Fortnite

# Fortnite with Intel Core i5-11400F + Intel Arc B390

This combo pairs a 6-core, 12-thread Rocket Lake CPU with an integrated Xe3-LPG GPU, and the measured results reveal a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics solution. The Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile among all tested GPUs, and its nearest rivals include the GeForce GT 520MX and GT 710 — parts from a different era. The data shows that Fortnite is playable only at lower resolutions and settings, while the processor demonstrates it has plenty of headroom left on the table.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is stark and tells a clear story about where the bottleneck lives. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 115 FPS at 1920x1080 to 73 FPS at 2560x1440 — a 36.5% reduction — and then to 39 FPS at 3840x2160, which is another 46.6% drop. That progression is not linear; the curve steepens as resolution climbs, which is a hallmark of a GPU-limited scenario.

Looking at Medium settings, the pattern repeats with slightly lower absolute numbers: 81 FPS at 1080p, 51 FPS at 1440p, and 27 FPS at 4K. The percentage losses between steps are similar, suggesting the scaling behavior is consistent regardless of quality preset. At High settings, the 1080p result is 63 FPS, dropping to 40 FPS at 1440p and 21 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic collapse: 41 FPS at 1080p, 26 FPS at 1440p, and just 14 FPS at 4K.

The fact that even at 1080p Low the system only reaches 115 FPS — while the CPU is capable of far more — points squarely at the integrated GPU as the limiting factor. If the processor were the constraint, we would expect to see smaller gaps between resolution steps, because CPU load does not scale with pixel count the way GPU load does. Instead, every resolution increase exacts a heavy toll, and the 4K Low result of 39 FPS is barely above the 4K Medium result of 27 FPS in relative terms, confirming that pixel throughput is the primary bottleneck.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F brings 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The processor posts a single-thread score of 868 in 3dmark, 204 in Cinebench R15, 850 in R20, 2024 in R23, and 1777 in Geekbench. Multi-threaded results are similarly respectable: 5619 in 3dmark with 16 threads, 6022 in Cinebench R20, 14340 in R23, and 7737 in Geekbench multicore.

The CPU's percentile ranking of 71 against all tested processors puts it comfortably in the mid-to-upper range. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7H12, which scores 17120 on average (just 0.3% behind), and the Intel Core i5-12450H at 17239 (0.4% ahead). The data suggests this is a competent gaming CPU for its generation, with passmark single-thread performance of 2981 and a multithread score of 16908.

However, in this particular combo, the CPU's potential is largely unrealized. Fortnite at 1080p Low produces 115 FPS average, which is well within what the 11400F can feed, given its 3dmark 16-thread score of 5619 and 8-thread score of 4691. The processor is not the limiting component at any resolution tested; even at 4K Ultra with 14 FPS, the bottleneck is clearly on the graphics side. The CPU's 65W TDP and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for this workload, but the integrated GPU simply cannot translate that CPU capability into high frame rates.

The 3dmark 2-thread score of 1691 and 4-thread score of 3171 indicate decent scaling across cores, which matters for Fortnite's engine that can utilize multiple threads for physics and draw calls. Yet none of this matters when the GPU is rendering at a fraction of the rate the CPU could support.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs, along with 12 ray tracing cores. The boost clock reaches 2500 MHz from a 300 MHz base, which yields a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is rated at 7.680 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 15.36 TFLOPS.

Memory is "System Shared" — there is no dedicated VRAM, and bandwidth is dependent on the system configuration. This is a significant limitation for gaming, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory access. The GPU's benchmark presence is thin: a single 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 places it at the 9th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% ahead), GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% ahead), GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% ahead), and GT 710 (1443, 2.7% ahead). These are all entry-level or legacy parts, which contextualizes the Arc B390's performance tier.

The GPU's TDP is 80W, and it operates as an IGP with no power connectors or slot width — it is embedded in the processor package. This explains the thermal and power constraints that limit sustained performance. The measured FPS data aligns with the GPU's low percentile: 115 FPS at 1080p Low is the best case, and that is only achievable because Fortnite at Low settings reduces shader complexity and texture bandwidth demands. At higher settings, the GPU's limited ROP count and memory bandwidth become increasingly problematic, as evidenced by the 4K Ultra result of 14 FPS.

The 12 RT cores are present but largely irrelevant at these frame rates; ray tracing would only further degrade performance. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) is a feature checkbox, but the raw throughput is not there to leverage it meaningfully in Fortnite.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of Intel Core i5-11400F and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2417 out of 2740 tested combos in Fortnite. That places it in the 88th percentile of all combos — meaning roughly 88% of tested systems perform better. The rank reflects the GPU's severe limitation, not the CPU's capability. If we isolate the processor, the 11400F's 71st percentile ranking suggests it would pair far better with a discrete GPU.

The gap between the CPU's potential and the combo's actual ranking is instructive. A system with this processor and a mid-range discrete GPU would likely rank much higher, but the integrated Arc B390 drags the overall performance down. The data implies that users seeking playable Fortnite performance would need to either lower expectations significantly or change the GPU component entirely.

Comparisons to the nearest rival GPUs reinforce this: the GT 520MX and GT 710 are not considered gaming-capable in any modern sense, yet the Arc B390 sits alongside them in benchmark scores. The combo's rank of 2417 out of 2740 means only about 323 combos perform worse, which is a small minority. This is not a competitive gaming configuration by any stretch.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo can achieve in Fortnite?

A: The highest measured average is 115 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best is 81 FPS at 1080p Medium, followed by 73 FPS at 2560x1440 Low.

Q: Is this combo capable of 4K gaming in Fortnite?

A: At 4K, the best result is 39 FPS on Low settings, with Medium dropping to 27 FPS, High to 21 FPS, and Ultra to 14 FPS. None of these are smooth gaming experiences by typical standards.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12. The GeForce GT 520MX scores 1463 (1.3% behind), GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% behind), GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% behind), and GT 710 scores 1443 (2.7% behind).

Q: What is the CPU's percentile ranking relative to all processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F ranks in the 71st percentile, with an average benchmark score of 17177. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7H12, scores 17120 (0.3% lower), while the Intel Core i5-12450H scores 17239 (0.4% higher).

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance more in Fortnite?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The CPU's 6 cores and 12 threads with a 4.40 GHz boost are more than sufficient, but the integrated GPU's 9th percentile ranking and the steep FPS drops with resolution increases indicate graphics-side limits.

Q: What resolution and settings yield the most consistent frame times?

A: At 2560x1440 Medium, the measured range is 44 to 59 FPS with an average of 51. At 1920x1080 Medium, the range is 69 to 93 FPS with an average of 81. The 1080p Medium result offers the narrowest relative variance among playable options.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly low. Low settings average 39 FPS, Medium averages 27 FPS with a range of 23 to 31, High averages 21 FPS, and Ultra averages 14 FPS. None of these meet the 60 FPS threshold, and only Low approaches something marginally playable for non-competitive play.

Moving to 2560x1440 improves things substantially. Low settings average 73 FPS, Medium averages 51 FPS with a range of 44 to 59, High averages 40 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. The Low and Medium presets are usable, though the Medium range of 44 to 59 FPS indicates some frame pacing variability.

At 1920x1080, the combo shows its best face. Low settings average 115 FPS, which is smooth for most players. Medium averages 81 FPS with a range of 69 to 93, which is also solid. High averages 63 FPS, dipping into the lower end of acceptable. Ultra averages 41 FPS, which is a significant step down and suggests the GPU cannot handle the additional effects and shadows.

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low is roughly double the FPS of Ultra, and Medium sits about 70-80% above Ultra. The delta between Low and Medium is smaller than between Medium and High, indicating diminishing returns as settings rise. The 4K results are uniformly below 40 FPS, making that resolution impractical for this combo.

Settings Recommendations

Based strictly on the measured data, the best experience comes from 1920x1080 with Low settings, yielding 115 FPS average. This is the only configuration that breaks the 100 FPS barrier, making it the clear choice for competitive play where frame rate matters most. The 1080p Medium preset at 81 FPS is the next best option, offering a balance between visual quality and performance, with a measured range of 69 to 93 FPS that stays above typical 60 FPS minimums.

For players who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, 2560x1440 Low at 73 FPS is the best high-resolution option. The Medium preset at 1440p produces 51 FPS average with a 44 to 59 FPS range, which is playable but may feel inconsistent during fast-paced moments. The 1080p High preset at 63 FPS is a middle ground, though the 1440p Low result at 73 FPS actually beats it in raw frame rate while offering higher resolution.

The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution. Even at 1080p, it only manages 41 FPS, and at 1440p it drops to 26 FPS. The performance cost of Ultra settings greatly outweighs the visual benefits on this hardware. Similarly, 4K at any setting is impractical; the best case of 39 FPS on Low is below acceptable thresholds for a fast-paced battle royale.

The optimal configuration balances resolution and settings such that the average FPS stays above 60 while maintaining stability. Two combinations meet this criterion: 1080p Low (115 FPS) and 1080p Medium (81 FPS). The 1440p Low result of 73 FPS also qualifies and offers higher pixel density. Choosing between these depends on whether the user prefers smoother motion or sharper image quality — the data supports either as viable, but nothing beyond these three configurations delivers a consistently smooth experience.