Rust

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this PC to run Rust?

A: According to the database, the only resolution where this combo reaches the 60 FPS playable threshold is 1920x1080. At 2560x1440 the best average FPS recorded is 53 (Low settings), and at 3840x2160 it drops to 31 FPS (Low settings).

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-14400F compare to its closest rivals?

A: The i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32279. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, scores 32233 (0.1% lower). The Intel Core i9-11900 scores 32226 (0.2% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS scores 32354 (0.2% higher). Performance is nearly identical across these four CPUs.

Q: What is the GPU performance tier of the Intel Arc B390?

A: The Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, scores 1463 (1.3% lower), and the GeForce GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% lower). This places it in the entry-level segment.

Q: What FPS does the combo deliver at 1080p Medium settings?

A: The measured average is 51 FPS, with a minimum of 44 and a maximum of 59. This falls below the 60 FPS playable threshold, so Medium settings at 1080p are not considered playable for this configuration.

Q: Which resolution and settings combination gives the highest average FPS?

A:** The highest recorded average FPS is 76, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration across all tested resolutions and presets that clears the 60 FPS playable threshold.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested systems?

A:** Out of 3723 total combinations in the database, this specific CPU and GPU pairing ranks 3312th for Rust. The data indicates it is in the bottom 11% of all tested configs for this game.

Best Settings per Resolution

3840x2160 (4K): No settings preset reaches 60 FPS. The best average is 31 FPS at Low, followed by 21 FPS at Medium, 18 FPS at High, and 13 FPS at Ultra. The database lists no playable settings at this resolution.

2560x1440 (1440p): No settings preset reaches 60 FPS. The best average is 53 FPS at Low, with Medium at 35 FPS, High at 30 FPS, and Ultra at 23 FPS. None of these configurations clear the playable threshold.

1920x1080 (1080p): The only playable preset is Low, which delivers an average of 76 FPS. Medium comes close at 51 FPS but misses the mark. High yields 43 FPS, and Ultra drops to 33 FPS. The database recommends Low as the best playable setting at this resolution.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a heavily GPU-limited scenario. At 1080p, reducing settings from Low to Ultra drops the average FPS from 76 to 33, a loss of 43 FPS. The CPU, with 10 cores and 16 threads, maintains consistent scores across resolutions, suggesting it is not the primary constraint.

Looking at resolution scaling, moving from 1080p Low (76 FPS) to 1440p Low (53 FPS) cuts performance by 23 FPS, a 30% reduction. Moving from 1440p Low to 4K Low (31 FPS) cuts another 22 FPS, a 42% reduction. This scaling pattern is typical for a GPU-bound workload: the Arc B390's rendering power degrades quickly as pixel count climbs.

The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with a boost clock of 2500 MHz. Its FP32 throughput is 7.680 TFLOPS. At 4K, even the Low preset only produces 31 FPS, while at 1080p Low it hits 76 FPS. This 2.5 times difference in frame rate for a 4x pixel count difference points to the GPU being the dominant factor across all tested resolutions.

The CPU's role becomes more apparent when comparing settings at the same resolution. At 1080p, the gap between Low (76 FPS) and Medium (51 FPS) is 25 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High (43 FPS) is only 8 FPS. This suggests the CPU can feed frames up to the 76 FPS level, but the GPU's limits surface at higher settings. The i5-14400F ranks in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, so processing power is not the limiting factor here; the GPU's 9th percentile ranking is the binding constraint.

How This Combo Ranks

This combination ranks 3312 out of 3723 tested combos for Rust, placing it in the bottom 11% of the database. The CPU alone performs well in general benchmarks, sitting at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. However, the GPU sits at the 9th percentile of all GPUs. The massive gap between CPU capability and GPU capability means the overall combo ranking is pulled down almost entirely by the graphics card.

The implication is that this system is severely unbalanced for Rust. The CPU has headroom, but the GPU cannot translate that into frame rate. At 4K Ultra, the combo delivers only 13 FPS, a number that makes the game effectively unplayable. Even at the best case, 1080p Low, the 76 FPS average is modest and leaves no headroom for demanding scenes.

Similar Performance Alternatives

From the CPU's nearest rivals, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (avg score 32233, 0.1% lower), the Intel Core i9-11900 (32226, 0.2% lower), the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS (32354, 0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i7-12800H (32121, 0.5% lower) would all behave nearly identically in Rust, assuming the same GPU. The performance difference is at most 0.5%, which is within noise.

For the GPU, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (avg score 1463, 1.3% lower), the GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% lower), the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% lower), and the GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% lower). These GPUs all sit in the same performance class as the Arc B390, so swapping the GPU to any of these would produce comparable frame rates in Rust. The delta range is 1.3% to 2.7%, meaning the user would see nearly identical FPS numbers.

If the goal is to keep the CPU and swap the GPU, the data suggests that any of these GPUs would deliver the same 76 FPS at 1080p Low, the same 53 FPS at 1440p Low, and the same 31 FPS at 4K Low. The differences are too small to matter in practice.

The Verdict

The database shows that this PC cannot run Rust at a playable 60 FPS at 4K or 1440p, regardless of settings. At 3840x2160, no settings preset reaches 60 FPS, and the best was 31 FPS at Low. At 2560x1440, the best is 53 FPS at Low, still below the threshold.

At 1920x1080, the system can run the game, but only on Low settings, with an average of 76 FPS. The verdictByResolution data lists only Low as a playable setting at 1080p, with Medium at 51 FPS being the next closest but not playable.

For a user targeting 60 FPS, the recommendation is to play at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The frame rate of 76 FPS gives some margin above the threshold, but there is no room to raise the quality to Medium without dropping to 51 FPS. At 1440p and 4K, this configuration is not playable at any setting.

Measured FPS Breakdown

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 31 average FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 21 average FPS, min 18, max 24
• High: 18 average FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 13 average FPS, no min/max recorded

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 53 average FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 35 average FPS, min 30, max 41
• High: 30 average FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 23 average FPS, no min/max recorded

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 76 average FPS, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 51 average FPS, min 44, max 59
• High: 43 average FPS, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 33 average FPS, no min/max recorded

The data shows a consistent pattern: every drop in resolution yields a noticeable gain in frame rate, and every drop in settings from Ultra to Low yields a substantial increase. The largest gain from a single setting change is from Low to Medium at 1080p, which costs 25 FPS on average. The smallest is from High to Ultra at 1080p, a 10 FPS difference. At 4K, the gain from Ultra to Low is 18 FPS, while at 1440p it is 30 FPS. The GPU is simply not powerful enough to handle this game at higher resolutions or settings.