Hard West

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F paired with the Intel Arc B390 produces a highly constrained gaming experience in Hard West, with benchmark data showing that the GPU becomes the definitive bottleneck across all tested resolutions and settings. The measured frames per second, derived from a Zen 5 architecture CPU and an integrated-class GPU, place this combination in the bottom tier of all tested hardware pairings, making it suitable primarily for low-resolution, low-detail play.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is a desktop processor built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge, and fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It provides 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a 65 W part on the AMD Socket AM5 platform, supporting DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, along with ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes. The processor’s benchmark results place it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 69,996.

In Hard West, a turn-based tactics title from 2015, the CPU’s substantial compute resources are largely underutilized. The game’s mechanics are not heavily threaded, and the data shows that the Ryzen 7 9700F’s capabilities far exceed what the title requires. For context, the CPU’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, with an average score of 69,875 and a delta of 0.2%, and the Intel Core i7-14700KF, scoring 70,163 with a delta of -0.2%. The Ryzen 9 7950X sits at 69,515 with a 0.7% delta, and the Core i7-14700K at 69,355 with a 0.9% delta. These comparisons indicate that the 9700F is positioned among high-end desktop and mobile processors, yet the measured FPS in Hard West are low at every configuration, confirming that the CPU is never the limiting factor. The game’s performance ceiling is set entirely by the graphics subsystem, and the CPU’s high single-thread and multithread scores — 4,691 in the single-thread test and 36,470 in the multithread test — do not translate into higher frame rates because the workload is GPU-bound. The data suggests that swapping this CPU for any of its nearest rivals would yield virtually identical results in this title, as the delta in processing power is negligible relative to the GPU constraint.

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

The Intel Arc B390 is a graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, with a chip codename of Panther Lake, fabricated on a 3 nm process by Intel. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The GPU features 1,536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operations pipelines, along with 12 ray tracing cores. Its compute capabilities are rated at 7.680 TFLOPS for FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS for FP16. The memory configuration is system shared, meaning the GPU uses a portion of the CPU’s main memory rather than dedicated VRAM, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Arc B390’s benchmark standing is remarkably low. It scores 1,482 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, with a score of 1,463 and a delta of 1.3%, the GeForce 800M at 1,460 with a 1.5% delta, the GT 625 OEM at 1,446 with a 2.5% delta, and the GT 710 at 1,443 with a 2.7% delta. These are all entry-level or legacy mobile/desktop parts, and the Arc B390’s performance in Hard West aligns with this low-tier positioning. The game’s measured FPS figures, ranging from 14 at 4K Ultra to 87 at 1080p Low, show that this GPU is only capable of producing playable frame rates at the lowest settings and resolutions. The lack of dedicated VRAM and the reliance on system shared memory likely contribute to the performance ceiling, as the bandwidth is not fixed but dependent on the system’s DDR5 configuration. The GPU’s 9th percentile ranking is a stark indicator that this is not a part designed for modern or even older 3D titles at high fidelity; rather, it is an integrated solution that handles basic graphics tasks with moderate success.

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

The measured FPS data shows a clear and consistent pattern of degradation as resolution increases, which is classic evidence of a GPU-bound scenario. At 1080p Low, the average frame rate is 87 FPS, which drops to 55 FPS at 1440p Low, and further to 29 FPS at 4K Low. This represents a 37% decrease from 1080p to 1440p and a 67% decrease from 1080p to 4K. The scaling is not linear, but the trend is unmistakable: the GPU’s fill rate and shading capacity are being overwhelmed by the increasing pixel count.

The Medium settings show a similar pattern. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 71, with a minimum of 61 and a maximum of 82. Moving to 1440p Medium, the average falls to 45 FPS, with a minimum of 38 and a maximum of 52. At 4K Medium, the average is 24 FPS, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is a 37% reduction, and from 1080p to 4K, a 66% reduction. The High settings produce 55 FPS at 1080p, 35 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K, representing a 36% and 67% reduction respectively. The Ultra settings are the most demanding, with 41 FPS at 1080p, 26 FPS at 1440p, and 14 FPS at 4K, which is a 37% and 66% reduction.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings is telling. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain relatively stable regardless of resolution, because the CPU workload is largely independent of pixel count. Instead, the FPS scales inversely with resolution, which indicates that the GPU’s rendering pipeline is saturated. The data strongly suggests that the Arc B390 is the limiting component at every resolution and settings combination, and the Ryzen 7 9700F’s role is reduced to feeding the GPU with draw calls that it can process without breaking a sweat.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and the Intel Arc B390 ranks 2,614 out of 2,949 tested combos in Hard West. This puts it in the 11.4th percentile of all tested hardware pairings, meaning that approximately 88.6% of all combinations tested perform better in this game. The ranking is notably poor, and it is almost entirely attributable to the GPU’s low performance tier, as the CPU is in the 94th percentile of all processors.

The data indicates that this combo is not competitive for Hard West at any settings above Low at 1080p. The 87 FPS at 1080p Low is the only configuration that approaches what might be considered a smooth experience, and even that is a modest result for a game from 2015. The combo’s rank is consistent with the GPU’s 9th percentile standing, which suggests that the overall ranking is driven by the graphics component. The CPU’s high benchmark scores do not boost the combo’s position because the game’s performance is not CPU-limited. In practical terms, this means that the user is paying for a high-end processor that has no opportunity to demonstrate its capabilities in this title, as the GPU holds the system back. The ranking also implies that there are many other GPU options that, when paired with a similar or even weaker CPU, would deliver far better results in Hard West. The combo’s position in the bottom 12% of all tested configurations is a clear warning that this is not a viable pairing for anything beyond the most basic settings.

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

The following data represents the measured average FPS for each resolution and settings combination. Minimum and maximum FPS are provided only for the Medium settings, as the other configurations did not record those values.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset yields an average of 87 FPS. The Medium preset produces 71 FPS on average, with a minimum of 61 and a maximum of 82. The High preset lowers the average to 55 FPS. The Ultra preset drops the average further to 41 FPS. This shows a steady decline as settings increase, with Ultra delivering less than half the frame rate of Low.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 55 FPS, which is a 37% reduction from the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset averages 45 FPS, with a minimum of 38 and a maximum of 52. The High preset averages 35 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 26 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 29 FPS, which is a 53% reduction.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 29 FPS. The Medium preset averages 24 FPS, with a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 27. The High preset averages 18 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 14 FPS. At this resolution, even the Low preset fails to reach 30 FPS, and the Ultra preset is effectively unplayable, with an average that hovers near the threshold of slideshow-like performance.

The data shows a clear pattern: at 1080p, the Low preset is the only one that exceeds 60 FPS, and the Medium preset is close at 71 FPS. At 1440p, no preset reaches 60 FPS, and at 4K, no preset reaches 30 FPS. The minimum FPS values for Medium at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K are 61, 38, and 20, respectively, which indicates that frame pacing is also impacted at higher resolutions, with the 4K Medium configuration dipping to 20 FPS on the low end.

FAQ

*Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this hardware in Hard West?*

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 at Low settings yields the highest average FPS at 87, which is the only configuration that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p is also viable, with an average of 71 FPS and a minimum of 61.

Q: Is the CPU or the GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is the definitive limiting factor. The evidence is the FPS scaling with resolution: as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K, FPS drops by roughly two-thirds across all settings, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound workload. The CPU’s high benchmark percentile (94th) and its nearest rivals’ similar scores do not translate into higher FPS.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to all other tested combos?

A: This combo ranks 2,614 out of 2,949 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 11.4% of all tested hardware pairings. The low ranking is driven by the GPU, which is in the 9th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: What are the FPS results at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 14. This is significantly below playable levels and represents the worst-performing configuration in the measured data.

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

A: The Arc B390’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, which is 1.3% slower, and the GeForce 800M, which is 1.5% slower. The GeForce GT 625 OEM is 2.5% slower, and the GT 710 is 2.7% slower. These are all low-tier parts, and the Arc B390 is only marginally faster than them.

Q: Does the Ryzen 7 9700F’s high CPU benchmark score help in this game?

A: No. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 69,996 and its 94th percentile ranking do not improve FPS because the game is not CPU-bound. The measured FPS are limited by the GPU, and a weaker CPU paired with a stronger GPU would likely produce better results.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS, the optimal configuration for this hardware in Hard West is 1920x1080 with the Low preset. This yields an average FPS of 87, which provides a smooth and responsive experience for a turn-based tactics game. The Medium preset at 1080p is a viable alternative, with an average of 71 FPS and a minimum of 61, which ensures that frame drops do not go below the 60 FPS threshold. Choosing High at 1080p reduces the average to 55 FPS, which is still playable but introduces the risk of noticeable stutter in busy scenes. The Ultra preset at 1080p, with an average of 41 FPS, is not recommended as it compromises smoothness for visual fidelity that is not worth the performance cost.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset provides an average of 55 FPS, which is acceptable for a slower-paced game, but the Medium preset at 45 FPS is borderline. The High and Ultra presets at 1440p, with averages of 35 and 26 FPS respectively, should be avoided. At 3840x2160, no settings are recommended, as even the Low preset averages only 29 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to 14 FPS. The data suggests that users with this hardware should stick to 1080p and use the Low or Medium presets to maintain a consistent frame rate above 60 FPS. The performance gap between Low and Medium at 1080p is only 16 FPS, so the Medium preset offers a reasonable balance of visual quality and performance, but the Low preset is the safest choice for ensuring a stable experience. The game’s turn-based nature means that 45 FPS might be tolerated, but the measured minimums at higher settings and resolutions indicate that the GPU struggles to maintain consistent output, making lower settings the pragmatic choice.