Rust

The Intel Core i5-13400F and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT combination delivers a strong performance profile for Rust, placing at rank 1454 out of 3723 tested combos. The measured data shows this pairing is capable of smooth frame rates at 1080p and 1440p with high settings, while 4K requires a reduction in graphical fidelity to maintain playability. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS results, the balance between CPU and GPU workload, and the optimal settings for each resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance ranking of this CPU and GPU combo for Rust?

A: The combo ranks 1454th out of 3723 tested combinations, placing it in the upper half of all tested systems for this game.

Q: Can this system achieve 60 FPS at 4K resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, only the Low preset clears the 60 FPS threshold with an average of 77.3 FPS. The Medium preset averages 53.2 FPS, which falls short of the playable threshold.

Q: What is the best playable setting at 1440p?

A: The High preset is the most demanding setting that stays playable at 2560x1440, delivering an average of 72.4 FPS. The Ultra preset drops to 56.8 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS playability threshold.

Q: Does the Ultra preset work at 1080p?

A: Yes, at 1920x1080 the Ultra preset averages 80.6 FPS, which comfortably clears the 60 FPS threshold. All four tested presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) are playable at this resolution.

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

A: The RX 7700 XT has an average benchmark score of 22549, which is 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile and 0.8% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile.

Q: What is the CPU's multi-threaded performance like?

A: The i5-13400F scores 22604 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 25032 in PassMark multi-thread, with a benchmark percentile ranking of 77 against all CPUs.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT achieves a rank of 1454 out of 3723 tested combinations for Rust. This places the system in the 61st percentile of all tested combos, meaning it outperforms a clear majority of configurations while remaining short of the top tier. The CPU's average benchmark score of 25292 places it at the 77th percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU's average score of 22549 places it at the 67th percentile against all GPUs.

The ranking reflects a balanced pairing where neither component is a dramatic outlier. The i5-13400F's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS with a score of 25284 (0% difference), the Intel Core 5 120 at 25362 (-0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D at 25365 (-0.3%). These tight margins show the CPU sits in a crowded performance band where small benchmark differences translate to negligible real-world variance. On the GPU side, the RX 7700 XT's nearest rivals are the RTX 5060 Mobile at 22435 (0.5% slower), the RTX 4060 Mobile at 22729 (0.8% faster), and the RTX 2080 at 22895 (1.5% faster). The RX 7700 XT also comes out 1.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 at 22170.

The 1454th rank in a field of 3723 means this combo sits above the median but not among the elite. For a survival game like Rust, which can be demanding on both CPU and GPU depending on server population and base complexity, this mid-to-upper tier placement suggests a system that handles the game well without top-end hardware.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four quality presets, with average frame rates recorded for each combination. No minimum or maximum FPS values are available in the data, so this analysis relies on average FPS figures.

At 1920x1080, the system shows its strongest performance. The Low preset averages 190.9 FPS, the Medium preset averages 127.7 FPS, the High preset averages 108.2 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 80.6 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra shows a drop of 110.3 FPS, or roughly 58% of the Low preset's performance, which indicates the GPU is the primary scaling factor at this resolution.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates decrease across all presets. Low averages 128.8 FPS, Medium averages 84.6 FPS, High averages 72.4 FPS, and Ultra averages 56.8 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 72 FPS, a smaller absolute drop than at 1080p but a similar proportional reduction of about 56%. The High preset remains comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold, while Ultra falls just below it.

At 3840x2160, the performance hit becomes significant. Low averages 77.3 FPS, Medium averages 53.2 FPS, High averages 43.2 FPS, and Ultra averages 31.3 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 46 FPS, representing a 60% reduction from the Low preset's score. Only the Low preset clears the 60 FPS threshold at this resolution, and even it delivers a modest margin above the playability line.

The progression across resolutions shows a consistent pattern: each step up in resolution costs roughly 40-50% of the frame rate at a given preset. For example, the High preset drops from 108.2 FPS at 1080p to 72.4 FPS at 1440p, a 33% reduction, then to 43.2 FPS at 4K, another 40% reduction.

The Verdict

The data clearly shows this system can run Rust at playable frame rates across most settings, with the verdict depending on resolution. At 1920x1080, all four presets—Low, Medium, High, and Ultra—are playable, with the Ultra preset averaging 80.6 FPS. This makes 1080p the most flexible resolution for this combo, allowing users to prioritize visual quality without sacrificing smoothness.

At 2560x1440, three of the four presets remain playable: Low at 128.8 FPS, Medium at 84.6 FPS, and High at 72.4 FPS. The Ultra preset falls to 56.8 FPS, just below the 60 FPS threshold. Users at this resolution should stick to High settings for the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, as the step down to Medium does not provide a substantial frame rate improvement over the 12 FPS gap.

At 3840x2160, only the Low preset is playable with an average of 77.3 FPS. The Medium preset at 53.2 FPS and High at 43.2 FPS are both below the threshold, and Ultra at 31.3 FPS is markedly unplayable. This resolution requires significant graphical compromises, and even then, the margin above 60 FPS is modest.

The verdict across all resolutions: this PC can run Rust at 60 FPS or better at 1080p with any preset, at 1440p with up to High settings, and at 4K only with Low settings.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark data reveals how the balance between the Intel Core i5-13400F and the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT shifts across resolutions. At 1080p, the frame rates are high enough across all presets that the GPU is likely the limiting factor, especially at Ultra where the average drops to 80.6 FPS. The CPU's multi-threaded performance, scoring 22604 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 25032 in PassMark multi-thread, provides ample headroom for the game's server-side simulation and entity processing.

At 1440p, the GPU begins to dominate the performance equation more clearly. The drop from 1080p to 1440p at High settings is 35.8 FPS (from 108.2 to 72.4), which is a 33% reduction. This proportional decline tracks closely with the increase in pixel count, suggesting the GPU's rasterization throughput is the primary constraint. The CPU's single-thread score of 3191 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 3634 in PassMark single-thread remains sufficient to feed the GPU at this resolution.

At 4K, the GPU becomes the overwhelming bottleneck. The High preset drops to 43.2 FPS, and even Low only manages 77.3 FPS. The RX 7700 XT's 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are pushed hard at this resolution, and the pixel rate of 244.2 GPixel/s is insufficient to maintain high frame rates with demanding settings. The CPU's role diminishes further, as the frame rate is constrained almost entirely by the GPU's ability to process the increased resolution.

The scaling between presets also indicates the GPU's influence. At 1080p, moving from Low to Ultra costs 110.3 FPS, while at 4K the same preset change costs 46 FPS. The absolute difference shrinks because the GPU is already maxed out at 4K, so preset changes have a smaller relative impact.

Best Settings per Resolution

For each resolution, the most demanding preset that maintains an average of at least 60 FPS is the recommended setting.

At 1920x1080, the Ultra preset is the best choice, delivering 80.6 FPS. This is the highest quality setting tested, and it clears the 60 FPS threshold with a 20.6 FPS margin. Users can run the game at maximum visual quality without worrying about frame rate dips below the playable threshold.

At 2560x1440, the High preset is optimal, with an average of 72.4 FPS. This provides a 12.4 FPS margin above the threshold, which is sufficient for smooth gameplay in most situations. The Ultra preset at 56.8 FPS falls short, so High represents the best balance of visual quality and performance at this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset is the only playable option, averaging 77.3 FPS. While this is well above the threshold, it requires sacrificing most graphical features. The margin of 17.3 FPS above the threshold is adequate, but users should be prepared for reduced texture quality and effects at this resolution.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-13400F show that several CPUs offer nearly identical benchmark performance. The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS scores 25284, a 0% difference from the i5-13400F's 25292. The Intel Core 5 120 scores 25362, 0.3% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D scores 25365, also 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800H scores 25201, 0.4% lower. All four alternatives would behave similarly in Rust, with frame rate differences well within the margin of error.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile with a score of 22435 (0.5% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile at 22729 (0.8% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 at 22895 (1.5% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 at 22170 (1.7% lower). The RTX 2080 is the closest desktop equivalent in performance terms, while the mobile options would produce slightly different results due to power constraints. Users with these GPUs can expect frame rates within a few percentage points of the RX 7700 XT, meaning the same verdict applies: playable at 1080p and 1440p with high settings, but limited to Low at 4K.

The CPU's nearest rivals span both mobile and desktop parts, showing that the i5-13400F's performance tier is well-populated. The Ryzen 9 6900HS is a mobile chip, while the Core 5 120 and Ryzen 5 5600X3D are desktop parts, yet all sit within 0.4% of the i5-13400F's average benchmark score. This suggests the system's overall rank of 1454 would not meaningfully change with any of these alternative CPUs installed.