Rust

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Rust on this Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with the Intel Arc B370 shows a clear performance ceiling imposed by the graphics solution. At 3840x2160, the results are consistently below playable thresholds. The High preset averages 16 FPS, Medium averages 19 FPS with a minimum of 16 FPS and a maximum of 22 FPS, Low reaches 28 FPS, and Ultra drops to 12 FPS. None of these figures approach the 60 FPS playable threshold, and the gap is substantial.

Dropping to 2560x1440 improves the situation but does not change the overall verdict. High averages 27 FPS, Medium averages 32 FPS with a minimum of 27 FPS and a maximum of 37 FPS, Low reaches 48 FPS, and Ultra sits at 20 FPS. The scaling from 4K to 1440p is roughly linear in percentage terms for most presets, but the absolute numbers remain far too low for smooth gameplay.

At 1920x1080, the data finally shows a usable configuration. Low preset averages 69 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS, High averages 39 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium is 23 FPS, which is a significant penalty for just one preset tier. This indicates that the Arc B370's limited shading units and texture rate are the dominant constraint, not the CPU.

The minimum and maximum FPS values are only recorded for Medium presets across all three resolutions. At 4K Medium, the spread is 6 FPS (16 to 22). At 1440p Medium, the spread is 10 FPS (27 to 37). At 1080p Medium, the spread is 14 FPS (39 to 53). This widening spread at lower resolutions suggests that frame pacing becomes less consistent as the GPU is less stressed, but the CPU begins to feed frames more unevenly, likely due to Rust's simulation and networking threads.

How This Combo Ranks

The database places this specific combination at rank 3437 out of 3723 tested combos for Rust. That puts it in the bottom 8 percent of all configurations evaluated. The percentile for the GPU alone is 5, meaning the Arc B370 scores better than only 5 percent of all GPUs in the database's aggregate benchmark. The CPU, by contrast, sits at the 96th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 84003.

This creates an extreme imbalance. The combo rank is dragged down almost entirely by the GPU. The CPU's nearest rivals in aggregate score include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K at 83807 (0.2 percent lower), the AMD EPYC 4584PX at 83090 (1.1 percent lower), and the AMD EPYC 9135 at 82980 (1.2 percent lower). The AMD EPYC 7F72 scores 85072, which is 1.3 percent higher. These are all server-class or high-end desktop parts, and the 290K Plus is effectively tied with them in raw compute. That does not matter for Rust at these settings, because the Arc B370's nearest rivals are ancient integrated and low-end discrete GPUs: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (0.2 percent higher score), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (0.5 percent higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (0.7 percent higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 (1.4 percent lower). The GPU is performing at a level comparable to hardware from over a decade ago.

The data implies that this combo is severely bottlenecked. The CPU has 24 cores, 24 threads, and a 5.80 GHz boost clock, but the GPU offers only 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation units. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 confirms this, placing it in the bottom 5 percent of all GPUs.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor in Rust is evident from the scaling between resolutions and presets. At 3840x2160, the average FPS across all presets ranges from 12 to 28. At 2560x1440, the range shifts to 20 to 48. At 1920x1080, the range is 30 to 69. The improvement from 4K to 1080p is roughly 2.5 times for Low preset (28 to 69 FPS) and about 2.5 times for High preset (16 to 39 FPS). This scaling factor is typical of a GPU-bound scenario: as pixel count drops, the GPU has less work per frame, and FPS rises proportionally.

The CPU role becomes visible when comparing presets at the same resolution. At 1080p, going from Low to Medium drops FPS from 69 to 46, a 33 percent reduction. Going from Medium to High drops to 39, another 15 percent reduction. High to Ultra drops to 30, a 23 percent reduction. These preset changes alter draw distance, shadow quality, texture filtering, and post-processing, all of which load the GPU more heavily. The CPU is not the limiting factor here because even the lowest preset at 1080p only reaches 69 FPS, which is well below what a 24-core Arrow Lake Refresh part with a 5.80 GHz boost should deliver in a game like Rust.

At 1440p, the same pattern holds. Low averages 48 FPS, Medium 32 FPS, High 27 FPS, and Ultra 20 FPS. The CPU has more headroom at this resolution because the GPU is already saturated. At 4K, the GPU is so overloaded that even Low preset only reaches 28 FPS, and the CPU is likely idle for significant portions of each frame. The data suggests that the CPU contributes almost nothing to the final FPS number in this configuration; it is purely a matter of how many pixels the Arc B370 can push per second.

The fact that the Medium preset at 1080p shows a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS, while Low has no recorded minimum or maximum, indicates that the GPU's frame time variance is moderate. The CPU's strong single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7303, does not translate into higher FPS because the GPU cannot accept frames fast enough.

The Verdict

Can this PC run Rust? Based on the playable threshold of 60 FPS, the answer is only at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. The verdict by resolution is unambiguous. At 3840x2160, there are no playable settings. The best recorded average is 28 FPS on Low, which is less than half of the 60 FPS target. At 2560x1440, there are also no playable settings. The best is 48 FPS on Low, which is still 12 FPS short. At 1920x1080, the Low preset is the only playable option, averaging 69 FPS.

This means that a user with a 1080p monitor can play Rust at Low settings with a comfortable margin above 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p averages 46 FPS, which is below the threshold, but the minimum of 39 FPS suggests occasional dips that would be noticeable in combat or when loading new areas. The High and Ultra presets at 1080p are not viable for smooth play. At 1440p and 4K, the configuration fails to meet the 60 FPS target at any preset. The CPU is not the issue; the Arc B370 is simply too weak for this game at higher resolutions.

The data also shows that there is no "best settings" entry for 4K or 1440p because no preset clears the threshold. For 1080p, the best settings are Low, with an average of 69 FPS. This is the only configuration in the entire measured dataset that achieves playable performance.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for the CPU and GPU, the database provides useful context for what else would behave similarly. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is within 1.3 percent of the AMD EPYC 7F72, within 1.2 percent of the AMD EPYC 9135, within 1.1 percent of the AMD EPYC 4584PX, and within 0.2 percent of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. Any of these CPUs paired with the same GPU would produce nearly identical FPS in Rust, because the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU choice has no measurable impact on the recorded frame rates.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc B370's nearest rivals are all significantly older or lower-end parts. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 0.2 percent higher, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 0.5 percent higher, the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 0.7 percent higher, and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1.4 percent lower. These are all parts from the early 2010s or mobile variants. In practice, a system with any of these GPUs would land in the same performance tier for Rust: playable at 1080p Low, borderline at 1080p Medium, and not playable at higher resolutions.

The implication is that swapping the CPU to a cheaper or older model would not change the gaming experience at all, as long as the GPU remains the Arc B370. Conversely, upgrading the GPU would be the only meaningful change. The database's combo rank of 3437 out of 3723 reflects this GPU limitation, not the CPU's capability.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo at 1920x1080?

A: The highest average FPS at 1920x1080 is 69, achieved on the Low preset. This is the only preset that clears the 60 FPS playable threshold at this resolution.

Q: Can this system run Rust at 2560x1440?

A: No. At 2560x1440, the best recorded average FPS is 48 on the Low preset, which is below the 60 FPS threshold. All other presets (Medium, High, Ultra) average 32 FPS, 27 FPS, and 20 FPS respectively.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84003, which is 0.2 percent higher than the 285K's score of 83807. This difference is negligible for gaming.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Arc B370 is at the 5th percentile, meaning it scores better than only 5 percent of all GPUs. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1184.

Q: Are there any playable settings at 3840x2160?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS is 28 on the Low preset. The Ultra preset averages only 12 FPS, and the Medium preset has a minimum of 16 FPS.

Q: What does the combo rank of 3437 out of 3723 indicate?

A: It indicates that this specific CPU and GPU combination performs worse than approximately 92 percent of all tested combos in Rust. The rank is driven by the GPU's low performance, not the CPU.

Best Settings per Resolution

For 3840x2160, there is no preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. The best average FPS is 28 on Low, which is far below the threshold. For 2560x1440, there is also no playable preset. The Low preset averages 48 FPS, which misses the 60 FPS target by 12 FPS. For 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Low, with an average of 69 FPS. This is the only resolution and preset combination in the entire dataset that meets the playable threshold.

The Medium preset at 1080p averages 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS, so it is not recommended for a 60 FPS experience. The data suggests that users with 1080p displays should stick to Low settings for consistent performance. At higher resolutions, the configuration is not viable for Rust at the 60 FPS target, regardless of preset selection. The recorded data leaves no room for alternative interpretations: this combo is a 1080p Low system for Rust, and nothing more.