Hard West

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 paired with the Intel Arc B370 integrated graphics delivers playable frame rates in Hard West only at 1080p with lower settings, while higher resolutions and quality presets push the system into unplayable territory. The data shows a 14-core CPU that is more than capable of handling this turn-based title, but the GPU—which ranks in the 5th percentile of all tested graphics solutions—becomes the definitive bottleneck as resolution increases.

Settings Recommendations

For the best experience from this combination, the Low preset at 1920x1080 is the only configuration that consistently delivers smooth, playable performance. The measured average of 79 FPS at these settings provides ample headroom for a turn-based tactics game, where frame pacing matters less than in action titles. This is the only preset/resolution pairing where the system achieves frame rates that would be considered fully fluid on standard displays.

The Medium preset at 1080p is a viable alternative for those who want better visual quality without sacrificing playability. The average of 64 FPS remains well above the threshold for comfortable gameplay, and the measured minimum of 55 FPS suggests the system holds up reasonably well under load. This represents the best balance between visual fidelity and performance for this hardware combination.

At 1440p, the Low preset delivers an average of 50 FPS, which is acceptable but noticeably less smooth than the 1080p Low experience. The Medium preset at 1440p drops to 41 FPS average with a minimum of 35 FPS, which may be borderline for some players. The High preset at 1440p falls to 31 FPS, which is generally considered too low for a satisfying experience even in a slower-paced genre.

The Ultra preset should be avoided entirely across all resolutions. At 1080p Ultra, the system manages only 37 FPS average, and this drops to 23 FPS at 1440p and a dismal 12 FPS at 4K. These figures indicate that the Ultra preset demands more graphics horsepower than the Arc B370 can provide, regardless of resolution. The data clearly shows that High and Ultra presets are not practical options for this hardware, even at 1080p.

FAQ

*Q: Can this system run Hard West at 4K resolution?*

A: Technically yes, but not at playable frame rates. The measured average FPS at 3840x2160 ranges from 26 FPS on Low settings down to 12 FPS on Ultra. Even the best-case 4K scenario falls well below what is needed for comfortable gameplay.

Q: What is the best performance-to-quality trade-off for this hardware?

A: The Medium preset at 1920x1080 offers the strongest combination of visual quality and performance, with an average of 64 FPS and a minimum of 55 FPS. This provides a comfortable margin above playability while delivering better visual fidelity than the Low preset.

Q: How much performance is gained by dropping from Ultra to Low settings at 1080p?

A: The improvement is substantial. The system goes from 37 FPS average on Ultra to 79 FPS average on Low at 1920x1080, representing more than a doubling of frame rate. This suggests the Ultra preset is extremely demanding relative to this GPU's capabilities.

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

A: The GPU is clearly the bottleneck. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 ranks in the 90th percentile of all CPUs and scores 32,924 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile of GPUs. The dramatic FPS drops when increasing resolution confirm that graphics processing, not CPU throughput, is constraining performance.

Q: Should I play at 1080p or 1440p with this setup?

A: For a consistently smooth experience, 1080p is the recommended resolution. The Low preset at 1440p averages 50 FPS, which is playable but noticeably less fluid than the 79 FPS at 1080p Low. The Medium preset at 1440p drops to 41 FPS average, which may introduce noticeable stutter in some scenes.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570's score of 1186 (0.2% difference) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770's score of 1190 (0.5% difference). It is slightly ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000's score of 1168 by 1.4%. These are all legacy integrated and entry-level discrete parts, underscoring the B370's limited graphics throughput.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases, which is the clearest indicator of a GPU-bound system. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 79 FPS at 1920x1080 to 50 FPS at 2560x1440—a 36.7% decrease when pixel count increases by 77.8%. Moving from 1440p to 4K at Low settings further reduces the average to 26 FPS, another 48% drop. These losses are far larger than the pixel-count ratios would suggest, indicating that the Arc B370 exhausts its computational resources quickly when fill-rate demands rise.

The scaling pattern at Medium settings follows the same trajectory. From 64 FPS at 1080p, the average falls to 41 FPS at 1440p and then to 21 FPS at 4K. The minimum frame rate at Medium settings is 55 FPS at 1080p, 35 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The proportional drops are consistent across settings, confirming that resolution scaling is the dominant factor in performance degradation.

At High settings, the system averages 49 FPS at 1080p, 31 FPS at 1440p, and 16 FPS at 4K. The Ultra preset is even more punishing: 37 FPS at 1080p, 23 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K. The gap between High and Ultra narrows as resolution increases, suggesting that Ultra's additional effects become relatively less expensive at higher pixel counts, but the absolute performance is too low to be useful in any case.

The 4K figures across all settings—from 26 FPS on Low to 12 FPS on Ultra—are consistently unplayable. Even the best 4K result is below the minimum threshold for acceptable frame pacing in most games. The data indicates that this combination is not viable for 4K gaming in Hard West, and the resolution should be avoided entirely.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates its best performance across all presets. The Low preset achieves an average of 79 FPS, which is the highest measured result in the entire dataset. Medium follows at 64 FPS average with a minimum of 55 FPS and maximum of 74 FPS. High drops to 49 FPS average, and Ultra bottoms out at 37 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 15 FPS, while the step from Medium to High costs another 15 FPS. The step from High to Ultra costs 12 FPS, showing diminishing returns in frame rate as settings increase.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops are significant but the relative ordering remains the same. Low averages 50 FPS, Medium averages 41 FPS with a minimum of 35 FPS and maximum of 47 FPS, High averages 31 FPS, and Ultra averages 23 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium narrows to 9 FPS, while the gap between Medium and High stays at 10 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p is the first configuration where the average dips below 25 FPS, making it borderline unplayable.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles with every preset. Low averages 26 FPS, Medium averages 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 FPS and maximum of 25 FPS, High averages 16 FPS, and Ultra averages 12 FPS. The differences between presets compress as the GPU becomes fully saturated: Low to Medium costs 5 FPS, Medium to High costs 5 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 4 FPS. This compression suggests that at 4K, the GPU is the sole limiting factor and settings adjustments have diminishing impact.

The minimum FPS values, only recorded for Medium settings, show that the system maintains reasonable frame stability at 1080p (55 FPS minimum) but degrades sharply at 1440p (35 FPS minimum) and 4K (18 FPS minimum). The spread between minimum and maximum at Medium settings is 19 FPS at 1080p, 12 FPS at 1440p, and 7 FPS at 4K—the narrowing spread at higher resolutions indicates the GPU is consistently maxed out.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2721 out of 2949 tested combos in Hard West. This places the system in the bottom 8% of all configurations tested, which is consistent with the GPU's low performance percentile. The ranking reflects that while the CPU is strong, the integrated graphics solution severely limits gaming performance.

The Arc B370's standalone benchmark performance explains this low ranking. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, meaning 95% of tested graphics solutions outperform it. The nearest rivals are all older integrated or entry-level parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% faster), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% faster), and AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% faster). The only GPU the B370 beats in its immediate comparison group is the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4% slower).

The CPU's strong benchmark results do not compensate for the GPU weakness in this pairing. The Core Ultra 5 245 ranks in the 90th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 48,995, and its nearest CPU rivals are all mainstream desktop processors: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49,196, 0.4% faster), AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49,228, 0.5% faster), Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48,698, 0.6% slower), and Intel Core i5-14600K (48,618, 0.8% slower). The CPU is clearly not the factor holding this combo back.

The 2,721st rank out of 2,949 combos suggests that nearly every combination tested with a discrete GPU outperforms this integrated-graphics setup. The data indicates that users seeking better Hard West performance should prioritize upgrading the graphics solution rather than the processor.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 provides substantial processing power that is largely underutilized in Hard West. The CPU features 14 cores and 14 threads based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boosts up to 5.10 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Benchmark results show the CPU's strengths. In Cinebench R23, it scores 32,924 multi-core and 4,648 single-core. The PassMark multi-thread score is 38,706, and single-thread is 4,394. The CPU also performs well in specialized workloads: 400,942 in data compression, 30,236 in data encryption, 120,548 in floating-point math, and 91,187 in integer math. These scores place it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 48,995.

For Hard West, a turn-based tactics game, the CPU demands are modest. The game's genre does not require high thread counts or extreme clock speeds for smooth gameplay. The Core Ultra 5 245's 14 cores and 5.10 GHz boost clock are far more than sufficient for this title's AI and game logic calculations. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings are consistently limited by the GPU, not the CPU.

The CPU's nearest rivals in benchmark scores include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49,196, 0.4% faster) and AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49,228, 0.5% faster), while it slightly outperforms the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48,698, 0.6% slower) and Core i5-14600K (48,618, 0.8% slower). These comparisons show the Ultra 5 245 sits in a competitive position among mainstream desktop processors, making it a strong foundation for any gaming system—provided a more capable GPU is paired with it.

The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU is the system's primary limitation. This IGP solution uses system-shared memory and has a boost clock of 2400 MHz with 1280 shading units. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of GPUs, confirming that the graphics portion of this processor is designed for basic tasks, not gaming. The CPU's role in this combination is to feed the GPU with data efficiently, which it does without issue; the bottleneck remains squarely on the graphics side.