Rust

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Rust with the Intel Core i5-14600KF and AMD Radeon RX 570 shows a clear pattern: playable frame rates exist only at 1080p with the lowest settings. At 4K, the combination struggles across all presets. The average FPS figures are the only metrics available, as minimum and maximum values were not recorded in the database.

At 1920x1080, the frame rates scale predictably with preset quality. Low settings deliver an average of 67.9 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. Medium settings drop to 47.3 FPS, a reduction of roughly 30% compared to Low. High settings fall further to 35.9 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 27.4 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is substantial, with Ultra delivering only about 40% of the Low setting's frame rate.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance declines noticeably across the board. Low settings average 45.4 FPS, which is below the playable threshold. Medium averages 32.9 FPS, High averages 23.9 FPS, and Ultra averages 19.6 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is steep: Low loses about 22 FPS, and the higher presets lose proportionally similar amounts. None of these settings reach 60 FPS, so 1440p is not viable for smooth gameplay with this hardware.

At 3840x2160, the results are mostly academic. Low settings average 24.6 FPS, Medium averages 18.6 FPS, Ultra averages 14.6 FPS, and High averages 14.1 FPS. The ordering is slightly unusual, as High performs marginally worse than Ultra, but both are far from playable. The RX 570's 4 GB GDDR5 memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for 4K rendering in Rust, and the GPU becomes the dominant bottleneck.

Comparing across resolutions, the frame rate loss from 1080p to 1440p is consistent at roughly 30-35% for each preset. From 1440p to 4K, the loss is even more severe, often exceeding 45%. This indicates that the GPU is heavily taxed as pixel count rises, and the CPU's strong single-thread performance cannot compensate.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Rust at 1080p with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings. The database shows an average of 67.9 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which exceeds the 60 FPS playable threshold. All other presets at this resolution fall below 60 FPS.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p with this hardware?

A: No preset at 2560x1440 reaches 60 FPS. The highest average is 45.4 FPS at Low settings. Medium, High, and Ultra all deliver below 33 FPS. For smooth gameplay at 1440p, a different GPU would be required.

Q: How does the RX 570 compare to its nearest rivals in raw benchmark scores?

A: The RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28,766. Its closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 6800M at 28,874, which is 0.4% faster. The AMD Radeon R9 M295X scores 28,580 (0.7% slower), the AMD Radeon RX 470 scores 28,996 (0.8% faster), and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 scores 28,421 (1.2% slower). These differences are negligible in real-world gaming.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the low frame rates at 4K?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at 3840x2160. The CPU has a strong single-thread score of 4,594 in Cinebench R23, but the RX 570's 5.095 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 4 GB memory are insufficient for 4K rendering. Frame rates at 4K are below 25 FPS even at Low settings, which points to GPU saturation.

Q: What settings should be used for a 60 FPS target?

A: The only configuration that meets the 60 FPS target is 1920x1080 with Low settings, delivering 67.9 FPS. If a user insists on higher visual quality, they must accept frame rates below 60 FPS, such as 47.3 FPS at Medium or 35.9 FPS at High.

Q: How does this combination rank among all tested hardware for Rust?

A: The combo ranks 3,552 out of 3,723 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 5% of all configurations. This is consistent with the measured frame rates, which only clear the playable threshold at the lowest resolution and preset.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the Intel Core i5-14600KF and the AMD Radeon RX 570 shifts dramatically depending on resolution. At 1080p, the CPU's capabilities are more relevant, but the GPU still governs the upper limits of performance. The i5-14600KF has a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,544 and a single-core score of 4,594, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (0.3% faster) and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 (0.8% slower), confirm that this processor is far from a bottleneck in most scenarios.

At 1920x1080, the scaling from Low to Medium to High shows a consistent drop in FPS, which suggests the GPU is handling the increased rendering load. The RX 570, with its 2,048 shading units and 32 ROPs, is a mid-range part from 2017. It sits in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, but its performance is clearly below modern standards. The 67.9 FPS at Low is achievable because the CPU can feed frames quickly, but the GPU cannot maintain that rate as settings rise.

At 2560x1440, the GPU's limitations become more pronounced. The frame rate at Low drops to 45.4 FPS, which is a 33% reduction from 1080p. This is a typical GPU-bound scaling pattern. The CPU's role diminishes because the GPU is spending more time on pixel shading and memory bandwidth. The RX 570's 224.0 GB/s bandwidth is strained at 1440p, and the 4 GB frame buffer may cause texture thrashing in Rust's open-world environments.

At 3840x2160, the GPU is unequivocally the bottleneck. The frame rates at all presets are below 25 FPS, and the differences between presets are small (ranging from 14.1 to 24.6 FPS). This indicates that the GPU is saturated regardless of settings. The CPU's high single-thread score is irrelevant when the GPU cannot render frames fast enough. The data shows that upgrading the GPU would yield the largest FPS gains at 4K, while the CPU would remain sufficient.

The scaling between presets also reveals the CPU's role. At 1080p, Ultra delivers 27.4 FPS versus Low's 67.9 FPS, a 40 FPS gap. At 1440p, the same comparison shows a 25.8 FPS gap (45.4 vs. 19.6). At 4K, the gap narrows to 10 FPS (24.6 vs. 14.6). This compression at higher resolutions confirms that GPU-bound scenarios reduce the impact of CPU-driven settings changes.

Similar Performance Alternatives

For the CPU, the Intel Core i5-14600KF sits in a tight cluster of comparable processors. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 has an average benchmark score of 49,228, just 0.3% higher than the i5-14600KF's 49,394. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49,196 (0.4% higher), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48,995 (0.8% lower). The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 49,796 (0.8% higher). In practical terms, all four rivals would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound performance in Rust, meaning the choice between them would not change the frame rate outcomes recorded here.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 570's nearest rivals are similarly matched. The AMD Radeon RX 6800M scores 28,874, which is 0.4% higher. The AMD Radeon R9 M295X scores 28,580 (0.7% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 470 scores 28,996 (0.8% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 scores 28,421 (1.2% lower). These deltas are within measurement noise, so swapping the RX 570 for any of these would produce essentially the same FPS in Rust. The RX 470, being the closest architectural sibling, would behave almost identically.

The takeaway is that neither the CPU nor the GPU has a standout rival that would push the combo into playable territory at higher resolutions. The CPU alternatives are all within 1% of each other, and the GPU alternatives are all within 1.2%. Users looking for better Rust performance would need to step outside these immediate rival groups, but the database does not provide data for such comparisons.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. The highest average is 24.6 FPS at Low settings, which is far below the playable threshold. The database records no playable settings for this resolution, so there is no recommended preset.

At 2560x1440, the situation is similar. The best average is 45.4 FPS at Low settings, which still misses the 60 FPS target. Medium averages 32.9 FPS, High averages 23.9 FPS, and Ultra averages 19.6 FPS. None of these are viable for smooth gameplay, so the database lists no playable settings.

At 1920x1080, Low settings are the only option that clears 60 FPS, with an average of 67.9 FPS. This is the recommended configuration for this hardware. Medium settings at 47.3 FPS are close but still below the threshold, and High (35.9 FPS) and Ultra (27.4 FPS) are too demanding. The verdict data confirms this: the only playable setting at 1080p is Low, and the best average FPS at that setting is 67.9.

For users who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, Medium at 1080p offers a compromise at 47.3 FPS, but it does not meet the defined playable standard. The database's playable threshold is 60 FPS, and only the Low preset at 1080p satisfies it across all tested resolutions.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Rust? The answer is conditional: yes, but only in a narrow configuration. The measured data shows that the Intel Core i5-14600KF and AMD Radeon RX 570 combination delivers playable performance exclusively at 1920x1080 with Low settings, where the average frame rate is 67.9 FPS. This clears the 60 FPS threshold by a comfortable margin, but it requires sacrificing most visual quality options.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is a clear no. The best achievable average is 45.4 FPS at Low settings, which falls short of the playable threshold. All other presets at 1440p are below 33 FPS, making the experience noticeably stuttery. At 3840x2160, the hardware is entirely inadequate, with even Low settings averaging only 24.6 FPS.

The overall ranking reflects this reality: the combo sits at 3,552 out of 3,723 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 5%. The CPU is not the problem, as its benchmark scores are strong and its rivals are all within 1%. The GPU is the limiting factor, and its 4 GB memory and 5.095 TFLOPS compute are simply not enough for Rust at higher resolutions or settings.

For a practical recommendation: if you own this hardware and want to play Rust, run it at 1080p with Low settings. That will give you a playable experience. If you want higher resolutions or better visual quality, the data indicates that a GPU upgrade is necessary, as the CPU has ample headroom to support a faster graphics card. The recorded frame rates at 1080p Low (67.9 FPS) versus 1080p Medium (47.3 FPS) show that even modest setting increases push the GPU past its limits.