

A: At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 88.8 FPS, which is above the 60 FPS playable threshold. This makes Ultra the highest-quality setting that remains fluid at this resolution.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-12400 has an average benchmark score of 18683, which is nearly identical to the AMD EPYC 7643 (18697, -0.1% delta) and the Intel Core i7-1355U (18730, -0.3% delta). It is slightly ahead of the Intel Core i3-14100F (18519, +0.9% delta).

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

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 has an average benchmark score of 56083. It is 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon 8060S (55757) and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698), while being 2.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE (57367).

Q: What is the maximum FPS achievable at 1080p?

A: The highest average FPS recorded at 1920x1080 is 201.1 on Low settings. The Ultra preset still provides a very high 128.3 average FPS at this resolution.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-12400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 secures the 280th position out of 3,723 tested hardware configurations for Rust. This ranking places the system firmly in the upper echelon of tested builds, indicating that it outperforms the vast majority of other CPU-GPU pairings in the database for this specific title. The percentile data for individual components reinforces this: the CPU sits in the 72nd percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 87th percentile against all GPUs. The high GPU percentile suggests that the RTX 5080 is the primary driver of this strong rank, as its relative standing is significantly higher than the CPU’s. The data shows a clear disparity between the two components’ individual standings, yet when combined, they produce a system that is well above average for Rust. The rank of 280 out of 3723 means that roughly 3,443 other combos are slower, which is a substantial margin of superiority. This position is not just about raw component power; it reflects how well the two parts work together in the context of Rust’s engine, which appears to favor the RTX 5080’s architecture and memory bandwidth.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results indicate that the GPU exerts a dominant influence on performance at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s role becomes more pronounced at lower resolutions. At 3840x2160, the frame rates scale directly with the graphical preset, with Low averaging 122 FPS, Medium at 80.7 FPS, High at 67.9 FPS, and Ultra dropping to 52.5 FPS. This dramatic spread of nearly 70 FPS between Low and Ultra demonstrates that the RTX 5080 is the limiting factor at 4K, as the rendering load overwhelms the GPU before the CPU can become a bottleneck. At 2560x1440, the scaling pattern remains, but the absolute frame rates are higher across the board: Low hits 178.6 FPS, Medium 140.3 FPS, High 118.5 FPS, and Ultra 88.8 FPS. The relative gap between presets narrows slightly, but the GPU still dictates performance. The situation changes at 1920x1080, where the CPU begins to show its influence. Here, the difference between Low (201.1 FPS) and Medium (173.5 FPS) is just 27.6 FPS, and the gap between Medium and High (166 FPS) is only 7.5 FPS. This compression of frame rates at lower resolutions suggests that the i5-12400’s six cores and 12 threads are starting to limit the maximum achievable FPS, preventing the RTX 5080 from fully stretching its legs. The data shows that at 1080p, the CPU is the more significant factor, as the GPU has enough headroom to render frames quickly, but the CPU cannot feed it data fast enough to maintain the same scaling seen at higher resolutions. The CPU’s single-thread performance, evidenced by a 3dmark single-thread score of 910 and a Passmark single-thread score of 3456, is adequate for the game’s logic, but it is the constraining element at the lowest resolution tested.

The Verdict

Based on the verdictByResolution data, this PC can run Rust successfully at all three tested resolutions, provided the correct preset is selected. At 3840x2160, the playable settings are High, Medium, and Low, with the best-performing playable option being High at an average of 67.9 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra at 4K is not playable, as it averages 52.5 FPS, below the 60 FPS playable threshold. At 2560x1440, all four presets are playable, and the best setting is Ultra, which delivers an average of 88.8 FPS, well above the threshold. This makes 1440p the sweet spot for maximum visual quality while maintaining a comfortable frame rate margin. At 1920x1080, all presets are also playable, with Ultra averaging 128.3 FPS, providing a high-refresh-rate experience. The overall verdict is that the system is capable of running Rust smoothly, but users targeting 4K must sacrifice Ultra settings to stay above 60 FPS. For those prioritizing visual fidelity, 1440p Ultra is the recommended configuration, as it offers the best balance of image quality and performance. The data confirms that the combo is not just playable but highly capable, with even the most demanding 1080p preset exceeding 120 FPS.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are the AMD EPYC 7643, Intel Core i7-1355U, AMD Ryzen AI 5 330, and Intel Core i3-14100F. The AMD EPYC 7643 and Intel Core i7-1355U have scores within 0.3% of the i5-12400, meaning they would deliver nearly identical performance in CPU-bound scenarios. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 is 0.7% faster, while the Intel Core i3-14100F is 0.9% slower. These small deltas indicate that swapping the i5-12400 for any of these chips would result in negligible changes to Rust’s frame rates, especially at higher resolutions where the GPU is the bottleneck. For the GPU, the 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 Radeon 8060S is 0.6% faster, the RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is 0.7% faster, and the Pro W5700X is 2.3% faster, while the RX 9070 GRE is 2.2% slower. These differences are marginal, suggesting that any of these GPUs would produce similar FPS numbers in Rust. A user with a Radeon RX 9070 GRE would see slightly lower performance, but the delta is so small that the playability classification would remain unchanged. The benchmark data shows that these alternatives would place the combo in the same performance tier, making them viable substitutes without significant impact on the user experience.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is High, which averages 67.9 FPS. Medium and Low also clear the threshold with 80.7 and 122 FPS respectively, but High offers the best visual quality while maintaining the 60 FPS target. At 2560x1440, the Ultra preset is the most demanding option that remains playable, averaging 88.8 FPS. This setting provides the highest graphical fidelity at this resolution while still delivering a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold. At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is also the best choice, with an average of 128.3 FPS. This allows for maximum settings at 1080p without any concern about dropping below the playable threshold. The data suggests that users should choose High at 4K, Ultra at 1440p, and Ultra at 1080p to get the best visual experience while ensuring smooth gameplay. For those with high-refresh-rate monitors at 1080p, even the Low preset at 201.1 FPS is available, but the Ultra preset’s 128.3 FPS is more than sufficient for most displays.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low settings produce 122 FPS, Medium settings produce 80.7 FPS, High settings produce 67.9 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 52.5 FPS. No minimum or maximum FPS values are recorded in the data, so only averages are available for analysis. At 2560x1440, the results are significantly higher: Low averages 178.6 FPS, Medium averages 140.3 FPS, High averages 118.5 FPS, and Ultra averages 88.8 FPS. At 1920x1080, the frame rates are the highest of all resolutions: Low averages 201.1 FPS, Medium averages 173.5 FPS, High averages 166 FPS, and Ultra averages 128.3 FPS. The progression across resolutions shows a clear trend: for any given preset, dropping the resolution from 4K to 1440p yields a substantial FPS increase, and dropping from 1440p to 1080p yields a further, albeit smaller, increase. For example, on High settings, the FPS goes from 67.9 at 4K to 118.5 at 1440p (a 74.5% increase) and then to 166 at 1080p (a 40% increase from 1440p). This pattern indicates that the GPU is the primary limiter at 4K, but as resolution decreases, the CPU’s contribution becomes more noticeable. The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution decreases, from a 69.5 FPS difference at 4K to a 72.8 FPS difference at 1080p, suggesting that the CPU can maintain higher minimum frame rates at lower resolutions. The lack of min/max data prevents a full analysis of frame pacing, but the average values are consistently above the 60 FPS playable threshold for all playable settings.