Rust

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for this combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 570 in Rust covers three resolutions and four quality presets. All figures represent average frames per second; minimum and maximum frame data were not captured in the database.

At 1920x1080, the results show a clear progression from Low to Ultra. The Low preset delivers an average of 68.8 FPS, which is the only setting at this resolution that clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium drops to 47 FPS, a decline of roughly 32% from Low. High falls further to 39.2 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 26.6 FPS. The gap between Medium and High is 7.8 FPS, while the drop from High to Ultra is 12.6 FPS, indicating escalating cost per quality tier.

Moving to 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with lower absolute numbers. Low produces 48.7 FPS, which is 20.1 FPS below the 1080p Low result. Medium reaches 34.1 FPS, High manages 26.6 FPS, and Ultra sinks to 20.6 FPS. Notably, the 1440p High result (26.6 FPS) exactly matches the 1080p Ultra result (26.6 FPS), suggesting that the rendering load at those two points is similar for this hardware.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes marginal at best. Low averages 29.5 FPS, Medium 19.1 FPS, High 12.7 FPS, and Ultra 12.8 FPS. The Ultra figure is actually 0.1 FPS higher than High, which is within measurement noise but worth noting as an anomaly in the dataset. None of the 4K presets come close to the playable threshold.

Across all resolutions, the delta between Low and Ultra is substantial. At 1080p, the spread is 42.2 FPS (from 68.8 down to 26.6). At 1440p, the spread narrows to 28.1 FPS (48.7 down to 20.6). At 4K, the spread is only 16.7 FPS (29.5 down to 12.8). This compression at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes the limiting factor more aggressively as pixel count rises.

CPU and GPU Roles

The benchmark results make the division of labor clear. At 1080p, the CPU has enough headroom that the GPU is the dominant constraint, but the scaling between presets shows that the combination still responds to graphics load. The jump from Low to Medium costs 21.8 FPS, while Medium to High costs another 7.8 FPS. This progressive degradation suggests the RX 570 is the primary bottleneck, as the i5-9400 can feed frames at a rate that exceeds what the GPU can render at higher settings.

At 1440p, the resolution scaling penalty is steep. Compared to 1080p, every preset loses roughly 20% to 30% of its frame rate. Low drops from 68.8 to 48.7 FPS (a 29% reduction), Medium from 47 to 34.1 (27% reduction), High from 39.2 to 26.6 (32% reduction), and Ultra from 26.6 to 20.6 (23% reduction). This consistent proportional loss points to the GPU being the limiting factor, since a CPU-bound scenario would show less penalty from resolution increases.

At 4K, the picture shifts further toward GPU saturation. Low only manages 29.5 FPS, which is a 39% drop from the 1440p Low result. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is just 16.7 FPS, compared to 28.1 FPS at 1440p and 42.2 FPS at 1080p. When the GPU is fully saturated, quality settings have diminishing impact because the pixel fill rate becomes the absolute ceiling. The i5-9400, with its 6 cores and 6 threads, does not appear to be the limiting factor even at 1080p Low, where the frame rate is highest.

The data also shows that the CPU's role is more visible at lower settings. At 1080p Low, the system reaches 68.8 FPS, which is close to what the GPU can deliver in ideal conditions. The CPU is not holding the system back at that point. At higher presets and resolutions, the GPU's rendering load dominates, and the CPU's contribution becomes less measurable.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 1920x1080, the only preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 68.8 FPS. This is the sole playable configuration in the entire dataset. Medium sits at 47 FPS, which is 13 FPS short of the threshold, and High and Ultra are further behind at 39.2 and 26.6 FPS respectively.

At 2560x1440, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best result is Low at 48.7 FPS, which is 11.3 FPS below the playable threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall well short, with 34.1, 26.6, and 20.6 FPS respectively. The database records no playable settings for this resolution.

At 3840x2160, performance is uniformly poor. Low averages 29.5 FPS, Medium 19.1 FPS, and High and Ultra hover around 12.7 to 12.8 FPS. None of these configurations come close to the 60 FPS target. The verdict data confirms that no playable settings exist at 4K for this combination.

The best settings per resolution can be summarized as follows: at 1080p, Low is the only viable preset with 68.8 FPS; at 1440p, no preset qualifies, with Low being the least unplayable at 48.7 FPS; at 4K, no preset qualifies, with Low being the highest performer at 29.5 FPS.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Rust? The answer depends entirely on the target resolution and quality expectations. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system delivers 68.8 FPS average, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold by a comfortable margin of 8.8 FPS. This is the only configuration in the entire measurement set that achieves playable performance.

At 2560x1440, the verdict is negative across all presets. The highest recorded average is 48.7 FPS on Low, which is 11.3 FPS below the threshold. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall further behind, with results ranging from 34.1 down to 20.6 FPS. The database records no playable settings for this resolution.

At 3840x2160, the verdict is also negative. Low produces 29.5 FPS, Medium 19.1 FPS, and High and Ultra both sit near 12.7 to 12.8 FPS. The GPU is far too weak to handle the pixel count at this resolution, and no preset offers a playable experience.

In summary, this combination is capable of running Rust only at 1080p with the Low preset. Any step up in resolution or quality will push the frame rate below 60 FPS. For players who insist on 1440p or 4K, this hardware is not suitable. For 1080p gaming with modest visual expectations, the system meets the minimum playability standard.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combination can achieve in Rust?

A: The highest recorded average is 68.8 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this system run Rust at 2560x1440?

A: No. The best result at 1440p is 48.7 FPS on Low, which is below the 60 FPS playable threshold. No playable settings are recorded for this resolution.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p Low to 1440p Low?

A: The average frame rate drops from 68.8 FPS to 48.7 FPS, a reduction of 20.1 FPS or roughly 29%.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more likely to be the bottleneck in Rust with this hardware?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary constraint. As resolution increases, frame rates drop proportionally across all presets, and the gap between Low and Ultra narrows, which is characteristic of GPU saturation rather than CPU limitation.

Q: What is the lowest recorded average FPS in the dataset?

A: The lowest is 12.7 FPS at 3840x2160 with High settings. Ultra at the same resolution records 12.8 FPS, which is marginally higher.

Q: Does the Ultra preset ever outperform the High preset?

A: Only at 3840x2160, where Ultra averages 12.8 FPS versus High's 12.7 FPS. This 0.1 FPS difference is within measurement noise and not a meaningful performance advantage.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database's ranking of tested combinations for Rust, this pairing of the Intel Core i5-9400 and AMD Radeon RX 570 sits at rank 3500 out of 3723 total combinations. That places it in the bottom 6% of all tested systems, which aligns with the measured FPS data showing playable performance only at 1080p Low.

The rank reflects the GPU's age and tier. The RX 570 was designed for 1080p gaming at medium to high settings in its era, but Rust's continued updates and the game's demanding rendering load push this hardware to its limits. The i5-9400, while a capable 6-core processor, does not compensate for the GPU's limitations at higher resolutions.

Compared to the broader pool of 3723 combinations, this system is clearly on the lower end. The 3500 rank means that 223 combinations perform worse, but 3719 combinations perform better or equal. For a game like Rust, where the playable threshold is 60 FPS, this ranking is consistent with the fact that only one preset at one resolution meets that standard.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU, the Intel Core i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. The closest matches are the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 with an average score of 2259 (0.2% higher), the Intel Core i3-10305 at 2264 (0.4% higher), the Intel Core i7-10710U at 2248 (0.3% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 at 2246 (0.4% lower). These processors would deliver nearly identical CPU-bound behavior in Rust, meaning the GPU would remain the limiting factor in most scenarios.

For the GPU, the AMD Radeon RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28766. The nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6800M at 28874 (0.4% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 470 at 28996 (0.8% higher), the AMD Radeon R9 M295X at 28580 (0.7% lower), and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 at 28421 (1.2% lower). The RX 470 is particularly notable as it is essentially the same Polaris architecture with slightly different specifications, so it would produce very similar FPS numbers in Rust.

A system pairing the i5-9400 with an RX 470 would behave almost identically to the measured combination, with frame rates within roughly 1% at every resolution and preset. The R9 M295X and Quadro RTX 8000, despite their different market positions, have benchmark scores close enough that their in-game performance in Rust would be statistically indistinguishable from the RX 570. The RX 6800M, despite being a mobile part, also falls within the same performance band according to the averaged benchmarks.

For users considering alternatives, swapping the CPU to any of the listed rivals would not meaningfully change Rust's frame rates, since the GPU is the bottleneck. Swapping the GPU to an RX 470 would yield essentially the same experience, while the other listed GPUs would also land within a narrow margin of the RX 570's performance. None of these alternatives would unlock 1440p or 4K playability; they would all remain limited to 1080p Low settings for a 60 FPS experience.