Evolve

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 and Intel Arc B370 combination delivers a performance profile that is strictly limited by its graphics component, based on the measured frame rates in Evolve. The data shows a system that can handle the game at lower resolutions and settings but falls behind significantly as graphical demands increase. This analysis breaks down the specific roles of the CPU and GPU, the measured performance at various settings, and the overall ranking of this combo.

FAQ

*Q: What is the overall performance rank of this CPU and GPU combination in Evolve?*

A: Out of 2872 tested combinations, this pairing ranks at 2639, placing it in the bottom percentile of systems tested for this game, indicating it is a low-performing configuration for this title.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its closest rivals in terms of benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184. Its nearest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186, which is a 0.2% difference. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, placing it 0.7% ahead, while the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, trailing by 1.4%.

*Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo can achieve in Evolve?*

A: The highest recorded average frame rate is 80 FPS, which is achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the measured data that reaches the 80 FPS mark.

Q: What is the lowest average frame rate recorded for this system?

A: The lowest average frame rate is 13 FPS, which occurs at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings. This is the most demanding configuration tested and proves unplayable.

Q: Does the CPU's performance present a bottleneck for the GPU in this game?

A: The data suggests the CPU is not the primary limiter. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 80 FPS, but performance drops dramatically with increased graphical settings, indicating the GPU is the constraining factor. The CPU's high multi-threaded benchmark scores, such as 20655 in Cinebench R23, suggest it has ample headroom for this title.

Q: Is there a significant difference between Medium and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: Yes, the difference is substantial. At 2560x1440, Medium settings produce an average of 42 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to an average of 23 FPS. This represents a 19 FPS decrease, or roughly a 45% reduction in performance when moving to the highest preset.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the decisive component in this system's Evolve performance. The GPU's specifications, including its clock speeds and memory configuration, directly correlate with the measured frame rates. The graphics card operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. Its memory is part of a "System Shared" configuration, meaning the size, bus width, and bandwidth are system-dependent rather than fixed values. This shared memory setup is a significant factor, as it relies on the system's main memory and can limit performance compared to dedicated VRAM.

The GPU's raw compute capabilities are modest. It has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units. Its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. The floating-point performance is 6.144 TFLOPS (FP32). These figures put the Arc B370 in a very low performance tier, which is reflected in its 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs. The only benchmark score available for this GPU is 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), which is nearly identical to the scores of legacy cards like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190) and ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186).

This GPU's low performance tier is the primary reason for the frame rates seen in Evolve. At 1080p with Low settings, the Arc B370 can produce 80 FPS, but this is the ceiling. As the resolution and settings increase, the GPU's limited pixel and texture processing capabilities become overwhelmed. The measured data shows a clear and steep decline in performance, confirming that the GPU is the bottleneck in this pairing. The fact that the GPU relies on system memory further compounds its limitations, as there is no dedicated high-bandwidth VRAM to draw from.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700 is a high-core-count processor that provides substantial computational power, which is more than sufficient for Evolve. This CPU features 8 cores and 16 threads, based on the Zen 3 architecture. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. This processing power is reflected in its benchmark results, where it scores 20655 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 2916 in single-core. Its average benchmark score is 25517, placing it in the 78th percentile of all CPUs.

The CPU's performance relative to its nearest rivals is very close. It is 0.1% behind the Intel Xeon D-2752TER (25530) and the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H (25550). It is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7640U (25485) and 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 5825U (25446). These negligible differences indicate that the Ryzen 7 5700 is squarely in the middle of its performance class.

In the context of Evolve, the CPU's role is to handle the game's logic, physics, and AI. With 8 cores and 16 threads, it is well-equipped to manage these tasks. The measured frame rates, however, are not constrained by the CPU. Evidence for this is the performance scaling with settings. At 1080p, the average FPS jumps from 49 at High to 80 at Low, a clear sign that the GPU is the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would remain relatively static regardless of graphical settings. The CPU's high multi-threaded score of 24303 in PassMark and 8675 in Cinebench R20 reinforce that its compute capacity is not being fully utilized in this scenario.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo's performance across resolutions and settings.

1920x1080 (1080p): Performance is at its best here. The average frame rate varies significantly with settings.

• Low: 80 FPS (the highest average recorded).
• Medium: 62 FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS.
• High: 49 FPS.
• Ultra: 34 FPS.

2560x1440 (1440p): The frame rates drop considerably at this resolution.

• Low: 54 FPS.
• Medium: 42 FPS, with a minimum of 35 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS.
• High: 33 FPS.
• Ultra: 23 FPS.

3840x2160 (4K): Performance at this resolution is generally poor.

• Low: 31 FPS.
• Medium: 24 FPS, with a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 27 FPS.
• High: 19 FPS.
• Ultra: 13 FPS.

The data clearly shows that the system is only viable for smooth gameplay at 1080p with Low or Medium settings. The Medium setting at 1080p offers a playable 62 FPS average. At 1440p, only the Low setting approaches a playable 54 FPS. At 4K, all settings are below the threshold for smooth gameplay, with the Low preset at 31 FPS being the only option even close to acceptable.

How This Combo Ranks

This system's performance in Evolve places it very low in the overall rankings. The combo rank is 2639 out of 2872 tested combinations. This means that roughly 92% of tested systems perform better than this one in this specific game. This rank is a direct result of the GPU's limitations, as the CPU is a mid-to-high-tier component.

The ranking is consistent with the GPU's low percentile ranking (5th) and its benchmark scores. The GPU's performance is on par with graphics cards from over a decade ago, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770. While the CPU ranks in the 78th percentile, it cannot compensate for the GPU's lack of rendering power. The combo is effectively a "strong CPU, weak GPU" pairing, and the overall ranking reflects the weakest link. In a game like Evolve, which is an FPS, the GPU's role is paramount, and this system's ranking indicates it will struggle to provide a competitive or smooth experience at higher graphical presets.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal experience is achieved at 1920x1080 with Medium settings. This configuration yields an average of 62 FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS, which provides a mostly smooth and responsive gaming session. The 80 FPS at Low settings is technically faster, but the visual quality reduction is significant.

The Medium preset at 1080p represents the best balance between visual fidelity and performance. It offers a stable frame rate that is suitable for an FPS game. Moving up to High at 1080p drops the average to 49 FPS, which is still playable but less fluid. Ultra at 1080p should be avoided, as the 34 FPS average will feel sluggish.

At higher resolutions, the choices are more limited. For 1440p, the Low setting is the only option that provides a playable frame rate (54 FPS). The Medium setting at 42 FPS is borderline, and anything higher is not recommended. For 4K gaming, this combo is not suitable. The best-case scenario at 4K is Low settings with 31 FPS, which is not a smooth experience for a fast-paced FPS. Therefore, the recommended settings are 1080p Medium for the best overall experience, with 1080p Low as a fallback for higher frame rates.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K clearly illustrates that the GPU is the limiting component. The performance drop is steep and consistent across all settings.

For the Low preset, the average FPS goes from 80 at 1080p to 54 at 1440p (a 32.5% decrease) and then to 31 at 4K (a 61.3% decrease from 1080p, or a 42.6% decrease from 1440p). This massive drop in performance with resolution is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck.

For the Medium preset, the average FPS goes from 62 at 1080p to 42 at 1440p (a 32.3% decrease) and then to 24 at 4K (a 61.3% decrease from 1080p, or a 42.9% decrease from 1440p). The pattern is identical to the Low setting, further confirming the GPU's limitation.

For the High preset, the average FPS drops from 49 at 1080p to 33 at 1440p (a 32.7% decrease) and then to 19 at 4K (a 61.2% decrease from 1080p, or a 42.4% decrease from 1440p).

For the Ultra preset, the average FPS falls from 34 at 1080p to 23 at 1440p (a 32.4% decrease) and then to 13 at 4K (a 61.8% decrease from 1080p, or a 43.5% decrease from 1440p).

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings is telling. The frame rate is being cut by roughly one-third when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and then by roughly another two-fifths when moving from 1440p to 4K. This predictable scaling is indicative of a system that is purely limited by the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth. A CPU-bound system would show much smaller differences between 1080p and 4K, as the CPU's workload would not increase as significantly with resolution. Here, the GPU's workload is increasing with every pixel, and its performance is collapsing accordingly.