Ready Or Not

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc B390 combination delivers a highly constrained gaming experience in Ready Or Not, with the GPU acting as the overwhelming performance bottleneck across all tested resolutions. The data shows a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, running at a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. This CPU, released on 2024-03-31, holds a percentile rank of 77 against all CPUs, indicating strong processing capability. Its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmark scores include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F with a deltaPct of 0.2%, the Intel Core i7-11850H at 0.3%, and the Intel Core i7-13620H at 0.4%, showing the 8400F is within a fraction of a percent of these parts. The processor’s multi-threaded performance is substantial, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851 and a single-core score of 2943, suggesting it can handle complex game logic and AI routines without issue. However, the measured frame rates in this tactical shooter tell a different story, with averages as low as 23 FPS at 4K Ultra, pointing directly at the integrated graphics solution as the limiting factor.

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

The Ryzen 5 8400F provides a foundation of six physical cores and twelve threads, which is a configuration well-suited for modern game engines that utilize multiple threads for physics, pathfinding, and enemy AI. Its base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost of 4.70 GHz are moderately high, and the 16 MB of shared L3 cache helps reduce memory latency for frequently accessed data. In Ready Or Not, which is a tactical shooter emphasizing squad-based coordination and environmental interactions, the CPU’s job is to maintain a stable frame pacing and avoid stutters when multiple suspects and civilians are on screen. Benchmark results from PassMark show a multi-thread score of 24389 and a single-thread score of 3685, confirming that the processor has ample headroom for this workload. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 6091 and single-thread score of 951 further underscore its balanced performance profile.

The interaction between this CPU and the game’s results is peculiar because the frame rates are uniformly low regardless of resolution, which is a classic sign of a GPU bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 125, which is the highest recorded for this combo. If the CPU were the constraint, we would expect to see a similar FPS ceiling at 1080p Low and 1440p Low, but the data shows a drop from 125 FPS at 1080p to 79 FPS at 1440p, and then to 41 FPS at 4K. This scaling pattern indicates that the Intel Arc B390’s rendering throughput is the primary limitation, not the Ryzen 5 8400F’s processing power. The CPU’s multi-core scores, such as the Cinebench R20 multi-core result of 8757, are more than sufficient to feed frames to a discrete GPU, but this system uses an integrated graphics solution that cannot keep up. The processor’s 4 nm process node and 65 W TDP suggest it is efficient, yet that efficiency is wasted when the graphics unit is the weak link. The data shows that even at 1080p Medium, which is a moderate load, the average FPS is 109, with a minimum of 92 FPS, indicating that the CPU is not causing dips but rather the GPU is hitting its limits.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1080p High settings for this combo?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings is 99 FPS, which is a playable level for a tactical shooter, though it falls short of the 125 FPS seen at Low settings.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 8400F compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 25005, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F’s score of 24964, and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i7-11850H’s 24935, indicating near-identical raw processing capability.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B390 a discrete graphics card?

A: No, the Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a slot width of IGP, meaning it is part of the processor package and shares system memory, which explains its low performance metrics.

Q: What is the best average FPS recorded for this combination?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 125 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that approaches high refresh rate territory, while all other settings and resolutions yield lower results.

Q: What is the performance gap between the GPU and its nearest rival in 3DMark Steel Nomad?

A: The Intel Arc B390 scores 1482 points in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, which is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX’s score of 1463, showing that it only outperforms very old, low-end mobile GPUs.

Q: What is the combo’s rank among all tested systems for Ready Or Not?

A: This combination ranks 3300 out of 3714 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 11% of all systems, which is consistent with the very low GPU performance percentile of 9.

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

The resolution scaling pattern in the measured data is stark and reveals a system that is severely GPU-limited. Starting at 1920x1080 with High settings, the average FPS is 99. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings, the average drops to 62 FPS, a reduction of approximately 37%. At 3840x2160, the average falls to 33 FPS, which is a 67% drop from the 1080p baseline. This scaling is almost perfectly linear with the number of pixels, which is the definitive signature of a graphics-bound workload. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the FPS would remain relatively flat across resolutions because the CPU workload is largely independent of pixel count. Instead, the data shows that doubling the pixel count roughly halves the frame rate, confirming that the Intel Arc B390’s pixel fill rate and shading units are exhausted.

The same trend holds for Low settings, where the FPS goes from 125 at 1080p to 79 at 1440p and then to 41 at 4K. The gap between Low and High settings narrows as resolution increases, which is another indicator of GPU saturation. At 1080p, the difference between Low and High is 26 FPS (125 vs. 99), showing that the GPU has some headroom to process additional effects. At 4K, the difference shrinks to 8 FPS (41 vs. 33), meaning the GPU is so overwhelmed by pixel count that it cannot take advantage of the reduced graphical load. The Medium settings show a minimum FPS of 92 at 1080p, 58 at 1440p, and 30 at 4K, with the 4K minimum being essentially unplayable. This data collectively indicates that for any resolution above 1080p, the user is not CPU-bound, and even at 1080p, the GPU is the primary constraint. The Ryzen 5 8400F, with its high multi-core scores, is never the bottleneck in this configuration.

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

At 1920x1080, the data shows a clear hierarchy across settings. Low settings yield an average FPS of 125, which is the maximum performance this combo can achieve. Medium settings produce an average of 109 FPS, with a minimum of 92 FPS and a maximum of 125 FPS, indicating some frame pacing variability but still a comfortable experience. High settings drop to an average of 99 FPS, which is adequate for a tactical game where precision matters more than raw speed. Ultra settings, however, cause a significant drop to an average of 69 FPS, which is a 45% reduction from Low and may introduce noticeable input lag in intense firefights. The jump from High to Ultra is particularly steep, suggesting that the Ultra preset enables effects that are disproportionately expensive for the Intel Arc B390.

At 2560x1440, the performance declines substantially. Low settings average 79 FPS, which is still playable but noticeably lower than 1080p. Medium settings average 69 FPS, with a minimum of 58 FPS, which is approaching the threshold where smoothness becomes questionable. High settings average 62 FPS, which is borderline for a game that requires quick target acquisition. Ultra settings average 44 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and will result in a stuttery experience during chaotic breaches. The gap between Low and Medium at 1440p is only 10 FPS, showing that the GPU is beginning to saturate. At 3840x2160, the results are largely unplayable for competitive play. Low settings average 41 FPS, Medium averages 36 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS, High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 23 FPS. These numbers indicate that 4K is not a viable option for this combo, even at the lowest settings, as the minimum FPS at Medium is below 30.

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

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. It features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, along with 12 ray tracing cores. Its memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the main system DDR5 memory for both capacity and bandwidth, which is system-dependent. The GPU’s theoretical compute capabilities are 7.680 TFLOPS for FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS for FP16, which sound respectable on paper, but the measured 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is only 1482. This score places the GPU at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, GeForce 800M, GT 625 OEM, and GT 710, all of which are over a decade old. The deltaPct to these rivals is 1.3%, 1.5%, 2.5%, and 2.7% respectively, meaning the Arc B390 is only slightly faster than these legacy parts.

In Ready Or Not, the GPU’s role is to handle the rendering of environments, character models, and lighting effects. The game’s tactical nature means there are often multiple dynamic light sources, such as flashlights and muzzle flashes, which are demanding on the pixel shader units. The measured FPS data confirms that the GPU is the sole bottleneck, as increasing resolution from 1080p to 4K at High settings reduces the average FPS from 99 to 33, a 66% drop that aligns with the pixel count increase. The GPU’s shared memory architecture is a particular weakness, as it must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth, which is limited to 83.2 GB/s for the system. This shared bandwidth is insufficient for high-resolution textures, leading to the severe frame rate collapses at 4K. The GPU’s 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 120.0 GTexel/s texture rate are the physical limits that cap the frame rates seen in the data. The ray tracing cores are present but likely unused in this game at these settings, as the performance is already so low that enabling RT would be futile.

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

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo are at 1920x1080 with Medium or High presets. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 109 with a minimum of 92 FPS, which provides a smooth and responsive experience for a tactical shooter where split-second reactions are crucial. The minimum FPS of 92 ensures that there are no significant hitches during intense gunfights or when breaching rooms. High settings at 1080p offer a slight visual improvement with an average of 99 FPS, but the lack of a minimum FPS measurement makes it riskier, though the average is still well above 60. Low settings at 1080p deliver the highest average of 125 FPS, but the visual fidelity is likely too degraded for a game that relies on spotting enemies in dark environments. Ultra settings at 1080p, with an average of 69 FPS, are not recommended because the 45% drop from High suggests that the additional effects are not worth the performance cost, and the average is below the 72 FPS threshold often associated with high-refresh displays.

For users who prefer higher resolutions, 2560x1440 with Low settings (79 FPS average) is the only reasonable choice, but it is a significant downgrade from 1080p. Medium at 1440p averages 69 FPS, which is playable but the minimum of 58 FPS could cause noticeable stutters. High and Ultra at 1440p are not advisable as their averages of 62 and 44 FPS respectively fall below the smoothness threshold. At 3840x2160, no settings are recommended for actual gameplay, as even Low averages only 41 FPS and Medium has a minimum of 30 FPS, making the game feel unresponsive. The data clearly shows that the best experience is achieved by prioritizing resolution over quality, meaning users should stick to 1080p and choose Medium or High settings to balance visual clarity with frame rate. The 1080p Medium preset is the sweet spot, offering a high average FPS with a solid minimum, which is critical for maintaining accuracy in a game that rewards patient aiming.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc B390 combination ranks 3300 out of 3714 tested combos for Ready Or Not, placing it in the bottom 11.1% of all systems. This rank is a direct consequence of the GPU’s low performance percentile of 9, which is among the worst for any graphics solution. The CPU, by contrast, has a percentile rank of 77, showing that the processor is capable of running this game well if paired with a competent discrete GPU. The rank of 3300 suggests that this combo is only suitable for very low-end gaming or for users who prioritize other aspects of the system over frame rates. The deltaPct to the GPU’s nearest rivals shows it is only 1.3% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and 2.7% faster than the GT 710, which are entry-level parts from 2011 and 2014 respectively.

In the context of Ready Or Not, this rank means that the system will struggle to maintain playable frame rates at any resolution above 1080p, and even at 1080p, users must compromise on settings. The combo’s position at 3300 out of 3714 is consistent with the measured FPS data, where the highest average is only 125 FPS at 1080p Low. For comparison, the CPU’s nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, would likely achieve much higher frame rates when paired with a discrete GPU, as the 8400F’s processing power is not the issue. The data indicates that this combo is severely unbalanced, with a high-end CPU being held back by an integrated GPU that cannot fully utilize its potential. Users considering this combination should be aware that the rank reflects the entire system’s capability, and the GPU is the sole reason for the low placement. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482, which is only 1.3% above the GT 520MX, is a clear indicator that this combo is not designed for modern gaming workloads like Ready Or Not.