Hard West

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus paired with the Intel Arc B580 delivers a revealing performance profile in Hard West, a 2015 turn-based tactics title. The measured data shows a system that scales predictably across resolutions, with the GPU becoming the primary constraint at higher pixel counts while the CPU’s strong single-thread and multi-thread scores keep frame rates fluid at lower resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS, component roles, and how this combo stacks against the broader benchmark database.

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 steep decline as resolution increases, which points directly to the GPU as the limiting factor at higher settings. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo averages 151 FPS, but dropping to 2560x1440 Low yields 96 FPS — a 36% reduction. Moving further to 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 50 FPS, which is a 48% drop from the 1440p result and a 67% drop from the 1080p baseline. This pattern is consistent across all settings presets, indicating that the Intel Arc B580’s rendering throughput, rather than the CPU’s processing power, dictates performance as pixel count rises.

For High settings, the scaling is similarly pronounced: 95 FPS at 1080p, 60 FPS at 1440p, and 32 FPS at 4K. The transition from 1080p to 1440p alone cuts performance by 37%, while the jump to 4K nearly halves it again. Medium settings follow the same trajectory, with 124 FPS at 1080p, 79 FPS at 1440p, and 41 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings, the most demanding preset, show the harshest drop: 71 FPS at 1080p falls to 45 FPS at 1440p, then plummets to 24 FPS at 4K — a 66% loss from 1080p to 4K.

What does this scaling imply? The CPU is clearly not the bottleneck at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system pushes 151 FPS, which would require strong per-core performance — the Core Ultra 7 270K’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2439 supports this. However, as resolution climbs, the GPU’s workload grows disproportionately, and the Arc B580’s 13.67 TFLOPS FP32 compute and 456.0 GB/s memory bandwidth become the limiting resource. The data suggests that at 4K, even Low settings (50 FPS) cannot maintain the fluidity seen at 1080p, reinforcing that the GPU is the ceiling. The 12 GB GDDR6 VRAM is ample for this title, but raw pixel throughput is what matters, and the B580’s 80 ROPs and 213.6 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply insufficient for 4K at playable frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain a 60 FPS average?

A: Based on the measured data, 2560x1440 with High settings achieves exactly 60 FPS. At 1920x1080, all settings presets exceed 60 FPS, with Low hitting 151 FPS, Medium 124 FPS, and High 95 FPS. For 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS, with Low being the highest at 50 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to High at each resolution?

A: Ultra consistently delivers lower frame rates than High. At 1080p, Ultra averages 71 FPS versus 95 FPS for High — a 25% reduction. At 1440p, Ultra drops to 45 FPS from High’s 60 FPS, a 25% gap. At 4K, Ultra falls to 24 FPS from High’s 32 FPS, a 25% decline. The relative penalty is nearly identical across resolutions, suggesting Ultra adds a uniform workload increase.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the 4K performance drop?

A: The GPU. The Intel Arc B580’s benchmark scores place it in the 68th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 23021. The CPU, in contrast, sits in the 96th percentile. At 4K Low, the system manages 50 FPS, while at 1080p Low it hits 151 FPS — the CPU’s headroom (evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44253) is not the limiting factor. The GPU’s pixel and texture rates (213.6 GPixel/s and 427.2 GTexel/s) are the bottleneck.

Q: What frame rate range can I expect at 1440p Medium?

A: The measured data shows an average of 79 FPS, with a minimum of 67 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS. This range indicates stable performance, with no severe dips below 60 FPS.

*Q: How does this combo’s rank in Hard West reflect its overall capability?*

A: The combo is ranked 2221 out of 2949 tested combinations, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the database. This rank suggests that while the CPU is top-tier, the GPU’s mid-range positioning (68th percentile) drags the overall score down for this game, which is GPU-bound at higher resolutions.

Q: Does the 12 GB VRAM on the Arc B580 ever become a limiting factor in this game?

A: The data does not indicate VRAM capacity as a constraint. Hard West is a turn-based tactics title from 2015, and the measured FPS drops are consistent with pixel throughput limitations, not memory capacity. The 12 GB GDDR6 with 456.0 GB/s bandwidth is more than sufficient for the game’s requirements.

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

The Intel Arc B580’s specifications directly explain the measured performance patterns. Its base and boost clocks are both 2670 MHz, a fixed frequency that provides consistent compute throughput. The GPU has 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 80 ROPs, which together produce a texture rate of 427.2 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 213.6 GPixel/s. These figures are modest for modern standards, which is why 4K performance caps out at 50 FPS on Low settings.

The 12 GB GDDR6 memory operates at 2375 MHz with a 19 Gbps effective speed, delivering 456.0 GB/s bandwidth over a 192-bit bus. For Hard West, this bandwidth is not a constraint — the game’s assets are likely small given its 2015 release. However, the GPU’s raw compute (13.67 TFLOPS FP32) is the key metric. At 4K, the GPU must process over four times the pixels of 1080p, and the measured scaling (151 FPS to 50 FPS at Low settings) reflects this quadratic workload increase. The GPU’s 68th percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 23021 place it near the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (deltaPct 0.6) and AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (deltaPct -0.2), which contextualizes its mid-range standing.

The memory clock of 2375 MHz does not dynamically adjust, meaning the GPU’s performance is predictable across the board. In Hard West, the data shows no anomalies — the FPS drops are smooth as resolution increases, which is expected from a GPU with fixed clocks and a consistent pipeline. The 80 ROPs are particularly relevant for rasterization at high resolutions, and their limited count explains why 4K Ultra (24 FPS) nearly halves the 1440p Ultra result (45 FPS).

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

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings average 151 FPS, Medium averages 124 FPS with a minimum of 105 and maximum of 143, High averages 95 FPS, and Ultra averages 71 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 80 FPS, a 53% reduction, which shows the GPU’s sensitivity to preset complexity. The minimum FPS for Medium (105) stays well above 60, indicating no stutter issues.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 96 FPS, Medium averages 79 FPS (minimum 67, maximum 90), High averages 60 FPS, and Ultra averages 45 FPS. The Medium preset’s minimum of 67 FPS is still above 60, but High’s 60 FPS average leaves no headroom for demanding scenes. Ultra at 45 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold, making it less desirable for smooth gameplay.

At 3840x2160, the GPU struggles. Low settings average 50 FPS, Medium averages 41 FPS (minimum 35, maximum 47), High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The Medium preset’s minimum of 35 FPS indicates potential frame pacing issues, and no preset reaches 60 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a 9 FPS drop, from Medium to High a 9 FPS drop, and from High to Ultra an 8 FPS drop — a consistent degradation per preset tier.

Comparing across resolutions, the 1080p Low to 4K Low drop is 101 FPS, while the 1080p Ultra to 4K Ultra drop is 47 FPS. This indicates that lower settings are more resolution-sensitive because the GPU is less constrained by other effects, allowing pixel count to dominate. Higher settings add fixed costs (lighting, shadows) that reduce the relative impact of resolution scaling, but the absolute frame rates remain low.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In Hard West, this Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus + Intel Arc B580 combination ranks 2221 out of 2949 tested combos, placing it in the 75th percentile of the database (lower rank is worse). This positioning is surprising given the CPU’s strength — the Core Ultra 7 270K sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 93785. The GPU, however, is in the 68th percentile, which drags the combo down.

The CPU’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6520P (avgScore 93786, deltaPct 0), AMD EPYC 4564P (avgScore 95183, deltaPct -1.5), and AMD EPYC 9175F (avgScore 95615, deltaPct -1.9). These are server-class processors, yet the Core Ultra 7 270K matches them in average score, highlighting its multi-threaded prowess (24 cores, 24 threads). For the GPU, the Arc B580’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (avgScore 23061, deltaPct -0.2), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (avgScore 22895, deltaPct 0.6), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (avgScore 23172, deltaPct -0.7). The B580’s deltaPct values are all under 1%, meaning it performs virtually identically to a RTX 2080 in synthetic benchmarks.

The combo’s rank of 2221 suggests that Hard West is more GPU-bound than CPU-bound. A top-tier CPU cannot compensate for a mid-range GPU in a game that scales heavily with resolution. The measured FPS at 1080p (151 FPS Low) is respectable, but the 4K results (24-50 FPS) pull the combined score down. This rank implies that users seeking higher performance in this title should prioritize GPU upgrades over CPU upgrades, as the Core Ultra 7 270K already provides ample headroom.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. These specifications are overkill for Hard West, a turn-based tactics game that likely uses a limited number of threads for AI and game logic. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44253 and single-core score of 2439 indicate strong performance in both parallel and single-threaded workloads.

In the measured FPS data, the CPU’s influence is most visible at 1080p Low, where the system reaches 151 FPS. This high frame rate requires the CPU to feed the GPU with draw calls and game state updates quickly. The PassMark single-thread score of 5068 and Cinebench R15 single-core score of 354 demonstrate that the CPU can handle such tasks without bottlenecking. However, as resolution increases, the GPU’s rendering time grows, and the CPU’s role diminishes — at 4K, even Low settings only hit 50 FPS, which is far below the CPU’s capability.

The CPU’s 24 threads are unlikely to be fully utilized by a 2015 title. Hard West’s turn-based nature means most processing occurs during AI turns or scene transitions, not during continuous rendering. The CPU’s high multi-core scores (Cinebench R20 multi-core 24461, PassMark multi-thread 68574) are more relevant for other workloads like video encoding or physics simulations. For this game, the single-core performance is what matters, and the Core Ultra 7 270K excels here, as evidenced by its 96th percentile ranking.

The CPU’s 125W TDP and 3 nm process node (TSMC) contribute to its efficiency, but these factors do not directly affect gaming FPS. The memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 interface is sufficient for Hard West’s data requirements, which are modest given the game’s age. The CPU’s integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU) are irrelevant since a discrete GPU is present.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. For 1920x1080, all presets exceed 60 FPS, with Low at 151 FPS, Medium at 124 FPS, High at 95 FPS, and Ultra at 71 FPS. The Ultra preset provides the best visual quality while still maintaining a 71 FPS average, making it the recommended choice for 1080p users who prioritize fidelity without sacrificing smoothness.

At 2560x1440, the choice becomes more nuanced. High settings average exactly 60 FPS, which is the standard for smooth gameplay, but this leaves no margin for demanding scenes. Medium averages 79 FPS with a minimum of 67 FPS, offering a safer frame rate buffer while still looking good. Low averages 96 FPS but sacrifices visual quality. The data suggests Medium is the best balance for 1440p, as its minimum FPS (67) stays above the 60 FPS threshold, whereas High’s average is exactly at it.

For 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS, so the user must compromise. Low averages 50 FPS, Medium 41 FPS, High 32 FPS, and Ultra 24 FPS. Low is the only preset that approaches playability, and even it is below 60 FPS. Medium’s minimum of 35 FPS indicates noticeable stutter, making Low the recommended setting for 4K if the user insists on that resolution. However, given the game’s turn-based nature, lower frame rates may be acceptable, but the data shows that 4K is not viable for a consistently smooth experience.

The overall recommendation is to play at 1080p with Ultra settings (71 FPS) or 1440p with Medium settings (79 FPS, min 67). These configurations leverage the CPU’s strength while staying within the GPU’s capabilities. The measured data does not support 4K as a reasonable option, as even Low settings (50 FPS) cannot maintain the 60 FPS target. The combo’s rank of 2221 out of 2949 reflects this limitation — the system is capable but not exceptional for this title, primarily due to the GPU’s mid-range performance at high resolutions.