Hitman 2

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D paired with the Intel Arc B370 in Hitman 2 produces a combination that is heavily constrained by its graphics component. The data shows a processor with exceptional multi-threaded capability paired with an integrated graphics solution that struggles to maintain playable frame rates at most settings. The benchmark results indicate a system where CPU headroom is vast, but the GPU becomes the definitive bottleneck at every resolution tested.

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a desktop-class processor from the 9000 series, built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The processor operates within a 120 W TDP and uses the AMD Socket AM5 platform. Its cache configuration is substantial: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a large 96 MB of shared L3 cache.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 9800X3D shows strong performance. It scores 23,230 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 2,080 in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 18,696 in Geekbench multi-core. Its 3DMark results scale from a single-thread score of 1,212 up to 10,081 with 16 threads, indicating robust scaling across cores. The processor’s average benchmark score is 39,768, placing it in the 87th percentile against all CPUs tested. Compared to its nearest rivals, it sits within a tight band: it is 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS, 0.7% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450, but 0.7% behind the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 and 0.8% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 7700.

For Hitman 2, a stealth game from 2018-11-12, the CPU’s role is largely preparatory. The game’s AI, physics, and world simulation benefit from the high core count and the large L3 cache, which reduces memory latency. However, the measured frame rates in this combo are so low that the CPU is never the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 73 FPS, which is the highest result in the entire dataset. Even at this resolution, the CPU is unlikely to be fully utilized, as the integrated GPU becomes the primary constraint. The processor’s 16 threads are more than sufficient for Hitman 2’s workload, which generally scales well up to 8 threads but rarely beyond. The benchmark data shows the CPU’s 3DMark 8-thread score of 8,252, which is close to its 16-thread score of 10,081, suggesting that performance gains taper off after 8 threads. This aligns with the game’s design, where the CPU is capable of feeding frames far faster than the Arc B370 can render them.

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

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, with the chip codename Panther Lake. It is manufactured on a 3 nm process by Intel and operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The GPU has 1,280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation pipelines. It also includes 10 ray tracing cores. Its compute capabilities are listed at 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS for FP16. The memory subsystem is entirely system-shared, meaning there is no dedicated VRAM; the GPU uses the system’s main memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent."

The Arc B370’s benchmark presence is minimal, with only a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,184. This places the GPU in the 5th percentile against all GPUs, indicating that it is among the weakest graphics solutions in the database. Its nearest rivals are all older discrete cards, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1,190, which is 0.5% higher) and the AMD FirePro M2000 (score 1,168, which is 1.4% lower). The GPU’s average benchmark score is 1,184, which is roughly 33 times lower than the CPU’s average score of 39,768.

In Hitman 2, the GPU’s limitations are immediately apparent. The highest measured average frame rate is 73 FPS at 1080p Low, but this drops precipitously as settings and resolution increase. At 1080p High, the average is 41 FPS; at 1440p High, it falls to 26 FPS; and at 4K High, it is just 14 FPS. The GPU’s boost clock of 2400 MHz is high for an IGP, but the lack of dedicated memory bandwidth severely hampers its ability to handle texture-heavy scenes. The data shows that even at the lowest settings, the GPU cannot maintain a smooth 60 FPS at 4K, achieving only 25 FPS. The system-shared memory is a critical weakness; as resolution increases, the memory bandwidth demands grow, and the GPU’s performance collapses, as evidenced by the 4K Ultra result of just 10 FPS.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent and steep decline as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. This pattern is typical of a system where the GPU is the limiting component, as the CPU’s workload does not scale significantly with resolution, while the GPU’s render load increases proportionally with pixel count.

At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 73 at 1080p, to 46 at 1440p, and further to 25 at 4K. This represents a 37% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 46% drop from 1440p to 4K. At Medium settings, the averages are 54 FPS at 1080p, 35 FPS at 1440p, and 19 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 35%, and from 1440p to 4K is 46%. At High settings, the averages are 41 FPS at 1080p, 26 FPS at 1440p, and 14 FPS at 4K. This is a 37% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 46% drop from 1440p to 4K. At Ultra settings, the averages are 30 FPS at 1080p, 19 FPS at 1440p, and 10 FPS at 4K, with drops of 37% and 47% respectively.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings indicates that the performance scaling is purely resolution-driven, which is a hallmark of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU’s performance is unaffected by resolution, so if the CPU were the limit, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions, or at least drop less severely. The data shows that the Arc B370’s rendering throughput is the sole constraint. The 4K results, which are all below 25 FPS, are essentially unplayable for a stealth action game that requires precise timing and reaction. The 1440p results are borderline, with only the Low setting achieving above 40 FPS. The 1080p results are the only ones where the system approaches playability, but even here, the Ultra setting only reaches 30 FPS.

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

Given the measured FPS data, the only viable settings for a playable experience are at 1080p with lower presets. At 1080p Low, the system achieves an average of 73 FPS, which is smooth and responsive. This is the only configuration in the entire dataset that consistently exceeds 60 FPS. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 54 FPS, with a minimum of 46 FPS and a maximum of 63 FPS. This is still playable, though the frame time variance might cause occasional stutter. The Medium preset offers a significant visual improvement over Low, and the 54 FPS average is acceptable for most players.

At 1080p High, the average falls to 41 FPS, which is below the ideal threshold for a smooth experience in a game that relies on quick reactions. The 1080p Ultra setting is the worst choice among the 1080p options, with an average of just 30 FPS, which is likely to feel sluggish. At 1440p, even the Low setting only manages 46 FPS, and the Medium setting drops to 35 FPS. These are below the 60 FPS target and are only marginally playable with compromises. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with the best being 25 FPS at Low, which is not recommended for any practical gaming scenario.

The data suggests that the optimal balance of visual quality and performance is achieved at 1080p Medium. This preset provides a 54 FPS average, which is 74% higher than the 4K Medium result of 19 FPS, while offering a substantial visual upgrade over the Low preset. The 1080p Low setting is the safest choice for competitive play or for users who prioritize frame rate above all else, as it is the only setting that guarantees a frame rate above 70 FPS. The High and Ultra presets should be avoided, as they sacrifice too much performance for marginal graphical gains. In summary, the recommendation is to play at 1080p with the Medium preset for the best experience, or drop to Low if a consistent 60+ FPS is required.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D and the Intel Arc B370 ranks 2,768 out of 3,001 tested combos in Hitman 2. This places the combo in the bottom 8% of all configurations, indicating that it is among the weakest performers for this specific game. The ranking is a direct consequence of the GPU’s limitations, as the CPU is a top-tier component. The combo’s rank is a stark contrast to the CPU’s individual percentile of 87, which shows that the processor is capable of much higher performance when paired with a more capable graphics solution.

The data indicates that this ranking is heavily skewed by the GPU’s 5th percentile performance. In a game like Hitman 2, which has moderate CPU demands but significant GPU load due to its detailed environments and lighting, the Arc B370’s integrated nature is a severe handicap. The 2,768th rank out of 3,001 combos means that the vast majority of other tested systems, including those with older or lower-tier CPUs, outperform this pairing. The only reason this combo does not rank dead last is likely due to the presence of even older or more underpowered GPUs in the database. However, for a modern processor like the 9800X3D, this result is a clear mismatch, and the data suggests that the CPU’s potential is almost entirely unrealized in this configuration.

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

The following table presents the exact measured average FPS values from the dataset, organized by resolution and settings preset. Where available, minimum and maximum FPS are also included for the Medium preset.

1920x1080 (1080p)

• Low: 73 FPS average
• Medium: 54 FPS average, 46 FPS minimum, 63 FPS maximum
• High: 41 FPS average
• Ultra: 30 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p)

• Low: 46 FPS average
• Medium: 35 FPS average, 30 FPS minimum, 40 FPS maximum
• High: 26 FPS average
• Ultra: 19 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K)

• Low: 25 FPS average
• Medium: 19 FPS average, 16 FPS minimum, 21 FPS maximum
• High: 14 FPS average
• Ultra: 10 FPS average

The data shows a clear progression of performance degradation. At 1080p, the system can deliver playable frame rates at Low and Medium settings. At 1440p, the frame rates drop to the 20-46 FPS range, which is marginal. At 4K, all settings produce average frame rates below 25 FPS, rendering the game essentially unplayable. The Medium preset at each resolution is the only one with recorded minimum and maximum values, providing insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 46 FPS and maximum of 63 FPS show a 17 FPS variance, which is noticeable but acceptable. At 1440p Medium, the variance is 10 FPS (30 to 40), and at 4K Medium, it is 5 FPS (16 to 21). The shrinking variance at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is consistently saturated, with less headroom for frame rate spikes. These numbers confirm that the Intel Arc B370 is the sole limiting factor, as the CPU’s performance is far beyond what is required for these frame rates.