Rust

The Intel Core i5-14600KF and Intel Arc B370 combination presents a significant imbalance when tasked with running Rust. The CPU is a high-end desktop processor, while the GPU is an integrated-class part with a low benchmark percentile. The measured frame rates reflect this, showing that the system struggles to maintain playable performance at most settings and resolutions. The data indicates that the graphics processor is the primary limiting factor, and only the lowest settings at 1080p allow the game to clear the 60 FPS threshold.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The CPU and GPU in this system occupy very different positions in the database’s performance hierarchy. The Intel Core i5-14600KF sits in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49394. Its nearest rivals in the database are all within a narrow margin of performance. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 scores 49228, which is a 0.3% difference. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G scores 49196, a 0.4% difference. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48995, a 0.8% difference. On the other side, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 49796, which is 0.8% higher. These deltas are small, meaning a user moving from the i5-14600KF to any of these processors would see nearly identical CPU-bound behavior in Rust. The 14 cores, 20 threads, and Raptor Lake architecture of the i5-14600KF place it in the same performance class as these rivals, so the CPU is not the bottleneck in this pairing.

The Intel Arc B370 tells a different story. It sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1184 from the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its nearest rivals are older, low-power parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, which is 0.2% higher. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, which is 0.5% higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, which is 0.7% higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, which is 1.4% lower. These are all legacy or entry-level mobile parts, and the Arc B370 matches their performance level. The Arc B370 has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, with a boost clock of 2400 MHz. Its FP32 throughput is 6.144 TFLOPS. These specifications align with a low-end integrated GPU rather than a discrete gaming card. The database places it in the Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake) generation, using the Xe3-LPG architecture on a 3 nm process. Its memory is system shared, with bandwidth described as system dependent, which further explains its limited gaming performance.

For Rust specifically, the nearest GPU rivals indicate the expected performance envelope. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M are both parts that would struggle with modern survival games, and the Arc B370 behaves similarly. The CPU rivals, by contrast, are all modern high-core-count processors that would have no trouble feeding a faster GPU. This means the combination of a 90th percentile CPU with a 5th percentile GPU creates a system where the GPU is the clear performance ceiling. Any of the rival CPUs listed would produce essentially identical frame rates in this game when paired with the Arc B370, because the game’s performance is dictated by the GPU’s rendering capabilities, not the processor’s compute headroom.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data shows how the workload shifts across resolutions and presets. At 3840x2160, the game is heavily GPU-bound. The Low preset produces an average of 28 FPS, while Medium drops to 19 FPS, High to 16 FPS, and Ultra to 12 FPS. The scaling from Low to Medium is a 9 FPS drop, from Medium to High a 3 FPS drop, and from High to Ultra a 4 FPS drop. This pattern indicates that each increase in graphical load directly reduces the frame rate, which is the signature of a GPU-limited scenario. The CPU, with its high multi-threaded scores such as 32544 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 38697 in Passmark multithread, is not the constraint at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the same trend continues. Low settings yield 48 FPS, Medium 32 FPS, High 27 FPS, and Ultra 20 FPS. The difference between Low and Medium is 16 FPS, the largest step in this resolution, while Medium to High drops 5 FPS and High to Ultra drops 7 FPS. The absolute numbers are higher than at 4K, but the pattern remains consistent: more demanding settings cost proportionally more frame rate. The GPU is still the limiting component.

At 1920x1080, the picture changes slightly. Low settings reach 69 FPS, which is the only playable result in the entire dataset. Medium drops to 46 FPS, High to 39 FPS, and Ultra to 30 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 23 FPS, the largest single-step drop in any resolution. This suggests that at 1080p Low, the system is close to a balance point where the GPU can keep up, but any increase in settings immediately overwhelms it. The CPU’s role becomes more visible at this resolution because the GPU is less burdened, but the Arc B370 still cannot sustain 60 FPS at Medium or above. The data shows that the GPU matters more than the CPU at every resolution and preset combination, because the frame rates scale directly with graphical settings rather than with CPU capability.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded measurements provide a complete picture of the system’s performance in Rust. At 3840x2160, the High preset delivers an average of 16 FPS with no recorded minimum or maximum. The Low preset averages 28 FPS. The Medium preset averages 19 FPS, with a minimum of 16 FPS and a maximum of 22 FPS. The Ultra preset averages 12 FPS. These numbers are far below the 60 FPS playable threshold. Even the best result at this resolution, Low at 28 FPS, is less than half of the target.

At 2560x1440, the High preset averages 27 FPS. Low averages 48 FPS. Medium averages 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 FPS and a maximum of 37 FPS. Ultra averages 20 FPS. The Low preset at 48 FPS is the closest this resolution comes to playable, but it still falls 12 FPS short of the threshold. The Medium preset’s minimum of 27 FPS shows that frame pacing is inconsistent, with drops that would be noticeable during gameplay.

At 1920x1080, the High preset averages 39 FPS. Low averages 69 FPS, which is the only average above the 60 FPS threshold in the entire dataset. Medium averages 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. Ultra averages 30 FPS. The Medium preset’s maximum of 53 FPS never reaches 60, confirming that even the best-case frame rate at Medium is not playable. The Low preset’s 69 FPS average provides a comfortable margin above the threshold, though no minimum or maximum was recorded for that setting.

The progression across resolutions is consistent. At each resolution, Low is the fastest preset, followed by Medium, then High, then Ultra. The delta between Low and Ultra grows as resolution decreases: at 4K it is 16 FPS, at 1440p it is 28 FPS, and at 1080p it is 39 FPS. This is because lower resolutions put less absolute load on the GPU, allowing the differences between presets to become more pronounced. The data also shows that the gap between Low and Medium is consistently the largest step at every resolution, indicating that the Medium preset introduces a significant increase in rendering cost that the Arc B370 cannot absorb.

How This Combo Ranks

The database ranks this combination at 3437 out of 3723 tested combos for Rust. This places it in the bottom 8% of all systems measured, a position that aligns with the GPU’s 5th percentile standing. The CPU’s high percentile does not rescue the ranking, because the game’s performance is dominated by the GPU. The combo rank of 3437 means there are 286 tested combinations that perform worse, but the vast majority of systems in the database outperform this pairing.

The rank reflects the measured FPS data across all resolutions and presets. A system that cannot reach 60 FPS at 1080p Medium, and cannot reach 60 FPS at any setting above 1080p Low, will naturally sit near the bottom of the distribution. The CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 or the Intel Core Ultra 5 245, would not change this ranking if substituted in, because the GPU would still constrain the frame rates. The GPU’s nearest rivals, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770 or the AMD FirePro M2000, would likely produce similar or worse rankings, confirming that the Arc B370 is the determining factor.

The ranking also highlights the imbalance in this specific pairing. The CPU is a 90th percentile part, while the GPU is a 5th percentile part. In the database’s hierarchy, this is an extreme mismatch. The recorded benchmark scores underline this: the CPU’s average benchmark score is 49394, while the GPU’s is 1184. The CPU outperforms the GPU by a factor of roughly 42 in raw benchmark terms. In Rust, however, the GPU cannot translate the CPU’s compute headroom into frame rate, so the system performs like a low-end integrated graphics machine rather than a desktop gaming rig.

The Verdict

The verdict data is unambiguous. At 3840x2160, there are no playable settings. The best average FPS at this resolution is 28 on Low, which is far below the 60 FPS threshold. At 2560x1440, there are also no playable settings. The best average is 48 FPS on Low, still 12 FPS short of playable. At 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only playable option, with an average of 69 FPS. Medium, High, and Ultra all fail to reach 60 FPS.

This means the PC can run Rust, but only under a narrow set of conditions. A user must select 1080p resolution and the Low preset to get a playable experience. Any other resolution, or any higher preset at 1080p, results in frame rates below the threshold. The 69 FPS average at 1080p Low provides some headroom, but the absence of recorded minimum and maximum values for that setting means there is no data on frame consistency. The Medium preset at 1080p, which does have recorded minimum and maximum values, shows a range of 39 to 53 FPS, indicating that even when the average is close to playable, the lows can dip well below it.

The system is not suitable for higher resolutions. At 1440p, the best case is 48 FPS on Low, which is borderline but below the threshold. At 4K, even Low settings produce only 28 FPS, which is a slideshow-like experience for a survival game where responsiveness matters. The GPU’s system-shared memory and system-dependent bandwidth likely contribute to these results, as the Arc B370 has no dedicated VRAM to buffer textures and geometry.

Best Settings per Resolution

The best settings analysis follows directly from the measured data. At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS, so the database records no best settings and no average FPS at best. The highest average at this resolution is 28 FPS on Low, but since it does not meet the playable threshold, it cannot be recommended as a playable configuration.

At 2560x1440, the same situation applies. No preset reaches 60 FPS, so there are no playable settings and no best settings recorded. The closest result is Low at 48 FPS, which is below the threshold and therefore not viable for playable performance.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset is the most demanding setting that stays at or above 60 FPS. The average FPS at this setting is 69. This is the only configuration in the entire dataset that meets the playable threshold. The Medium preset at 46 FPS, High at 39 FPS, and Ultra at 30 FPS all fall short. The 23 FPS gap between Low and Medium at 1080p shows how sharply performance degrades when the preset is increased, so users should not expect to raise settings without a substantial frame rate penalty.

For a user with this specific CPU and GPU combination, the practical takeaway is that Rust is playable only at 1080p with Low settings. The CPU’s strength does not help at higher resolutions because the GPU cannot deliver the necessary rendering throughput. The database’s measured results provide no evidence that any other setting or resolution can reach the 60 FPS target. The system’s rank of 3437 out of 3723 combos reflects this limited capability, and the verdict data confirms that the GPU is the hard ceiling for this game.