Archeage

# CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i9-14900K is a 24-core, 32-thread processor built on Intel's 10 nm Raptor Lake-R architecture, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz. It features 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, along with 80 KB of L1 cache per core. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU demonstrates substantial multi-threaded capability, scoring 39,399.5 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 20,793 in Cinebench R20 multi-core. Single-thread performance is equally strong, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 2,262.5 and Geekbench single-core at 2,655.

However, Archeage's measured FPS results tell a different story. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 65 FPS, which drops to 57 FPS at Medium and 39 FPS at High. The Ultra preset falls to 27 FPS. This pattern—where even the highest-end 24-core CPU cannot push past 65 FPS at the lowest settings—suggests that Archeage's engine does not scale effectively with the i9-14900K's massive thread count. The game launched in 2014, and its single-threaded workload likely dominates, making the 6.00 GHz boost clock more relevant than the 24 cores. The PassMark single-thread score of 4,697 and Cinebench R15 single-core score of 324.5 indicate excellent per-core performance, yet the game's FPS ceiling appears to be constrained by factors beyond raw CPU throughput.

The data implies that the i9-14900K's 125 W TDP and 32 threads are largely underutilized in this MMORPG. The processor's PassMark multi-thread score of 58,674 and Geekbench multi-core score of 21,697 show it can handle heavily parallel workloads, but Archeage doesn't appear to be one of them. The near-linear FPS decline from Low to Ultra settings at each resolution points to a combination of CPU-bound game logic and GPU limitations, with the CPU's role being necessary but not sufficient for high frame rates in this title.

# Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Examining the measured FPS rows, the Low preset offers the most playable experience across all resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo delivers 65 FPS, which is 8 FPS higher than Medium's 57 FPS and 26 FPS higher than High's 39 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium costs 8 FPS, while moving from Medium to High costs another 18 FPS—a much steeper penalty. At 1440p, Low produces 43 FPS versus Medium's 39 FPS and High's 26 FPS, showing a similar pattern where the first settings tier is the most efficient.

At 4K, Low yields 25 FPS, Medium 22 FPS, and High 15 FPS. The Ultra preset is consistently the worst performer, with 27 FPS at 1080p, 18 FPS at 1440p, and 10 FPS at 4K. These numbers suggest that Low is the only preset that approaches acceptable frame rates, and even then, only at 1080p does it exceed 60 FPS. The Medium preset provides a modest visual upgrade over Low while maintaining a playable 57 FPS at 1080p, but the 8 FPS loss may not justify the graphical improvement for competitive play.

For the best experience per the measured data, Low at 1080p is the clear winner, delivering 65 FPS. Players seeking a balance between visuals and performance might consider Medium at 1080p (57 FPS) or Low at 1440p (43 FPS), but the data indicates that any preset above Medium at 1080p results in sub-40 FPS, which is generally considered borderline for MMORPG gameplay. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution, as it produces the lowest frame rates across the board.

# Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals a significant dependency on the GPU. At Low settings, the combo delivers 65 FPS at 1080p, 43 FPS at 1440p (a 33.8% drop), and 25 FPS at 4K (a 61.5% drop from 1080p). Medium settings show 57 FPS at 1080p, 39 FPS at 1440p (31.6% drop), and 22 FPS at 4K (61.4% drop). High settings produce 39 FPS at 1080p, 26 FPS at 1440p (33.3% drop), and 15 FPS at 4K (61.5% drop).

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings presets is telling. Whether on Low or High, moving from 1080p to 1440p costs roughly one-third of the frame rate, and moving from 1080p to 4K costs roughly 61%. This uniform scaling pattern strongly suggests that the Intel Arc B370's rendering capabilities are the primary bottleneck as resolution increases. The GPU's pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s, combined with its 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance, are modest figures that explain the steep FPS declines at higher resolutions.

The i9-14900K, with its 95th percentile ranking among all CPUs, is clearly not the limiting factor in resolution scaling. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar FPS across different resolutions at the same settings, since CPU workload is largely resolution-independent. Instead, the data shows a clear resolution-dependent decline, pointing to the GPU as the constraint. The Arc B370's system-shared memory and 25 W TDP further support this conclusion, as integrated-class GPUs typically struggle with high-resolution rendering.

# How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This CPU-GPU combination ranks 2,546 out of 2,761 tested combos in Archeage, placing it in the bottom 7.8% of all configurations. This low ranking is surprising given the i9-14900K's exceptional CPU benchmarks. The processor alone sits in the 95th percentile versus all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 79,097, placing it just above the Intel Core i9-14900KF (79,371, -0.3% delta) and slightly below the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus (79,574, -0.6% delta). The CPU's nearest rivals, including the AMD EPYC 7413 (80,041, -1.2% delta) and AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 (77,740, +1.7% delta), show that the i9-14900K is competitive at the top tier of processors.

The GPU, however, tells a different story. The Intel Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile versus all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1,184 from the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its nearest rivals—the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1,186, -0.2% delta), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1,190, -0.5% delta), and AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1,192, -0.7% delta)—are all older, lower-performance parts. The GPU's 1.4% delta above the AMD FirePro M2000 (1,168) confirms its position near the bottom of the performance spectrum.

The combination of a top-tier CPU with a bottom-tier GPU produces a combo rank that reflects the GPU's limitations. In Archeage, where the measured FPS never exceeds 65 FPS even at 1080p Low, the data indicates that the Arc B370 is the dominant factor dragging down the combo's ranking. The 2,546th rank out of 2,761 combos suggests that most tested configurations—even those with weaker CPUs—outperform this pairing because they include more capable graphics solutions.

# GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated GPU based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2,400 MHz, featuring 1,280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation units. The GPU includes 10 ray tracing cores but relies on system-shared memory, with no dedicated VRAM. Its memory bandwidth is system-dependent, which is a critical limitation for gaming performance.

The GPU's theoretical throughput figures—6.144 TFLOPS FP32, 12.29 TFLOPS FP16, 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate—are modest compared to discrete graphics cards. The 25 W TDP and integrated form factor (IGP) further confirm that this is not designed for high-end gaming. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,184 places it in the 5th percentile, with its nearest rivals being integrated or older discrete parts like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1,190, -0.5% delta).

In Archeage, the GPU's role is clearly evident from the FPS data. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 65 FPS, which is the maximum across any resolution or setting. This suggests that even at the lowest graphical settings, the Arc B370 is working near its limits. The drop to 27 FPS at 1080p Ultra represents a 58.5% reduction from Low, indicating that the GPU cannot handle the increased shading and texture loads of higher presets. The system-shared memory and system-dependent bandwidth create additional performance variability, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory access.

The GPU's 1280 shading units and 40 TMUs are sufficient for basic rendering at 1080p, but the 20 ROPs limit pixel fill rate, which becomes critical at higher resolutions. The data suggests that the Arc B370 is the primary bottleneck in this combination, with the i9-14900K's compute capabilities far exceeding what the GPU can feed to the display.

# FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo based on measured FPS?

A: 1920x1080 is the only resolution where the combo achieves playable frame rates. At Low settings, it delivers 65 FPS, while 1440p maxes out at 43 FPS and 4K at 25 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core i9-14900K compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i9-14900K has an average benchmark score of 79,097, which is 0.3% below the Intel Core i9-14900KF (79,371), 0.6% below the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus (79,574), and 1.2% below the AMD EPYC 7413 (80,041). It is 1.7% above the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 (77,740).

Q: Is the Ultra preset ever viable with this combo?

A: No. At 1080p Ultra, the combo produces 27 FPS; at 1440p Ultra, 18 FPS; and at 4K Ultra, 10 FPS. These frame rates are below playable thresholds for an MMORPG.

Q: What does the combo's rank of 2,546 out of 2,761 indicate?

A: It places this configuration in the bottom 7.8% of all tested combos in Archeage, reflecting the GPU's 5th percentile performance despite the CPU's 95th percentile ranking.

Q: Why does FPS drop so consistently between resolutions?

A: Moving from 1080p to 1440p reduces FPS by roughly 32-33% across all settings, and from 1080p to 4K by about 61%. This uniform scaling indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, as CPU workload would not scale with resolution.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1,184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 0.2% below the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1,186), 0.5% below the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1,190), and 0.7% below the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1,192). It is 1.4% above the AMD FirePro M2000 (1,168).

# Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

1920x1080:

• Low: 65 FPS average
• Medium: 57 FPS average, 49 FPS minimum, 66 FPS maximum
• High: 39 FPS average
• Ultra: 27 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 43 FPS average
• Medium: 39 FPS average, 33 FPS minimum, 44 FPS maximum
• High: 26 FPS average
• Ultra: 18 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 25 FPS average
• Medium: 22 FPS average, 19 FPS minimum, 25 FPS maximum
• High: 15 FPS average
• Ultra: 10 FPS average

The data shows a clear hierarchy: 1080p is the only resolution where Low exceeds 60 FPS, and even then, the margin is slim at 65 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p offers 57 FPS with a minimum of 49 FPS, which is the only other setting that approaches smooth gameplay. At 1440p, the best result is 43 FPS on Low, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced combat. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with the maximum being 25 FPS on Low—below the threshold for acceptable MMORPG performance.

The FPS spread between Low and Ultra at each resolution is notable: 38 FPS at 1080p (65 to 27), 25 FPS at 1440p (43 to 18), and 15 FPS at 4K (25 to 10). This narrowing spread at higher resolutions further confirms that the GPU's pixel throughput becomes the dominant constraint as resolution increases. The Medium preset's minimum and maximum values at each resolution—49-66 FPS at 1080p, 33-44 FPS at 1440p, and 19-25 FPS at 4K—provide insight into frame time consistency, with the 1080p Medium showing the most stable range relative to its average.