Allods Online

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600 paired with the Intel Arc B370 lands near the bottom of the database for Allods Online, holding the 2559th spot out of 2775 tested combinations. This placement puts the combo in the bottom percentile of tested systems, indicating that while the CPU is a capable mid-range part, the integrated-class GPU severely bottlenecks the experience. The data shows a system that is fundamentally limited by its graphics solution, making it a poor match for a game that demands consistent frame pacing at higher visual fidelity.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 2559 out of 2775 represents the 7.8th percentile of all tested combinations. This is a very low standing, driven almost entirely by the Intel Arc B370’s performance tier. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 1184 places it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, and its nearest rivals in the database are legacy parts like the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (scoring 1186) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (scoring 1190). The deltaPct values here are telling: the Arc B370 is only 0.2% slower than the HD 5570 and 0.5% slower than the HD 5770, meaning its raw 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 performance is essentially on par with graphics hardware from over a decade ago.

In contrast, the Ryzen 5 5600 is a much stronger component. Its CPU benchmarks show a solid mid-range processor: the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18309 and single-core score of 2584 are respectable, and the Geekbench multicore score of 9158 confirms strong multi-threaded performance. The CPU sits at the 74th percentile among all CPUs, with rivals like the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V (scoring 20454, only 0.1% higher) and the AMD Ryzen 5 8500G (scoring 20425, 0.2% higher). This massive gap between CPU and GPU capability creates a heavily unbalanced system. In Allods Online, this imbalance manifests as a GPU-bound scenario at all resolutions above 1080p, where the Arc B370 simply cannot feed enough frames to utilize the CPU’s headroom.

The measured FPS data confirms this. The combo’s best result is 108 FPS at 1080p Low, which is the only instance where the system approaches playable high-refresh territory. At 1440p, the average drops to 68 FPS on Low, and at 4K it falls to 36 FPS. These numbers indicate that the GPU is the sole limiting factor; the CPU’s 12 threads and 32 MB of L3 cache are more than sufficient for the MMO’s workload, but the GPU’s 20 ROPs and 40 TMUs struggle to rasterize the scene. The rank, therefore, reflects a hardware pairing that is mismatched for this title’s requirements, with the GPU holding back what would otherwise be a competent gaming platform.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Arc B370 a bottleneck for the Ryzen 5 5600 in Allods Online?

A: Yes. The data shows a severe GPU bottleneck. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 1184, placing it at the 5th percentile, while the CPU sits at the 74th percentile. The measured FPS at 4K High (18 FPS) versus 1080p High (53 FPS) shows the GPU struggling to scale with resolution, while the CPU remains underutilized.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo in this game?

A: 1080p is the only viable resolution for smooth gameplay. The measured FPS at 1080p with Medium settings is 85 FPS, and Low settings yield 108 FPS. At 1440p, even Low settings only produce 68 FPS, and at 4K, all settings fall below 36 FPS, making it unplayable.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% faster), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% faster), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% faster). It is only 1.4% slower than the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168). This places it in the performance bracket of early-2010s discrete GPUs.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 5600’s single-thread performance help in Allods Online?

A: The CPU’s single-thread score of 882 in 3DMark and 2584 in Cinebench R23 is solid, but it does not translate to higher FPS because the GPU is the limiting factor. The measured FPS at 1080p High (53 FPS) is far below what the CPU could theoretically support, confirming that the graphics card is the primary constraint.

Q: What is the difference in FPS between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, Low settings average 108 FPS, while Ultra settings average only 34 FPS. This is a 74 FPS drop, or a 68.5% reduction in frame rate, indicating that the Ultra preset’s additional graphical demands overwhelm the GPU.

Q: Is the system’s memory bandwidth a concern?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR4 with a theoretical bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The GPU uses "System Shared" memory, meaning its bandwidth is "System Dependent." Since the GPU relies on the same memory bus as the CPU, the shared bandwidth could contribute to the low performance, especially at higher resolutions where the GPU needs more data.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor built on the Xe3-LPG architecture (Panther Lake chip) using a 3 nm process. Its specifications are modest: 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. The GPU operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts up to 2400 MHz, with a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is rated at 6.144 TFLOPS, which is low for modern gaming. Critically, the memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it has no dedicated VRAM; it borrows from the system’s DDR4 memory, with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." This is a fundamental limitation, as shared memory bandwidth is typically far lower than dedicated GDDR6 or GDDR6X.

In Allods Online, the GPU’s role is the primary bottleneck. The measured FPS at 4K with Medium settings shows an average of 28 FPS with a minimum of 24 and maximum of 32, indicating that the GPU is barely coping with the rendering load. The Ultra preset at 4K drops to 11 FPS, which is unplayable. The GPU’s low ROP count (20) limits fill-rate performance, which is critical for a game that involves complex scenes with many characters and effects. The 10 ray tracing cores are present but irrelevant here, as the game is from 2010 and does not utilize such features. The GPU’s 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs and its benchmark score of 1184 (nearly identical to the ATI Radeon HD 5770) confirm that it is not designed for gaming at 1440p or 4K, and even at 1080p, it only achieves playable frame rates on Low or Medium presets.

The GPU’s 25 W TDP and integrated form factor (IGP) mean it has no dedicated power connectors and relies on the system’s memory controller. This design choice severely limits its ability to sustain high clock speeds under load, as thermal and power constraints are tight. The boost clock of 2400 MHz is respectable for an iGPU, but without dedicated VRAM, the effective throughput is hampered by memory latency and bandwidth sharing with the CPU. In practice, this results in the observed frame rates: 53 FPS at 1080p High, which drops to 34 FPS at 1440p High, and further to 18 FPS at 4K High. The data shows a clear trend where the GPU’s performance degrades linearly with pixel count, confirming its inability to handle high resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the combo’s performance across three resolutions and four settings presets. Starting at 1080p, the best result is 108 FPS on Low settings. This is the only configuration that exceeds 100 FPS, making it suitable for a smooth experience on a standard 60 Hz or even 144 Hz monitor. On Medium settings, the average drops to 85 FPS, with a minimum of 72 and maximum of 97 FPS; this is still playable but shows a significant 21.3% reduction from Low. High settings yield 53 FPS, which is borderline for a smooth experience, while Ultra drops to 34 FPS, which is stuttery and below the 60 FPS threshold for most gamers.

Moving to 1440p, the performance takes a substantial hit. Low settings average 68 FPS, which is a 37% drop from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings average 53 FPS (with a minimum of 45 and maximum of 61), and High settings fall to 34 FPS. Ultra at 1440p is nearly unplayable at 21 FPS. The data shows that 1440p is only viable on Low settings, and even then, the frame rate is not consistently smooth, as the minimum FPS data for Low is not provided, but the average suggests headroom is minimal.

At 4K, the results are uniformly poor. Low settings average 36 FPS, which is a 66.7% drop from 1080p Low. Medium settings average 28 FPS (minimum 24, maximum 32), and High settings drop to 18 FPS. Ultra at 4K is a slideshow at 11 FPS. No 4K configuration is playable, as even the lowest settings fail to maintain a consistent 30 FPS. The measured data includes minimum and maximum values only for Medium settings across all resolutions, which show a narrow range (e.g., 72-97 FPS at 1080p, 45-61 FPS at 1440p, 24-32 FPS at 4K), suggesting that the frame pacing is relatively stable but at low levels.

The absence of min/max data for Low, High, and Ultra presets means we cannot assess frame time consistency for those settings, but the average FPS alone disqualifies High and Ultra at 1440p and 4K, and Ultra at 1080p. The overall pattern is clear: the combo is only suitable for 1080p gaming with Low or Medium settings, with 1440p Low being a stretch and 4K being out of the question.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling behavior of this combo reveals a classic GPU-bound curve. Moving from 1080p to 1440p, the average FPS on Low settings drops from 108 to 68, a 37% decrease. From 1080p to 4K, the Low setting average falls from 108 to 36, a 66.7% decrease. This scaling is nearly linear with pixel count: 1440p has 1.78 times the pixels of 1080p, and the FPS drops to 63% of the 1080p value; 4K has 4 times the pixels, and the FPS drops to 33% of the 1080p value. This indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor, as a CPU-bound scenario would show much smaller FPS drops when resolution increases.

The same pattern holds for High settings. At 1080p High, the average is 53 FPS; at 1440p High, it drops to 34 FPS (a 35.8% decrease); and at 4K High, it falls to 18 FPS (a 66% decrease). The consistency of these percentage drops across different settings presets confirms that the GPU’s fill-rate and memory bandwidth are the primary constraints. The CPU’s performance, as measured by Cinebench R23 (18309 multicore) and Geekbench (9158 multicore), is more than enough to handle the game’s logic, but the GPU cannot keep up with the increasing pixel workload.

The limiting component is unequivocally the GPU. The Intel Arc B370’s shared memory architecture and low ROP count (20) mean that its performance scales directly with the number of pixels processed. At 1080p, the GPU can leverage its boost clock of 2400 MHz to deliver 108 FPS on Low, but at 4K, the same clock speed cannot overcome the fourfold increase in pixel count. The data suggests that the GPU’s memory bandwidth, being "System Dependent," becomes a severe bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the shared DDR4 bus is saturated. This is evident in the 4K Medium result of 28 FPS, which is only 7 FPS higher than the 4K High result of 18 FPS, indicating that even reducing graphical complexity does not provide meaningful gains due to the memory constraint.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and acceptable frame rate. For a smooth 60 FPS experience, 1080p Low is the only configuration that delivers (108 FPS). This preset is recommended for competitive or fast-paced gameplay where frame rate is prioritized over visual quality. If visual fidelity is more important, 1080p Medium is the highest preset that maintains a playable average of 85 FPS, with a minimum of 72 FPS ensuring no major stutters. This is the recommended compromise for most users, as it provides a 60% improvement over High settings (85 vs 53 FPS) while still offering improved textures and effects over Low.

At 1440p, the data shows that Low settings (68 FPS) are the only viable option for a smooth experience. Medium settings (53 FPS) are borderline, but the minimum of 45 FPS could cause noticeable dips in busy scenes. High (34 FPS) and Ultra (21 FPS) are not recommended, as they fall below the 30 FPS playability threshold. For users with a 1440p monitor, sticking to Low settings is advised, and even then, the frame rate may fluctuate in crowded areas.

At 4K, no settings preset is recommended. The best result is Low at 36 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and may feel sluggish. Medium (28 FPS) and High (18 FPS) are unplayable, and Ultra (11 FPS) is a slideshow. Users with a 4K display should consider lowering the resolution to 1440p or 1080p in the game’s settings to achieve a better experience. The data suggests that the Ultra preset offers no tangible benefit at any resolution, as it yields only 34 FPS at 1080p, which is worse than 1440p Low (68 FPS). Therefore, the recommended configuration is 1080p Medium for the best balance of visual quality and performance, with 1080p Low as a fallback for higher frame rates.