Hard West

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i7-14700K paired with the Intel Arc B390 lands at rank 2614 out of 2949 tested combinations in Hard West. That places this pairing in the bottom 12% of all tested combos, a poor showing for a processor that otherwise sits in the 94th percentile among all CPUs. The bottleneck is unmistakable: the Arc B390, which ranks in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, holds this system back dramatically.

The data shows a stark mismatch between the two components. The i7-14700K delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 33440.5 and a Geekbench multi-core score of 20767, placing it within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and 0.1% of the AMD EPYC 9115 in average benchmark score. Meanwhile, the Arc B390's only recorded benchmark is a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482, which puts it just 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and 2.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710. This is a GPU that competes with entry-level parts from over a decade ago.

In practical terms, this combo ranks below 88.6% of all tested configurations in Hard West. The turn-based tactical genre typically demands modest hardware, yet this pairing still struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher resolutions. The processor's PassMark multi-thread score of 52392 and single-thread score of 4472 are exceptional, but they cannot compensate for a GPU whose FP32 throughput is just 7.680 TFLOPS. The Arc B390's 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units simply do not provide enough pixel-pushing capability for demanding scenarios.

The ranking reflects what the measured FPS data confirms across all resolutions: this is a GPU-limited configuration. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 87 FPS, but at 4K Ultra it drops to 14 FPS. The processor is never the limiting factor. Even the weakest CPU would likely produce similar results with this GPU in Hard West, given the game's modest threading requirements.

# FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-14700K a bottleneck for the Intel Arc B390 in Hard West?

A: No. The data shows the opposite. The i7-14700K has 20 cores and 28 threads with boost clocks up to 5.60 GHz, and its benchmark scores are in the 94th percentile among all CPUs. The Arc B390 is in the 9th percentile among GPUs. The GPU is the limiting component in every measured scenario.

Q: What frame rates can this combo achieve at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, the measured results range from 87 FPS on Low settings to 41 FPS on Ultra. Medium settings deliver 71 FPS with minimums of 61 FPS and maximums of 82 FPS, while High settings produce 55 FPS.

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

A: The Arc B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce 800M, 2.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710.

Q: Is 4K gaming feasible with this configuration?

A: The data indicates no. At 3840x2160, the highest average FPS recorded is 29 on Low settings. Ultra settings drop to 14 FPS. Medium settings produce 24 FPS with minimums of 20 FPS and maximums of 27 FPS. None of these are consistently playable for most users.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo?

A: 1920x1080 provides the most playable results across all settings. Low settings achieve 87 FPS, Medium achieves 71 FPS, High achieves 55 FPS, and even Ultra stays above 40 FPS at 41 FPS. This is the only resolution where every preset maintains playable frame rates.

Q: Does the i7-14700K's performance advantage show up in Hard West?

A: The processor's strengths—such as its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 33440.5 and PassMark integer math score of 182876—do not translate into higher frame rates in Hard West because the GPU saturates first. The measured FPS values are consistent with what a much weaker CPU would produce when paired with this GPU.

# Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance for optimizing the experience with this hardware combination. At 1920x1080, Medium settings deliver 71 FPS average with a minimum of 61 FPS and maximum of 82 FPS. This is the sweet spot: it provides a 29% improvement over High settings' 55 FPS and remains well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. The minimum frame rate of 61 FPS ensures that even demanding scenes stay fluid.

For users prioritizing visual fidelity at 1080p, High settings at 55 FPS average is a viable option, though the drop below 60 FPS may be noticeable in a turn-based tactics title where camera movements and animations benefit from smoothness. Ultra settings at 1080p produce 41 FPS, which is a substantial 42% reduction from Medium and offers diminishing returns given the genre's static presentation.

At 2560x1440, the data recommends Low settings for playability. The 55 FPS average on Low is the only preset that clears 60 FPS territory at this resolution, while Medium drops to 45 FPS and High falls to 35 FPS. The minimum frame rate at Medium is 38 FPS, which could cause perceptible stutter during action sequences. Users with 1440p displays should accept Low settings or drop to 1080p and use Medium for a better balance.

At 3840x2160, no preset provides a consistently playable experience. The best option is Low at 29 FPS average, which is below the 30 FPS threshold many consider the absolute minimum for playability. Medium at 24 FPS and High at 18 FPS are increasingly sluggish. Ultra at 14 FPS is effectively a slideshow. The data suggests avoiding 4K entirely with this configuration unless the user is willing to accept severe compromises.

The overall recommendation based on the measured rows is 1920x1080 with Medium settings. This configuration yields the best combination of average frame rate, minimum frame rate stability, and visual quality. The 61 FPS minimum is particularly important for turn-based tactics, where a single dropped frame during a critical animation can disrupt the experience.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, providing a comprehensive view of this combo's capabilities. Starting at 1920x1080, the results show a clear progression: Low settings achieve 87 FPS average, Medium reaches 71 FPS with a minimum of 61 FPS and maximum of 82 FPS, High delivers 55 FPS, and Ultra drops to 41 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 46 FPS, representing a 53% reduction in performance when moving to maximum quality.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds with lower absolute numbers. Low settings produce 55 FPS, Medium achieves 45 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS and maximum of 52 FPS, High delivers 35 FPS, and Ultra falls to 26 FPS. The reduction from 1080p to 1440p is consistent: Low drops by 32 FPS, Medium by 26 FPS, High by 20 FPS, and Ultra by 15 FPS. The diminishing gaps at higher settings suggest the GPU's fixed overhead becomes a larger proportion of the frame time as resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, the results are marginal across the board. Low settings produce 29 FPS, Medium achieves 24 FPS with a minimum of 20 FPS and maximum of 27 FPS, High delivers 18 FPS, and Ultra drops to 14 FPS. The step from 1440p to 4K is severe: Low loses 26 FPS, Medium loses 21 FPS, High loses 17 FPS, and Ultra loses 12 FPS. The percentage reductions are steeper at lower settings, indicating that the GPU's compute capacity is being exhausted by the pixel count.

Comparing settings within each resolution reveals the cost of quality. At 1080p, the jump from Low to Medium costs 16 FPS (18% reduction), Medium to High costs 16 FPS (23% reduction), and High to Ultra costs 14 FPS (25% reduction). At 1440p, the steps are 10 FPS (18%), 10 FPS (22%), and 9 FPS (26%). At 4K, the steps are 5 FPS (17%), 6 FPS (25%), and 4 FPS (22%). The proportional cost of each quality tier remains relatively stable across resolutions, suggesting the GPU's bottleneck scales predictably with workload.

The minimum and maximum FPS values, available only for Medium settings, show that frame time variability increases with resolution. At 1080p, the range is 61 to 82 FPS, a 21 FPS spread. At 1440p, the range is 38 to 52 FPS, a 14 FPS spread. At 4K, the range is 20 to 27 FPS, a 7 FPS spread. The absolute variability shrinks as the average frame rate drops, but the percentage variability stays similar, indicating consistent performance scaling.

# Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals how this combo scales across resolutions. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the average frame rates drop by 37% on Low (87 to 55 FPS), 37% on Medium (71 to 45 FPS), 36% on High (55 to 35 FPS), and 37% on Ultra (41 to 26 FPS). The consistency of these reductions—all near 37%—indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor, as resolution scaling affects the pixel throughput directly.

Moving from 2560x1440 to 3840x2160, the reductions are more severe: Low drops by 47% (55 to 29 FPS), Medium drops by 47% (45 to 24 FPS), High drops by 49% (35 to 18 FPS), and Ultra drops by 46% (26 to 14 FPS). The larger percentage drops at this step suggest the GPU is hitting a hard ceiling. The Arc B390's 24 ROPs and 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply insufficient for 4K workloads, even at Low settings.

The overall scaling from 1080p to 4K is stark: Low settings lose 67% of their average FPS (87 to 29), Medium loses 66% (71 to 24), High loses 67% (55 to 18), and Ultra loses 66% (41 to 14). These uniform reductions—all near two-thirds—confirm that the limiting component is the GPU, not the CPU. If the processor were the bottleneck, higher resolutions would show smaller percentage drops because the CPU workload per frame would dominate less relative to the GPU workload.

The i7-14700K's role in this scaling is minimal. With 20 cores and 28 threads, the processor has ample headroom for Hard West's turn-based tactics engine, which rarely utilizes more than a few threads. The CPU's strong single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2160, ensures that even the lowest resolution and highest FPS scenarios at 1080p Low (87 FPS) do not expose a CPU limitation. The frame rate scaling pattern is classic GPU-bound behavior.

The data implies that reducing resolution yields proportional gains, but the GPU's absolute performance ceiling prevents any resolution from achieving high frame rates at maximum quality. Even at 1080p Ultra, the 41 FPS average is below the 60 FPS target, and the 4K results are uniformly unplayable. Users seeking higher frame rates would need to either lower settings to Low at 1080p for 87 FPS or accept the visual compromises of Medium at 1080p for 71 FPS.

# CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700K is a 20-core, 28-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. It features a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, with a 33 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB L2 cache per core. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4472 and Cinebench R15 single-core score of 313.5 demonstrate strong per-core performance, while its multi-thread scores—including a Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 33440.5 and a PassMark multi-thread score of 52392—showcase its parallel capability.

In Hard West, the CPU's role is minimal because the game's turn-based tactical nature creates relatively low CPU demand. The measured FPS data shows no signs of CPU bottlenecking: frame rates scale linearly with resolution, and even the highest average FPS (87 at 1080p Low) does not push the processor to its limits. The i7-14700K's 94th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 69355, places it in elite company, but this power goes largely unused in this title.

The processor's nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the AMD EPYC 9115 (0.1% behind), AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (0.2% ahead), AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.7% ahead), and AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (0.9% ahead). These differences are negligible in real-world gaming scenarios, particularly in a game like Hard West where the GPU dominates the workload. The i7-14700K's 125 W TDP and support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory provide flexibility, but these features do not affect the measured FPS results.

The GPU, by contrast, is the definitive bottleneck. The Arc B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 places it in the 9th percentile among all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% behind) and NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (2.7% behind). Its 1536 shading units and 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 performance are insufficient for 4K rendering, and even 1440p Medium (45 FPS) struggles to maintain smooth frame rates. The GPU's system-shared memory and 80 W TDP further indicate its integrated-class positioning, despite being listed as an active production part.

The conclusion from the data is unambiguous: the i7-14700K provides far more computational capability than Hard West requires, while the Arc B390 provides far less rendering capability than the game demands at higher settings. Users with this combination should target 1080p Medium for the best experience, as the CPU will never be the limiting factor, and the GPU's modest performance ceiling defines the achievable frame rates.