Rust

Intel Core i5-9400 paired with Intel Arc B370 is a combination that sits near the bottom of the database’s performance hierarchy for Rust. The recorded data shows a system that is heavily constrained by the integrated-class GPU, with only one playable configuration across all tested resolutions. The following analysis breaks down the measured results, ranking context, and component roles based solely on the recorded benchmarks.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers four presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) across three resolutions: 3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080. The results indicate a consistent pattern: as resolution increases, performance degrades sharply, and as settings intensify, the same effect occurs.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 12 to 28. The lowest preset, Low, delivers an average of 28 FPS. Medium drops to 19 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 16 and maximum of 22. High settings yield 16 FPS on average, and Ultra is the slowest at 12 FPS. Notably, only the Medium preset at this resolution has recorded min/max values; the others only have averages.

At 2560x1440, the performance improves but remains far below the playable threshold. Low settings deliver an average of 48 FPS. Medium averages 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 and maximum of 37. High settings average 27 FPS, and Ultra averages 20 FPS. As with 4K, only Medium provides min/max data at this resolution.

At 1920x1080, the results are the strongest of the entire test set. Low settings achieve an average of 69 FPS, which is the only preset across all resolutions that clears the 60 FPS playable threshold defined in the database. Medium averages 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 and maximum of 53. High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. Again, only Medium has recorded min/max values.

The absence of min/max data for most presets indicates either that the frame pacing was stable enough to be unremarkable, or that the measurement methodology only recorded those deltas for the Medium preset. Regardless, the average FPS numbers tell a clear story: this combination struggles to maintain fluid gameplay outside of 1080p Low.

Best Settings per Resolution

The database’s playable threshold is set at 60 FPS. Based on the recorded measurements, only one resolution and preset combination meets that bar.

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS. The best average is 28 FPS on Low, but that is still less than half the required threshold. The verdict data confirms there are no playable settings at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the same result applies. No preset reaches 60 FPS. The highest average is 48 FPS on Low, which is 12 FPS short. The database records no playable settings here either.

At 1920x1080, the situation changes. Low settings produce an average of 69 FPS, which exceeds the threshold by 9 FPS. This is the only playable configuration. Medium averages 46 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS, all below the threshold. The database lists Low as the best settings for 1080p, with an average FPS of 69 at that setting.

Therefore, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low at 1080p. No other preset or resolution combination achieves even 50 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 3437 out of 3723 tested combos in Rust. This places it in the bottom 8% of all recorded configurations. The percentile data for the individual components reinforces this: the CPU is in the 47th percentile of all CPUs, which is near the median, while the GPU is in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it is at the very low end of the performance curve.

The rank of 3437 out of 3723 means that only 286 combos tested worse than this one. In practical terms, this is one of the weakest pairings in the database for running Rust. The CPU itself is not the primary bottleneck; the GPU is the clear limiter. The CPU’s benchmark scores are respectable for its class, with an average benchmark score of 2254, but the GPU’s average score is only 1184, which is far below the typical baseline.

The data suggests that this combo is not suitable for any resolution above 1080p, and even at 1080p, it only handles the lowest settings. The ranking directly reflects this: out of 3723 combinations, 3437 perform better. This is a critical data point for anyone evaluating this hardware pairing.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Rust at 4K resolution?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 28 on Low settings. Medium averages 19, High averages 16, and Ultra averages 12. None of these approach the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: What is the highest playable preset at 1080p?

A: Low is the only playable preset at 1920x1080. It achieves an average of 69 FPS. Medium is 46 FPS, High is 39 FPS, and Ultra is 30 FPS, all below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does this combo compare to other tested systems?

A: The database ranks this combination 3437 out of 3723 tested. This means 3436 other combos perform better in Rust, and only 286 perform worse.

Q: Which component is holding back performance?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. Its average benchmark score is 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The CPU’s average score is 2254, which is in the 47th percentile. The GPU’s relative weakness is far more limiting than the CPU’s.

Q: Is there any scenario where this combo reaches 60 FPS beyond Low?

A: No. The database shows no other settings or resolution combination that reaches 60 FPS. The only configuration that clears the threshold is 1080p Low with an average of 69 FPS.

Q: What are the FPS ranges at 1440p Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 Medium, the average is 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 and maximum of 37. This is the only 1440p preset with recorded min/max data.

CPU and GPU Roles

The data reveals a stark division of responsibility between the processor and the graphics solution. The Intel Core i5-9400 has six cores and six threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. It scored 6629 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 935 in single-core. These are solid figures for a mid-range desktop chip. The GPU, however, is an Intel Arc B370 with a boost clock of 2400 MHz, 1280 shading units, and a recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184. Its percentile ranking of 5 places it among the weakest graphics processors in the database.

Looking at the scaling between resolutions, the GPU’s limitations become stark. At 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS is 69. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops it to 48 FPS, a 24% decrease in average FPS. Going to 3840x2160 Low drops it further to 28 FPS, which is a 59% decline from the 1080p result. This is a classic pattern of a GPU that runs out of fill rate or shading capacity as pixel count increases. The CPU is likely not the primary constraint at 1080p, but at 4K the frame rate becomes entirely dependent on the GPU’s ability to process geometry and pixels.

The preset scaling tells the same story. At 1080p, transitioning from Low to Medium drops the average from 69 to 46 FPS, a 23 FPS penalty. From Medium to High, it drops to 39 FPS, and from High to Ultra, it falls to 30 FPS. At 1440p, the same progression goes from 48 to 32 to 27 to 20. At 4K, the numbers are 28, 19, 16, and 12. The relative drop between presets is consistent, indicating that the GPU’s fixed hardware resources are saturated at each level. The CPU, with its six threads, is unlikely to be the primary limiter at any setting, as the frame rate scales inversely with settings and resolution, which is GPU-bound behavior.

The conclusion is that the GPU is the primary constraining factor at all resolutions. The CPU can feed it at 1080p Low, but the GPU cannot render frames fast enough to reach 60 FPS at higher settings or resolutions.

The Verdict

The verdict from the database is clear: this PC can run Rust, but only under a very narrow set of conditions. According to the verdictByResolution data, the only playable settings are at 1920x1080 with Low settings, producing an average of 69 FPS. At 2560x1440, there are no playable settings; the best average is 48 FPS on Low. At 3840x2160, there are also no playable settings; the best average is 28 FPS on Low.

If the target is a stable 60 FPS or higher, this system only achieves it at 1080p with the lowest graphics preset. At 1080p Medium, the average falls to 46 FPS, which is below the playable threshold. At 1080p High, it is 39 FPS, and at Ultra, it is 30 FPS. There is no margin for visual quality improvements.

The combination ranks 3437 out of 3723 in the database, meaning 3437 other combinations perform better in Rust. The GPU is the primary bottleneck, as evidenced by its 5th percentile ranking. Therefore, while the system is technically capable of running Rust, it is only playable at the absolute minimum quality preset, and any attempt to increase visual fidelity will result in sub-60 FPS performance.

Similar Performance Alternatives

The database provides nearest rival lists for both the CPU and the GPU, based on their average benchmark scores. These alternatives would behave similarly in Rust, given their comparable scores.

For the CPU, the Intel Core i5-9400 has an average score of 2254. The closest rival is the Intel Core i7-1068NG7, with an average score of 2259, a delta of -0.2% (meaning the i5 is slightly slower). The Intel Core i3-10305 is also close, with an average score of 2264, a delta of -0.4%. The Intel Core i7-10710U scores 2248, a delta of +0.3%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 scores 2252, a delta of +0.4%. These chips are within 4 points of the i5-9400, so they would likely deliver nearly identical frame rates in Rust when paired with the same GPU.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc B370 has an average score of 1184. Its nearest rivals are all older, low-end discrete GPUs. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, a delta of -0.2%. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, a delta of -0.5%. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, a delta of -0.7%. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, a delta of +1.4%. These are all within 1.4% of the Arc B370’s score, meaning they would produce very similar FPS numbers in Rust.

If a user has any of these CPUs or GPUs, the measured performance for this combo is a reliable indicator of what to expect. The CPU alternatives would not change the bottleneck, and the GPU alternatives would not improve the frame rates. This pairing is firmly in the low-performance tier for Rust.