Palworld

Palworld, a survival game released in early 2024, presents a demanding workload that stresses both processor and graphics hardware. This analysis examines the measured performance of the Intel Core i5-14600KF paired with the Intel Arc B370, a combination that ranks 2706 out of 2944 tested combos in this specific game, placing it in the lower percentile of systems. The data reveals a configuration severely constrained by its graphics component, where CPU potential is largely untapped and frame rates remain low across all tested scenarios.

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

The Intel Core i5-14600KF is a 14-core, 20-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, supported by a 24 MB shared L3 cache. This is a high-end desktop CPU, evidenced by its 90th percentile ranking among all processors in the database and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32544. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, which scores a near-identical 49228 average, putting the i5-14600KF just 0.3% ahead in synthetic benchmarks.

In Palworld, the CPU's role appears largely underutilized given the measured frame rates. At 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 76 FPS, which is the highest result recorded for this pairing. This suggests the processor is capable of driving higher frame rates, but the graphics card becomes the limiting factor. The CPU's strong single-thread performance, reflected in a Geekbench single-core score of 2445 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4594, should theoretically handle the game's physics and AI simulation tasks effectively. The Passmark physics test score of 2449 further indicates robust processing capabilities for game logic.

However, the actual gameplay data tells a different story. When moving from 1080p Low to 1080p Ultra, the average FPS drops from 76 to 36, a reduction that aligns more with GPU workload scaling than CPU limitations. The CPU shows its strength in the delta between low and high settings at the same resolution; at 1080p, High settings yield 47 FPS, which is only a 29 FPS drop from Low. This indicates the CPU is still feeding frames adequately, but the GPU is struggling to render them at higher graphical fidelity. The i5-14600KF's 125W TDP and unlocked multiplier suggest it has headroom for overclocking, but in this specific test, that extra performance would not translate to higher FPS due to the GPU bottleneck.

The benchmark data implies that Palworld is not heavily CPU-bound in this configuration. The processor's percentile ranking (90th) versus the combo's overall rank (2706th out of 2944) highlights the disparity between CPU capability and actual in-game performance. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see minimal FPS differences between resolutions at the same settings, but the data shows significant scaling, which points to the GPU as the primary constraint.

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

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process with a 25W TDP. It features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation units, with 10 ray tracing cores. Its boost clock is 2400 MHz, and it operates with system-shared memory, meaning its VRAM size, type, and bandwidth are all dependent on the host system's RAM configuration. This is a critical limitation for modern games like Palworld, which benefit significantly from dedicated high-bandwidth video memory.

The GPU's synthetic benchmark results are extremely poor, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1184, which puts it in direct competition with legacy cards like the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (scoring 1186) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (scoring 1190). The Arc B370 is actually 0.2% behind the Mobility HD 5570 and 0.5% behind the HD 5770, indicating it performs at a level comparable to graphics hardware from over a decade ago. This explains the catastrophic frame rates observed in Palworld.

In-game, the GPU's performance is consistently below playable thresholds. At 1080p Medium settings, the average FPS is 62, with a minimum of 52 and maximum of 71, which is the only configuration that approaches acceptable smoothness. However, this is at the cost of visual fidelity. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are insufficient for the demands of a modern open-world game. The GPU's FP32 compute performance of 6.144 TFLOPS is also modest, and when combined with system-shared memory that lacks dedicated bandwidth, the rendering pipeline becomes heavily congested.

The data shows a clear pattern: as resolution and settings increase, the GPU's limitations become more pronounced. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS plummets to 13, which is essentially a slideshow. Even at 1080p Ultra, the frame rate drops to 36 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target most players expect. The GPU's 5th percentile ranking versus the CPU's 90th percentile ranking confirms that the Arc B370 is the definitive bottleneck in this system for Palworld. Its performance is so low that it negates the powerful CPU, making the combination effectively unplayable at higher resolutions and settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate this combo achieves in Palworld?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 76 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration where the system approaches a smooth experience, though it still falls short of high-refresh-rate displays.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its direct rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This places it 0.2% behind the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186) and 0.5% behind the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190). It is only 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this system for Palworld?

A: The GPU is the definitive limiting factor. The CPU ranks in the 90th percentile of all processors, while the GPU ranks in the 5th percentile. The FPS drops significantly with increasing resolution and settings, which is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck, not a CPU one.

Q: What is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1080p?

A: At 1080p, Low settings yield an average of 76 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to an average of 36 FPS. This represents a 40 FPS reduction, or roughly a 53% decrease in frame rate, when moving from the lowest to the highest graphical preset.

Q: Does the combo provide a playable experience at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the best average FPS is 50 on Low settings. Medium settings drop to 41 FPS, and High settings fall to 31 FPS. These figures are below the standard 60 FPS target, indicating that 1440p is not a viable resolution for smooth gameplay with this hardware.

Q: How does the combo's rank in Palworld compare to its component rankings?

A: The combo ranks 2706 out of 2944 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of systems. This is significantly worse than the CPU's 90th percentile ranking, confirming that the GPU drags down the overall performance potential of the system.

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

The measured data provides a comprehensive view of the system's capabilities across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system achieves its best results. Low settings produce an average of 76 FPS, which is the only playable result for this combination. Medium settings drop to 62 FPS, with a minimum of 52 and maximum of 71. High settings yield 47 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 36 FPS. This shows a steady degradation of performance as graphical demands increase, with a total loss of 40 FPS between Low and Ultra.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance takes a significant hit. Low settings average 50 FPS, which is a 26 FPS drop from the same settings at 1080p. Medium settings average 41 FPS, with a minimum of 35 and maximum of 47. High settings drop to 31 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 24 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at this resolution is also 26 FPS, but the absolute numbers are much lower, making even the Low preset barely acceptable for casual play.

At 3840x2160, the system is severely overtaxed. Low settings average just 28 FPS. Medium settings drop to 23 FPS, with a minimum of 19 and maximum of 26. High settings yield a meager 17 FPS, and Ultra settings produce an unplayable 13 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is only 15 FPS, but this is because the GPU is already so overwhelmed at Low settings that the additional load from Ultra settings has diminishing returns on frame rate. The data indicates that this combo is not suited for 4K gaming in Palworld under any circumstances.

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

The resolution scaling analysis clearly identifies the GPU as the bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 76 at 1080p to 50 at 1440p, a 34% reduction, and then to 28 at 4K, a 63% reduction from 1080p. This steep decline with increasing pixel count is a classic symptom of GPU-bound performance, as the rendering workload grows exponentially with resolution while the CPU workload remains relatively constant.

At Ultra settings, the scaling is even more dramatic. The system achieves 36 FPS at 1080p, drops to 24 FPS at 1440p (a 33% reduction), and falls to 13 FPS at 4K (a 64% reduction from 1080p). The consistency of the percentage drop across different settings suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth and compute resources are consistently saturated, regardless of the graphical preset. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see similar FPS numbers across resolutions, as the CPU's workload does not scale with pixel count.

The data points to the system-shared memory of the Arc B370 as a critical weakness. With no dedicated VRAM, the GPU must access system RAM over the memory bus, which has limited bandwidth. At 4K, the amount of data required for frame buffers and textures increases dramatically, overwhelming the shared memory interface. This explains why 4K performance is so poor, with even Low settings struggling to maintain 30 FPS. The resolution scaling behavior confirms that upgrading the GPU would yield significant FPS improvements, while upgrading the CPU would have minimal impact on this system's Palworld performance.

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

Based on the measured data, the optimal configuration for this combo is 1080p with Low settings, which delivers an average of 76 FPS. This is the only preset that consistently exceeds the 60 FPS threshold considered the minimum for smooth gameplay. While Low settings compromise visual quality, the alternative is a sub-60 FPS experience that feels less responsive. At Medium settings, the average drops to 62 FPS, which is still playable, but the minimum frame rate of 52 FPS indicates potential stutters during intense scenes.

For players prioritizing visual fidelity over frame rate, 1080p High settings at 47 FPS is the highest quality preset that remains marginally playable. However, this is a significant compromise, as the frame rate is below the standard 60 FPS target. Ultra settings at 1080p (36 FPS) and any settings at 1440p (50 FPS or lower) are not recommended for a responsive experience. At 4K, all presets are effectively unplayable, with even Low settings failing to reach 30 FPS.

The data suggests that players should stick to 1080p and choose between Low for the smoothest experience or Medium for a balance of quality and performance. The difference between Low and Medium is 14 FPS on average, which is noticeable, but Medium's minimum of 52 FPS ensures that the game remains playable during combat or exploration. Any setting above Medium at 1080p, or any resolution above 1080p, results in a degraded experience that fails to meet the baseline requirements for a survival game, where quick reactions are often necessary.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core i5-14600KF and Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 2706 out of 2944 tested combos in Palworld, placing it in the 8th percentile of all systems tested. This is an exceptionally poor ranking, indicating that this combo is outperformed by the vast majority of other hardware configurations. The low rank is almost entirely attributable to the GPU, as the CPU's individual ranking is in the 90th percentile of all processors, while the GPU is in the 5th percentile of all graphics cards.

Comparing this combo's rank to its component parts reveals a stark mismatch. The CPU is a top-tier performer, but the GPU is among the worst in the database. In Palworld, which is a visually demanding game, the GPU's limitations are fully exposed. The combo's rank of 2706 means that only 238 other tested combinations perform worse, and these are likely systems with equally outdated or underpowered graphics hardware. The delta between the CPU's high percentile and the combo's low percentile underscores the importance of balanced system builds.

The nearest GPU rivals to the Arc B370, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770, are legacy components from a previous era, and their performance in modern games is predictably inadequate. This combo's rank serves as a cautionary example of pairing a high-end CPU with an entry-level integrated GPU for a modern gaming workload. The data unequivocally shows that this combination is not suitable for Palworld, and users would need to significantly upgrade the GPU to achieve a playable experience, even at lower resolutions and settings.