Minimum

The Intel Core i5-10400F is a 6-core, 12-thread desktop processor based on the Comet Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 14 nm process node. Its base clock is 2.90 GHz with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, and it features 12 MB of shared L3 cache, with 256 KB of L2 and 64 KB of L1 per core. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10297 and a single-core score of 1453, while its Geekbench multi-core and single-core results are 5783 and 1454, respectively. With a 3DMark max-threads score of 4735 and a single-thread score of 688, the processor demonstrates balanced scaling across thread counts, though its 3DMark 2-thread score of 1350 suggests modest per-thread performance for a chip of this generation.

For this game, the CPU’s role is primarily to maintain frame pacing and avoid bottlenecking the GPU at lower resolutions where frame rates rise. The data shows that at 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo reaches 84.8 FPS average, a figure that demands solid single-thread throughput; the i5-10400F’s PassMark single-thread score of 2541 supports this. At higher resolutions, such as 3840x2160, the frame rates drop to between 14.4 and 26.4 FPS across all settings, indicating that the GPU becomes the limiting factor rather than the CPU. The processor’s 3DMark 8-thread score of 3929 and multi-thread benchmarks like PassMark multithread at 12115 suggest enough headroom for the game’s threading model, but the measured frame rates at 4K point to the GPU being the primary constraint in this pairing.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear hierarchy across resolutions and presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the best playable experience with an average of 84.8 FPS, which is 34% higher than the High preset’s 55 FPS and 25% higher than Medium’s 63.3 FPS. The Ultra preset at this resolution drops to 40.5 FPS, which is still above the 30 FPS threshold but represents a significant 52% reduction from Low. For users prioritizing smoothness at 1080p, Low is the recommended setting, as it is the only preset that pushes the average past 80 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset again leads with 55.3 FPS, followed by Medium at 38.8 FPS, High at 33.3 FPS, and Ultra at 28 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 30%, while the drop from Medium to High is 14%. Given that 55.3 FPS is the only result in this resolution that approaches standard 60 Hz refresh rates, Low is the only viable option for a consistent experience; Medium and High fall below 40 FPS, which may introduce noticeable stutter. For 3840x2160, all presets fail to reach 30 FPS, with Low at 26.4 FPS, Medium at 22.8 FPS, High at 20.3 FPS, and Ultra at 14.4 FPS. None of these are recommended for competitive play, but Low offers the least degraded experience if 4K is required.

The data suggests that the optimal experience is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, yielding 84.8 FPS, which is 53% higher than the next best preset at that resolution (Medium at 63.3 FPS). For users willing to accept lower frame rates for improved visuals, Medium at 1080p provides 63.3 FPS, which is still smooth, but High and Ultra sacrifice too much performance relative to their visual gains in this benchmark.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this hardware?

A: The data shows that 1920x1080 with Low settings produces the highest average FPS at 84.8, making it the best combination for frame rate. At 2560x1440, Low yields 55.3 FPS, while at 3840x2160, Low drops to 26.4 FPS, so 1080p Low is the only configuration that exceeds 80 FPS.

Q: How does the Ultra preset compare to Low across different resolutions?

A: At 1920x1080, Ultra averages 40.5 FPS versus Low’s 84.8 FPS, a 52% reduction. At 2560x1440, Ultra averages 28 FPS versus Low’s 55.3 FPS, a 49% reduction. At 3840x2160, Ultra averages 14.4 FPS versus Low’s 26.4 FPS, a 45% reduction.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU the bottleneck at 4K resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, all settings yield frame rates below 27 FPS, with Low at 26.4 FPS and Ultra at 14.4 FPS. This indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, as the CPU’s single-thread performance (PassMark single-thread score of 2541) is sufficient for higher frame rates seen at 1080p.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between Medium and High at 2560x1440?

A: Medium averages 38.8 FPS, while High averages 33.3 FPS, a difference of 5.5 FPS or 14%. This is a smaller gap than the 30% difference between Low (55.3 FPS) and Medium (38.8 FPS).

Q: Can this combo achieve 60 FPS at any resolution?

A: No. The highest measured average is 84.8 FPS at 1920x1080 Low, but no resolution or setting combination reaches 60 FPS at 2560x1440 or higher. At 2560x1440, the best result is 55.3 FPS (Low), which is below 60 FPS.

Q: How does the i5-10400F’s multi-thread performance relate to the game’s frame rates?

A: The CPU’s Cinebench R20 multi-core score is 4324, and its 3DMark 8-thread score is 3929. These figures suggest adequate multi-threaded capability, but the measured FPS at lower settings (e.g., 84.8 FPS at 1080p Low) indicates that the game’s performance scales more with GPU load than CPU threading, as frame rates drop sharply with resolution increases.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and AMD Radeon RX 570 ranks 1630 out of 1733 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower 6% of all configurations. This rank reflects the hardware’s age and tier: the CPU sits at the 73rd percentile among all CPUs, but the GPU’s percentile is 74, meaning both components are mid-tier relative to their respective pools. However, the combo’s rank in this specific game is disproportionately low compared to those percentiles, suggesting that the game’s demands are not well met by this pairing.

The CPU’s nearest rivals—AMD EPYC 7552 (avgScore 14115, deltaPct 0.4), AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14277, -0.8), Intel Core i5-8500 (14332, -1.1), and AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 (14336, -1.2)—all have average benchmark scores within 1.2% of the i5-10400F’s 14168. This indicates that the processor is competitive with these alternatives in general benchmarks, yet the combo rank of 1630/1733 shows that the overall system performance in this game is poor. The GPU’s nearest rivals—NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (30109, 0.2), AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT (30097, 0.2), NVIDIA Tesla M60 (29969, 0.6), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile (29928, 0.8)—have avgScores within 0.8% of the RX 570’s 30158, despite these being much newer or higher-tier products. This suggests that the RX 570’s benchmark score is inflated by synthetic tests, but its real-world gaming performance in this title is limited.

The rank of 1630 out of 1733 means that only 103 combos perform worse, placing this system near the bottom of the database. This is consistent with the measured FPS data, where even the best-case scenario (1080p Low at 84.8 FPS) is far from the top-tier performance seen in other configurations. The deltaPct values for both CPU and GPU rivals are minimal, yet the combo rank indicates that the pairing’s synergy in this game is poor, likely due to the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and older GCN 4.0 architecture struggling with modern rendering demands.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 570 is based on the Polaris 20 chip using the GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. It has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, with a base clock of 1168 MHz and a boost clock of 1244 MHz. The GPU’s memory subsystem consists of 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth at a memory clock of 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). Its compute capabilities include 5.095 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and a texture rate of 159.2 GTexel/s, with a pixel rate of 39.81 GPixel/s.

In this game, the GPU’s role is dominant, as evidenced by the frame rate scaling with resolution. At 1920x1080, the GPU delivers 84.8 FPS at Low, but this drops to 55.3 FPS at 2560x1440 and 26.4 FPS at 3840x2160, representing a 69% and 50% reduction, respectively, from the 1080p result. The 4 GB VRAM capacity is likely a limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the Ultra preset at 3840x2160 only achieves 14.4 FPS, indicating that memory bandwidth and capacity are insufficient for 4K textures. The GPU’s synthetic benchmark scores—3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 880, Geekbench OpenCL at 32084, and Geekbench Vulkan at 42752—suggest it performs well in compute tasks, but the game’s measured frame rates show that this does not translate to playable performance at higher settings.

The RX 570’s nearest rivals in benchmarks include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (deltaPct 0.2) and AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT (deltaPct 0.2), which is surprising given the generational gap. However, the measured FPS in this game tells a different story, as the RX 570’s 74th percentile ranking among all GPUs does not align with the sub-30 FPS results at 4K. The GPU’s 150 W TDP and requirement for a 450 W power supply, along with its 1x 6-pin power connector, are consistent with its mid-range positioning, but its end-of-life production status and 2017 release date suggest it is outdated for this title’s demands.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across three resolutions and four settings. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are 84.8 FPS (Low), 63.3 FPS (Medium), 55 FPS (High), and 40.5 FPS (Ultra). The transition from Low to Medium incurs a 25% performance penalty, while Medium to High drops another 13%, and High to Ultra falls 26%. This indicates that the Low preset is the most efficient, offering 2.1 times the frame rate of Ultra at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 55.3 FPS (Low), 38.8 FPS (Medium), 33.3 FPS (High), and 28 FPS (Ultra). The relative differences are larger: Low to Medium is a 30% drop, Medium to High is 14%, and High to Ultra is 16%. Compared to 1080p, the same settings yield 35% lower FPS at Low (55.3 vs 84.8), 39% lower at Medium (38.8 vs 63.3), 40% lower at High (33.3 vs 55), and 31% lower at Ultra (28 vs 40.5). This shows that the performance scaling with resolution is not linear, with the biggest absolute loss occurring at Low settings.

At 3840x2160, the averages are 26.4 FPS (Low), 22.8 FPS (Medium), 20.3 FPS (High), and 14.4 FPS (Ultra). None of these reach 30 FPS, and the gap between Low and Ultra is 45%. When comparing across resolutions, the 4K Low result (26.4 FPS) is 52% lower than 1440p Low (55.3 FPS) and 69% lower than 1080p Low (84.8 FPS). The 4K Ultra result (14.4 FPS) is 48% lower than 1440p Ultra (28 FPS) and 64% lower than 1080p Ultra (40.5 FPS). This data confirms that the combo is only playable at 1080p with Low or Medium settings, and even at 1440p, only Low approaches acceptable frame rates. The lack of min or max FPS values in the data means only averages are available, but the consistency of the drops across settings suggests a stable, GPU-bound performance profile.