Rust

The Intel Core i5-12400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 delivers a highly capable Rust experience across most common gaming resolutions, though the data reveals a clear performance ceiling at 4K. Benchmark results show the combination scales impressively from 1080p through 1440p, with the playable threshold of 60 FPS easily cleared at every preset level in those ranges. The story changes at 3840x2160, where only the Low preset maintains smooth gameplay, indicating that the GPU’s rendering load at that resolution becomes the dominant factor. Across all measured presets, the average frame rates demonstrate a consistent pattern: lower settings unlock substantial headroom, while Ultra settings remain viable only up to 1440p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows a wide performance envelope. The Low preset produces an average of 204.5 FPS, which is the highest recorded figure for this combo in the entire dataset. Medium follows at 140.8 FPS, High at 120.6 FPS, and Ultra at 94.5 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra represents a drop of 110 FPS, indicating that each preset tier imposes a significant cost on the GPU. Even at Ultra, the average remains well above the 60 FPS playable threshold, leaving substantial headroom for demanding scenes or background tasks. The gap between Medium and High is relatively modest at 20.2 FPS, while the jump from High to Ultra costs another 26.1 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the highest visual quality.

Moving to 2560x1440, the averages shift downward but remain robust. Low delivers 147.9 FPS, Medium 96.1 FPS, High 82.9 FPS, and Ultra 66.1 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra here is a 81.8 FPS reduction, which mirrors the 1080p pattern but with a steeper relative drop at the top end. Ultra at 1440p sits only 6.1 FPS above the 60 FPS threshold, meaning that while it is technically playable, it offers less margin for frame-time spikes compared to the 1080p results. The Low preset at 1440p still outperforms the High preset at 1080p by 27.3 FPS, highlighting how resolution scaling interacts with preset choices.

At 3840x2160, the performance picture changes dramatically. Low averages 83.5 FPS, which is the only preset at this resolution to clear the 60 FPS mark. Medium drops to 55.3 FPS, High to 48.9 FPS, and Ultra to 39.3 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium at 4K is a substantial 28.2 FPS, while the drop from Medium to High is 6.4 FPS, and from High to Ultra another 9.6 FPS. The 4K Ultra result is less than half of the 1080p Ultra figure, demonstrating that the RX 9070’s rendering capabilities are heavily taxed by the increased pixel count. Notably, the 4K Low average of 83.5 FPS is nearly identical to the 1440p High average of 82.9 FPS, suggesting that preset and resolution trade-offs can produce similar outcomes.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU’s nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, provide context for how the i5-12400F positions itself. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS scores 19047, a 0% delta from the i5-12400F’s performance level. The Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056 with a -0.1% delta, placing it statistically identical. The Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982 with a 0.3% delta, and the AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18979 with a 0.3% delta. These figures indicate that the i5-12400F sits within a tight cluster of processors, where the largest measured difference is only 0.4%. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would likely deliver similar frame pacing in Rust, though the i5-12400F’s desktop-oriented design with 6 cores and 12 threads may behave differently in sustained workloads compared to the mobile and server parts listed.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 9070’s nearest rivals reveal a similar story. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z scores 23736, a 0.6% delta. The AMD Radeon RX 6800S scores 24063, a -0.8% delta. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile scores 23628, a 1.1% delta. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER scores 24170, a -1.2% delta. The RX 9070’s average benchmark score of 23877 places it between the RTX 2080 SUPER and the RX 6800S, with the closest competitor being the GTX TITAN Z at a 0.6% difference. This suggests that users with any of these GPUs should expect broadly comparable FPS in Rust, though architectural differences could influence specific scene rendering. The RX 9070’s 16 GB of memory and RDNA 4.0 architecture may provide advantages in texture-heavy areas that these benchmarks do not fully capture.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data reveals how the balance between CPU and GPU shifts across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor, as evidenced by the wide spread between Low (204.5 FPS) and Ultra (94.5 FPS). The CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads, with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, provide sufficient headroom to feed the GPU at lower presets, but the rendering workload dominates as settings increase. The 110 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p indicates that the RX 9070’s compute units and memory bandwidth are the primary constraints.

At 2560x1440, the GPU’s role becomes more pronounced. The Low preset still achieves 147.9 FPS, which is higher than the 1080p High result, confirming that the CPU is not a bottleneck at this resolution when settings are reduced. However, the Ultra preset drops to 66.1 FPS, showing that the increased pixel count amplifies the GPU’s workload. The scaling from 1080p Ultra to 1440p Ultra represents a 28.4 FPS reduction, while the same preset change from 1440p Ultra to 4K Ultra costs another 26.8 FPS. This pattern suggests that resolution scaling has a near-linear impact on GPU performance, while the CPU contribution remains relatively constant.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is unequivocally the dominant component. The Low preset’s 83.5 FPS versus Ultra’s 39.3 FPS demonstrates that the RX 9070 cannot maintain high frame rates at 4K even with reduced settings. The CPU’s benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multicore result of 12380, indicate it has ample processing power for Rust’s simulation and physics systems, but the 4K data shows that GPU fill rate and pixel throughput are the limiting factors. The absence of min and max FPS values in the dataset prevents a full characterization of frame time consistency, but the average figures alone suggest that the CPU plays a secondary role at 4K.

The Verdict

The data confirms that this combination can run Rust successfully, but the playable resolution range is clearly defined by the 60 FPS threshold. At 1920x1080, all four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—clear 60 FPS, with Ultra averaging 94.5 FPS. At 2560x1440, the same is true, though Ultra’s 66.1 FPS average offers less margin above the threshold. At 3840x2160, only the Low preset is playable, averaging 83.5 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K falls short at 55.3 FPS, and High and Ultra are well below the threshold at 48.9 and 39.3 FPS respectively.

For users prioritizing visual fidelity, 1440p Ultra is the highest quality setting that maintains playability, with an average of 66.1 FPS. At 1080p, Ultra provides a more comfortable experience at 94.5 FPS, leaving room for frame rate drops during intense moments without falling below 60 FPS. The 4K resolution should only be considered with the Low preset, which delivers playable but visually reduced performance. The verdict data from the benchmark database lists 1440p and 1080p as fully playable across all settings, while 4K is restricted to Low. This makes the combo a strong choice for high-refresh-rate 1080p displays and a solid performer for 1440p, but not a 4K-capable configuration for this game.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, the best playable setting is Low, which achieves an average of 83.5 FPS. This preset provides a comfortable margin above the 60 FPS threshold, though it sacrifices most visual enhancements. The Medium preset at 55.3 FPS is not viable for sustained play, so users at 4K must accept Low settings to avoid dropping below the target. The 83.5 FPS average suggests that even this preset may experience occasional dips, but the overall experience remains fluid.

At 2560x1440, the best playable setting is Ultra, with an average of 66.1 FPS. This is the highest preset that clears 60 FPS, but the margin is slim. Users who prefer consistent frame rates might opt for High at 82.9 FPS, which offers a more comfortable buffer. The data shows that Ultra at 1440p is playable, but it does not provide the same headroom as lower presets. The jump from High to Ultra costs 16.8 FPS, which may be noticeable in fast-paced combat scenarios.

At 1920x1080, the best playable setting is also Ultra, averaging 94.5 FPS. This preset delivers both high visual quality and robust performance, with enough headroom above 60 FPS to absorb most frame time variations. The Low preset’s 204.5 FPS is ideal for competitive play or high-refresh-rate monitors, but Ultra provides the best balance of aesthetics and performance. The 1080p Ultra result is 28.4 FPS higher than the 1440p Ultra result, demonstrating the resolution’s impact on the GPU.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Rust at 4K with high settings?

A: No. The data shows that at 3840x2160, the High preset averages 48.9 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Only the Low preset at 4K achieves playable performance with an average of 83.5 FPS.

Q: What is the highest preset that maintains 60 FPS at 1440p?

A: The Ultra preset at 2560x1440 averages 66.1 FPS, making it the highest playable setting at that resolution. However, the margin above 60 FPS is only 6.1 FPS, so High at 82.9 FPS may be a more consistent choice.

Q: How does the Ultra preset at 1080p compare to the High preset at 1440p?

A: Ultra at 1920x1080 averages 94.5 FPS, while High at 2560x1440 averages 82.9 FPS. The 1080p Ultra configuration is 11.6 FPS faster, despite using a higher preset, because of the reduced pixel count.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more important for Rust at 1080p?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor at 1080p. The data shows a 110 FPS difference between Low (204.5 FPS) and Ultra (94.5 FPS) presets, indicating that rendering workload, not CPU processing, determines performance at this resolution.

Q: What is the average FPS for Medium settings at 4K?

A: The Medium preset at 3840x2160 averages 55.3 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. This setting is not recommended for smooth gameplay at 4K.

Q: How does the RX 9070 compare to its nearest GPU rival in this dataset?

A: The RX 9070’s average benchmark score is 23877, which is 0.6% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z (23736) and 1.1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile (23628). It trails the AMD Radeon RX 6800S by 0.8%, which scores 24063.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-12400F and AMD Radeon RX 9070 combination ranks 1093 out of 3723 tested combos in Rust. This places it in the upper third of all configurations in the benchmark database, indicating a strong overall performance level. The CPU’s percentile ranking of 73 against all processors and the GPU’s percentile ranking of 69 against all GPUs both contribute to this solid position. The rank is particularly notable given that the CPU is a mid-range desktop part from 2022, while the GPU is a recent release from 2025. The combination’s ability to exceed 60 FPS at 1440p Ultra and approach 100 FPS at 1080p Ultra demonstrates that the pairing is well-balanced for this game, even if the 4K results fall short of high preset expectations. The 1093 rank out of 3723 suggests that a majority of tested combos perform worse, making this a reliable choice for Rust players who prioritize high frame rates at standard resolutions.