Assetto Corsa

Assetto Corsa is a racing simulation from 2014 that remains a staple for modding and serious driving enthusiasts. This particular benchmark pairing combines a modern six-core AMD desktop processor with a low-power integrated Intel graphics solution, producing results that are heavily constrained by the graphics side. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a Zen 4 part built on a 4 nm TSMC process, featuring 6 cores and 12 threads with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. It uses the AMD Socket AM5, supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and carries a 65 W TDP. The processor has a 16 MB shared L3 cache and a 1 MB L2 cache per core. In synthetic benchmarks, this CPU scores 20,851 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,943 in Cinebench R23 single-core, with a PassMark multithread score of 24,389 and a PassMark single-thread score of 3,685. Its average benchmark score is 25,005, placing it in the 77th percentile among all CPUs.

The graphics side is where this combo becomes unusual. The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The memory configuration is system shared, meaning the GPU uses the same DDR5 memory as the CPU, with bandwidth that is system dependent. It includes 1,536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 render output units, and 12 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, and it offers 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The total board power is 80 W, and it requires no external power connectors. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, it scores 1,482, which places it in the 9th percentile among all GPUs. That low percentile is a clear signal that this is not a gaming-first part, and the measured frame rates in Assetto Corsa will reflect that reality.

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

The Ryzen 5 8400F provides ample computational headroom for Assetto Corsa, a title that is not particularly demanding on modern processors. With 6 cores and 12 threads, the CPU can easily handle the physics calculations, AI opponent logic, and the main game thread that racing simulations typically rely on. The base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 4.70 GHz are solid figures, and the Zen 4 architecture delivers strong single-thread performance, which is important for a simulation game that often has one primary simulation thread. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,943 and PassMark single-thread score of 3,685 indicate that this CPU is more than capable of feeding frames to any discrete graphics card, and even in this integrated configuration, it is never the bottleneck.

The benchmark results support this interpretation. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 118 FPS. That is a high frame rate that demonstrates the CPU can push the integrated GPU to its limits without being the limiting factor. At the same resolution with High settings, the average drops to 62 FPS, which is still a playable figure, but the drop is entirely attributable to the GPU struggling with increased shading and effects. The CPU's 3DMark scores reinforce its capability: 6,091 in the 16-thread test, 5,275 in the 8-thread test, and 951 in the single-thread test. These numbers show a balanced multi-threaded design that scales well, but for Assetto Corsa, the single-thread performance is more relevant, and it is more than sufficient.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 8400F sits in a tight pack. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F has an average score of 24,964, which is 0.2% lower. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24,935, 0.3% lower. The Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24,911, 0.4% lower. On the other side, the AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25,103, which is 0.4% higher. These deltas are tiny, meaning the 8400F is essentially performance-equivalent to those parts in aggregate benchmarks. For Assetto Corsa specifically, any of these CPUs would deliver identical frame rates when paired with the same GPU because the GPU is the limiting factor in nearly every configuration tested here. The CPU's role is to ensure that frame pacing stays stable and that minimum frame rates do not dip due to physics spikes, and the 8400F handles that job without issue.

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

The Intel Arc B390 is the definitive bottleneck in this pairing. As an integrated GPU with system-shared memory, it has no dedicated VRAM, which means it relies on the system's DDR5 memory bandwidth. The boost clock of 2500 MHz is decent for an IGP, but the 1,536 shading units and 24 ROPs are modest numbers, and the 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is far below what any discrete gaming GPU would offer. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,482 places this GPU in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, meaning roughly 91% of tested graphics solutions outperform it. Its nearest rivals are all very old or very low-end parts: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX scores 1,463 (1.3% lower), the GeForce 800M scores 1,460 (1.5% lower), the GT 625 OEM scores 1,446 (2.5% lower), and the GT 710 scores 1,443 (2.7% lower). This is the performance class of the Arc B390, and the measured frame rates in Assetto Corsa align with that positioning.

The integrated nature of this GPU means that memory bandwidth is system dependent. The CPU's dual-channel DDR5 configuration provides 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is shared between the CPU and GPU. In a racing simulation with many objects on track, this shared bandwidth can become a secondary bottleneck, especially at higher resolutions where the GPU needs to access more texture data. The GPU's 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 120.0 GTexel/s texture rate are theoretical maximums that will not be reached in practice due to memory constraints. The 12 ray tracing cores are irrelevant for Assetto Corsa, which does not use ray-traced effects in this benchmark configuration.

Looking at the measured results, the GPU's limitations become obvious. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average of 118 FPS is the best this combo can achieve. That is a playable frame rate, but it requires the lowest quality preset. At Medium settings, the average drops to 83 FPS, and at High settings it falls to 62 FPS. Ultra settings bring it down to 51 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a drop of 67 FPS, which is a 56.8% reduction. This is a clear indication that the GPU is being overwhelmed by the increasing shader complexity and texture detail, not the CPU. The CPU could handle Ultra settings at 1080p without breaking a sweat, but the Arc B390 cannot.

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

Resolution scaling is the clearest diagnostic tool for identifying the bottleneck in this combo. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 to 3840x2160 shows a consistent and dramatic drop in frame rates across all settings presets. At Low settings, the average FPS goes from 118 at 1080p, to 82 at 1440p, to 50 at 4K. That is a 57.6% drop from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the average goes from 62 at 1080p, to 44 at 1440p, to 26 at 4K, a 58.1% drop. At Medium settings, the average goes from 83 at 1080p, to 58 at 1440p, to 35 at 4K, a 57.8% drop. At Ultra settings, the average goes from 51 at 1080p, to 36 at 1440p, to 22 at 4K, a 56.9% drop.

These drops are nearly uniform across all presets, which is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario. When the resolution increases, the number of pixels the GPU must render increases quadratically, and the Arc B390 does not have the raw fill rate or memory bandwidth to keep up. The pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s sounds reasonable on paper, but in practice, the system-shared memory bandwidth becomes the limiting factor. The 4K results are particularly telling: at Ultra settings, the average is 22 FPS, which is borderline unplayable. At High settings, 4K yields 26 FPS, and even at Low settings, 4K only reaches 50 FPS. No preset at 4K achieves a consistently smooth 60 FPS, and the Medium preset at 4K has a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS, showing significant frame time variance.

The CPU's role in this scaling is minimal. A CPU-bound scenario would show frame rates that stay relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU is doing the same amount of work regardless of pixel count. That is not what the data shows. The frame rates drop steeply with each resolution increase, confirming that the Arc B390 is the sole limiting component. If a discrete GPU were paired with this CPU, the scaling would be much flatter at lower resolutions, and the CPU would eventually become the bottleneck only at very high frame rates like 200+ FPS. Here, the GPU hits its ceiling early, and the CPU has plenty of headroom to spare.

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

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best performance. Low settings produce an average of 118 FPS, with no reported minimum or maximum. Medium settings produce an average of 83 FPS, with a minimum of 70 FPS and a maximum of 95 FPS. High settings produce an average of 62 FPS, with no reported minimum or maximum. Ultra settings produce an average of 51 FPS, with no reported minimum or maximum. The Medium preset at 1080p is the only one in the entire dataset that provides both a minimum above 60 FPS and an average above 80 FPS, making it the smoothest experience available. Low settings are faster but lack visual fidelity, while High and Ultra dip below the 60 FPS threshold that many players consider the baseline for a racing sim.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops noticeably. Low settings produce an average of 82 FPS, which is still playable but represents a 30.5% drop from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings produce an average of 58 FPS, with a minimum of 49 FPS and a maximum of 67 FPS. This is a borderline experience, as the average is just below 60 FPS and the minimum dips into the 40s. High settings produce an average of 44 FPS, and Ultra settings produce an average of 36 FPS. None of the 1440p presets are ideal for competitive driving, but Low is workable and Medium is acceptable if you can tolerate occasional dips below 60 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the combo is severely handicapped. Low settings produce an average of 50 FPS, which is the only 4K preset that approaches playability, but it still falls short of 60 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS. High settings produce an average of 26 FPS, and Ultra settings produce an average of 22 FPS. These numbers are too low for a driving simulation where precise control inputs and smooth frame pacing are critical. The Medium preset at 4K has a wide 10 FPS range between minimum and maximum, which suggests inconsistent frame times that would be distracting during gameplay.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the database of tested combos for Assetto Corsa, this pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2,566 out of 2,897 total combinations. That places it in the bottom 11.4% of all tested systems. The rank is influenced almost entirely by the GPU, as the CPU is a capable mid-range part that would rank much higher if paired with a discrete graphics card. The Arc B390's 9th percentile standing among all GPUs, combined with its nearest rivals being the GeForce GT 520MX and GT 710, which are both over a decade old, explains why this combo sits so low in the rankings.

What this rank means in practical terms is that the vast majority of tested combos deliver higher average frame rates in Assetto Corsa. The 2,566th position out of 2,897 indicates that only 331 tested combos performed worse. Those are likely systems with even older integrated graphics or severely underpowered CPUs paired with equally weak GPUs. For a player who owns this combo, the expectation should be that they are at the low end of the performance spectrum, and they will need to use low resolutions and low settings to get a playable experience. The combo's rank is not a reflection of the CPU, which is in the 77th percentile among all CPUs, but rather a direct consequence of the GPU's integrated nature.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience for this combo depends heavily on the target resolution. If the player is using a 1920x1080 monitor, the Medium preset is the clear recommendation. It delivers an average of 83 FPS with a minimum of 70 FPS and a maximum of 95 FPS. That is the only preset at any resolution that maintains a minimum above 60 FPS, which is crucial for a racing simulation where frame drops can disrupt the feel of the car. The Low preset at 1080p is faster at 118 FPS, but it sacrifices too much visual detail, and the game will look noticeably sparse. High and Ultra at 1080p drop to 62 and 51 FPS respectively, which are below the 60 FPS threshold and will introduce perceptible stutter during fast cornering or when multiple cars are on screen.

For a 2560x1440 display, the Medium preset is still the best choice, but with caveats. The average of 58 FPS is just under 60, and the minimum of 49 FPS means there will be noticeable dips during heavy scenes. Low settings at 1440p produce 82 FPS, which is smoother, but the visual quality drop from Medium to Low is significant in a game like Assetto Corsa, where seeing distant corners and braking markers matters. If the player prioritizes smoothness over visuals, Low at 1440p is the safer pick. If they prioritize visuals and can tolerate occasional dips into the 40s, Medium is acceptable. High and Ultra at 1440p are not recommended, as 44 and 36 FPS averages are too low for consistent driving.

At 3840x2160, there is no good option. Low settings produce an average of 50 FPS, which is below 60 and will feel choppy. Medium produces 35 FPS, which is borderline unplayable for a racing sim. High and Ultra at 26 and 22 FPS are not viable. The recommendation for 4K is to avoid it entirely with this combo, or to accept that the game will run at reduced visual quality and frame rates that require significant adaptation. The Medium preset at 4K has a minimum of 30 FPS, which is the absolute floor for playability, but it will not be a satisfying experience.

In summary, the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a solid CPU that would perform well in Assetto Corsa with any discrete GPU, but the Intel Arc B390's integrated nature limits this combo to 1080p Medium for a smooth experience, 1080p Low for higher frame rates, 1440p Low for a compromise on larger monitors, and 4K only for those who are willing to accept sub-60 FPS gameplay. The data clearly shows that the GPU is the bottleneck, and any upgrade path would involve adding a discrete graphics card rather than changing the CPU.