Assetto Corsa

The Intel Core i5-12400 and Intel Arc B570 pairing delivers a functional, if not spectacular, Assetto Corsa experience. The data shows a system that is consistently capable of playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but one that struggles to maintain fluid motion at 4K with high visual fidelity. Analysis of the measured FPS rows reveals a clear performance hierarchy tied directly to resolution and settings, with the GPU acting as the primary limiting factor at higher loads.

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

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. This configuration provides a solid foundation for a racing simulation like Assetto Corsa, which relies on consistent single-thread performance for physics calculations and game logic. The processor's 18 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 further contribute to its capability in feeding data to the GPU.

In the context of this specific benchmark dataset, the CPU's role is best understood through its synthetic performance profile. The Core i5-12400 achieves a single-thread score of 910 in 3dmark and 2257 in Cinebench R23 single-core, indicating robust per-core strength. Multi-threaded results are equally respectable, with a 3dmark max threads score of 5890 and a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15989. The processor's average benchmark score of 18683 places it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, showing that it is a mid-to-upper tier performer in general compute tasks.

The relationship between the CPU and the game results is indirect but measurable. At 1080p with Low settings, the system produces 181 FPS, which suggests that the CPU is not a bottleneck in this scenario; the frame rate is high enough to indicate that the processor can keep up with the GPU's output. However, as resolution increases and settings are raised, the frame rates drop significantly, which points to the GPU becoming the limiting component. The CPU's performance is sufficient to avoid creating a severe bottleneck in most tested configurations, as evidenced by the fact that even the most demanding 4K Ultra setting yields a playable 33 FPS average, a situation that would be far worse if the CPU were severely underpowered. The Core i5-12400's position relative to rivals like the AMD EPYC 7643, which has a negligible -0.1% delta in average score, and the Intel Core i3-14100F, which is 0.9% slower, further reinforces that this is a balanced, competent processor for gaming workloads.

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

The Intel Arc B570 is the decisive factor in this system's gaming performance. This GPU, based on the Xe2-HPG architecture and built on TSMC's 5 nm process, features 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory configuration is a key asset, as Assetto Corsa with high-resolution textures can be memory-intensive. The GPU's shading units number 2304, with 144 TMUs and 80 ROPs, and it operates at a consistent 2500 MHz for both base and boost clocks. The pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s are indicative of its raw fill-rate capabilities.

The Arc B570's synthetic scores position it as a mid-range performer. Its passmark G3D score is 14195, and it achieves a 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2649. The GPU's average benchmark score of 20556 places it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, which is only 0.1% faster in average score, and the Intel Arc A750, which is 0.1% slower. This suggests that the B570 is a competitive product in its class, but it is not a high-end solution capable of brute-forcing maximum settings at high resolutions.

The benchmark results clearly show the GPU's influence. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 181 FPS, but this drops to 78 FPS at 1080p Ultra, a reduction that aligns with the increased graphical load on the GPU. At 4K, the strain is even more evident, with the average FPS falling from 76 at Low to 33 at Ultra. These numbers indicate that the Arc B570 has enough raw power for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but its 10 GB VRAM and compute resources are stretched thin at 4K with higher settings. The data suggests that the GPU is the primary limiting factor in this combination, especially at higher resolutions, as the CPU appears to have ample headroom to support lower-resolution, higher-FPS scenarios.

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

The scaling of frame rates across resolutions is a clear indicator of where the performance bottleneck lies. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 and then to 3840x2160 shows a consistent and steep decline in FPS across all settings levels. For example, at High settings, the average FPS drops from 96 at 1080p to 67 at 1440p and then to 41 at 4K. This is a 30% decrease from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 39% drop from 1440p to 4K. The pattern is similar at other settings, with Medium settings going from 127 FPS at 1080p to 89 at 1440p and 54 at 4K.

This steep decline as pixel count increases is a classic sign of GPU limitation. The number of pixels rendered at 4K is over four times that of 1080p, and the Arc B570 does not have the compute throughput to maintain the same frame rate under that load. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would be more consistent across resolutions, as the processor's workload does not scale as dramatically with resolution. The fact that the system can achieve 181 FPS at 1080p Low but only 76 FPS at 4K Low demonstrates that the GPU is being overwhelmed by the increased pixel fill rate and shading demands.

Furthermore, the gap between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution widens as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (181 FPS) and Ultra (78 FPS) is 103 FPS. At 4K, the difference between Low (76 FPS) and Ultra (33 FPS) narrows to 43 FPS. This indicates that at 4K, even the lowest settings are pushing the GPU to its limits, leaving less headroom for quality improvements. The data strongly suggests that for this combo, resolution scaling is dominated by the GPU's rendering capacity, and users seeking higher frame rates must first reduce resolution or settings to alleviate the GPU load.

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

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of the system's performance across a matrix of resolutions and settings. The available data includes average FPS for all configurations, with minimum and maximum FPS provided for the Medium settings at each resolution.

At 1920x1080 (1080p), the system performs admirably. With Low settings, it achieves an average of 181 FPS, providing a highly fluid experience suitable for competitive play. Medium settings yield an average of 127 FPS, with a minimum of 108 and a maximum of 146, indicating very stable frame pacing. High settings reduce the average to 96 FPS, which remains smooth for most displays. Ultra settings bring the average down to 78 FPS, which is still playable but begins to show the game's demanding nature on the GPU.

At 2560x1440 (1440p), performance remains solid but shows the expected decline. Low settings average 127 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate monitors. Medium settings average 89 FPS, with a minimum of 76 and a maximum of 102, ensuring a consistent experience. High settings drop to an average of 67 FPS, which is acceptable for a racing simulator where frame pacing is more important than raw speed. Ultra settings average 55 FPS, which is on the edge of what might be considered ideal for a smooth experience, but it is functionally playable.

At 3840x2160 (4K), the system struggles to maintain high frame rates. Low settings average 76 FPS, which is surprising for such a high resolution and suggests the game is not overly demanding at lower presets. Medium settings average 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 and a maximum of 62, which is a playable range but not consistently smooth. High settings drop to an average of 41 FPS, which starts to feel less fluid and may be noticeable in fast-paced sections. Ultra settings average 33 FPS, which is generally considered too low for a smooth experience, falling below the 60 FPS target most players expect.

The data shows a clear pattern: 1080p is the sweet spot for this combo, 1440p is a viable compromise, and 4K is only suitable for lower settings. The Medium settings rows, which include min and max FPS data, show that frame times are relatively stable, with a 16 FPS range at 1080p, a 26 FPS range at 1440p, and a 16 FPS range at 4K. This suggests that while the average FPS drops with resolution, the frame pacing does not become erratic, which is a positive sign for gameplay smoothness.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU/GPU combo in Assetto Corsa?

A: Based on the measured FPS data, 1920x1080 is the best resolution. It is the only resolution where the system achieves an average FPS above 78 across all settings, with Low settings reaching 181 FPS. At 2560x1440, average FPS ranges from 55 to 127, which is also viable, but 4K performance is limited.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Assetto Corsa?

A: Yes, but with significant limitations. At 4K, the system achieves 76 FPS on Low settings and 54 FPS on Medium settings. However, High settings drop to 41 FPS and Ultra to 33 FPS, which are not ideal for a smooth experience. The data indicates that 4K is only recommended with Low or Medium settings.

Q: Which setting has the most stable frame pacing?

A: The Medium settings rows are the only ones with min and max FPS data. At 1920x1080, the range is 108 to 146 FPS; at 2560x1440, it is 76 to 102 FPS; and at 3840x2160, it is 46 to 62 FPS. These ranges suggest stable frame times, with the 1440p range being the largest at 26 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-12400 compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-14100F?

A: The Core i5-12400 has an average benchmark score of 18683, while the Core i3-14100F has an average score of 18519. This gives the i5-12400 a 0.9% advantage in average score, indicating slightly better overall performance in synthetic tests.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B570 a significant upgrade over the Intel Arc A750?

A: No, the difference is minimal. The Arc B570 has an average benchmark score of 20556, while the Arc A750 has an average score of 20582. This means the A750 is actually 0.1% faster in average score, making the B570 a near-identical performer in this metric.

Q: What is the maximum FPS achievable with this combo?

A: The highest recorded average FPS in the dataset is 181, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that exceeds 180 FPS, indicating the system's upper limit in this game.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear path for optimizing the experience. For users targeting a smooth 60 FPS, the 1920x1080 resolution is the most reliable choice. At this resolution, High settings provide 96 FPS, which is well above the target and offers a good balance of visual quality and performance. Ultra settings at 1080p yield 78 FPS, which is still above 60 and provides the best visual fidelity without sacrificing playability.

For users with 1440p monitors, the recommendation is to use Medium settings. This preset achieves an average of 89 FPS, with a minimum of 76 FPS, ensuring that the frame rate rarely drops below the 60 FPS threshold. High settings at 1440p drop to 67 FPS, which is still playable, but Medium provides a more comfortable margin for demanding scenes. Ultra at 1440p is not recommended, as the 55 FPS average is below the 60 FPS target and may lead to noticeable stutters.

At 4K, the options are limited. Low settings provide 76 FPS, which is the only 4K preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. Medium settings at 4K average 54 FPS, which is borderline; while it is playable, the min FPS of 46 indicates potential dips below smooth thresholds. High and Ultra settings at 4K are not recommended for a good experience, as they average 41 FPS and 33 FPS respectively, which will feel sluggish. The best 4K experience is achieved with Low settings, prioritizing frame rate over visual detail.

Overall, the best experience per the measured rows is at 1920x1080 with High or Ultra settings. This provides a high frame rate with good visual quality. For 1440p users, Medium settings offer the best balance of performance and stability. For 4K users, Low settings are the only recommended option for a fluid experience.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-12400 and Intel Arc B570 combination ranks 2315 out of 2897 tested combos in Assetto Corsa. This places it in the lower half of all configurations tested, indicating that while it can run the game, it is not among the top-performing setups. The rank is a relative measure, and the actual performance data shows that the combo is capable of playing the game at 1080p and 1440p with high frame rates.

The rank of 2315 out of 2897 suggests that many other CPU/GPU pairings achieve higher frame rates or can handle higher settings at the same resolutions. This is consistent with the Arc B570's position as a mid-range GPU, as it is outclassed by higher-tier graphics cards that can more easily manage 4K resolutions and Ultra settings. The Core i5-12400 is a competent CPU, but it is not a high-end processor, and its pairing with a mid-range GPU places the combo in the lower-middle tier of performance.

Despite the low rank, the combo is not a poor performer. The data shows that it excels at 1080p, where it can produce frame rates well above 60 FPS on most settings. The rank is a reflection of the competitive landscape, where many other combos feature more powerful GPUs. For a user with a 1080p or 1440p monitor, this combo provides a solid experience. The rank is a useful metric for comparison, but the measured FPS data is the more critical factor in determining whether this system meets a user's specific needs. The combo's performance is adequate for the game's requirements, but it does not stand out in the broader context of all tested systems.