Red Dead Redemption 2

Red Dead Redemption 2 pairs the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F with the Intel Arc B370, a combination that lands near the bottom of the tested leaderboard. The data places this pairing at rank 2670 out of 2902 combos, meaning roughly 92% of tested configurations deliver higher average frame rates in this title. That rank is not a surprise given the GPU’s standing among all tested graphics cards, but the CPU’s strong benchmark profile suggests the bottleneck is almost entirely on the graphics side. The measured frames per second across all resolutions and settings confirm a system that can run the game, but only at the lowest tiers of playability.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 2670 out of 2902 is a blunt statement about performance expectations. Only 232 tested combos sit below this pairing, which places it in the bottom 8% of all configurations tested for Red Dead Redemption 2. The CPU itself, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, holds a percentile rank of 77 against all CPUs, meaning it outperforms 77% of processors in general benchmark workloads. That contrast—a top-quartile CPU paired with a bottom-decile GPU result—tells the story of this combo. The processor is not the limiting factor; the graphics solution is.

Looking at the CPU’s nearest rivals in general benchmarks, the Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964 on average, which is within 0.1% of the Intel Core i7-11850H (24935) and 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-13620H (24911). It sits 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F (25005) and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core 5 210H (24872). These deltas are negligible, indicating that the 7500F is a mid-pack performer relative to its immediate competitors, but none of those rivals would rescue this combo from its GPU constraint. The GPU, Intel Arc B370, holds a percentile rank of 5 against all GPUs, meaning 95% of tested graphics cards score higher. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% ahead), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% ahead), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% ahead), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4% behind). These are legacy or low-end parts, and the Arc B370’s average benchmark score of 1184 places it in that company.

The combo rank reflects this GPU standing. In Red Dead Redemption 2, the pairing produces average frame rates that rarely cross into smooth territory, and the rank of 2670 is consistent with the GPU’s low percentile. The CPU’s 77th percentile does not lift the combo because the game’s rendering load falls on the GPU. The data suggests that swapping the CPU for a weaker model would barely change the outcome, while swapping the GPU would transform it.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on Intel’s 3 nm process. Its base clock is 300 MHz, boosting to 2400 MHz, and it features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units. The GPU also includes 10 ray tracing cores, though Red Dead Redemption 2’s measured results do not separate ray tracing performance. The memory configuration is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM, and the memory bandwidth is listed as system dependent. That shared memory arrangement is a critical factor for this game, as Red Dead Redemption 2 is known for large texture and geometry loads, and the lack of dedicated VRAM forces reliance on system memory bandwidth.

The GPU’s pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1). These specifications, while modest, are not the full story. The GPU’s average benchmark score from 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 is 1184, which places it at the 5th percentile of all GPUs. That score is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186) and ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), both of which are over a decade old. The Arc B370’s 25 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate it is designed for low-power, portable systems, not desktop gaming.

In practice, the GPU’s role in Red Dead Redemption 2 is to render frames at whatever settings the system can tolerate. The measured data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo averages 47 FPS, which is the only setting where frame rates approach playable levels. At 1080p High, the average drops to 29 FPS. The GPU’s shared memory and low shading unit count (1280) are likely the primary constraints, as the game’s draw calls and texture streaming demand more than this part can deliver at higher quality presets. The boost clock of 2400 MHz helps at low settings, but the architecture’s raw throughput is insufficient for the game’s heavier scenes.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 47 FPS at 1080p to 35 FPS at 1440p and then to 23 FPS at 4K. That is a 49% reduction from 1080p to 4K, which indicates the GPU is heavily resolution-bound. At Medium settings, the averages are 35 FPS at 1080p, 26 FPS at 1440p, and 17 FPS at 4K—a 51% drop from 1080p to 4K. High settings show 29 FPS at 1080p, 22 FPS at 1440p, and 14 FPS at 4K, a 52% reduction. Ultra settings are the most punishing: 21 FPS at 1080p, 16 FPS at 1440p, and 10 FPS at 4K, a 52% drop.

The consistency of the percentage decline across settings—roughly 49-52% from 1080p to 4K—reveals that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth are the limiting factors. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are fixed, and as resolution increases, the number of pixels to fill grows geometrically. The system-shared memory bandwidth, which is system dependent, cannot compensate for the lack of dedicated VRAM, leading to the steep FPS declines. The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra at any given resolution is substantial: at 1080p, 47 FPS versus 21 FPS (a 55% difference); at 1440p, 35 FPS versus 16 FPS (54%); at 4K, 23 FPS versus 10 FPS (57%). This suggests the GPU’s shading units and TMUs are saturated even at low settings, and higher presets add workloads that the part cannot handle.

The limiting component is unquestionably the GPU. The CPU’s benchmark scores—such as 22799 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 3218 in single-core—are far above what Red Dead Redemption 2 requires for its simulation and AI threads. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS drops from 1080p to 4K would be minimal, since resolution scaling primarily affects GPU load. Instead, the halving of frame rates at 4K points directly to the Arc B370’s inability to keep up with pixel throughput demands.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo achieves in Red Dead Redemption 2?

A: The highest measured average is 47 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does this combo rank against all tested combinations?

A: It ranks 2670 out of 2902 total combos, placing it in the bottom 8% of all tested configurations.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this game?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The Ryzen 5 7500F has a 77th percentile CPU rank, while the Arc B370 has a 5th percentile GPU rank. The FPS drops of roughly 50% from 1080p to 4K confirm a GPU-bound workload.

Q: What are the nearest GPU rivals and how do they compare?

A: The Arc B370’s nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (0.2% higher score), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (0.5% higher), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (0.7% higher), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1.4% lower). All score within 1.4% of the Arc B370.

Q: Does the CPU’s performance vary much from its nearest rivals?

A: No. The Ryzen 5 7500F’s average benchmark score of 24964 is within 0.4% of its four nearest rivals, with deltas ranging from 0.1% to 0.4%.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded?

A: The lowest average is 10 FPS, measured at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on Zen 4 architecture (codenamed Raphael), built on TSMC’s 5 nm process with 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. Its base clock is 3.70 GHz, boosting to 5.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 32 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, and ECC memory is supported. The CPU uses AMD Socket AM5 and has 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). It was released on 2023-07-21 with a launch MSRP of $179.

In benchmark tests, the 7500F shows strong multi-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 multicore scores 22799, R20 multicore scores 9575, and R15 multicore scores 2298. Single-thread scores are also solid, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 3218, R20 at 1351, and R15 at 324. Geekbench multicore is 12362 and single-core is 2374. The PassMark multithread score is 26825, with single-thread at 3841. These numbers place the CPU at the 77th percentile of all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 24964 is within 0.4% of its nearest rivals.

For Red Dead Redemption 2, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and AI, which typically use fewer threads but benefit from high single-core performance. The 7500F’s 5.00 GHz boost clock and 3218 single-core Cinebench R23 score are more than adequate for this game’s CPU demands. The L3 cache of 32 MB is shared across all cores, which helps with data locality in open-world titles. However, the measured FPS data shows no evidence of CPU limitation: even at 1080p Low, where the GPU load is lowest, the average of 47 FPS is likely GPU-bound, as the CPU could push far higher frame rates based on its benchmark scores. If the CPU were the constraint, the 1080p Low result would be lower relative to higher resolutions, but instead it is the highest of all measured points.

The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s is relevant because the GPU uses system-shared memory. That means the CPU’s memory controller also serves the GPU’s VRAM needs, creating a potential contention point. Yet the data does not show a CPU-side bottleneck; the FPS scaling with resolution is consistent with pure GPU limits.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the only setting that provides a consistently playable experience is 1920x1080 with Low settings, averaging 47 FPS. This is the sole configuration above 45 FPS, and it offers the best balance of visual clarity and frame rate. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 35 FPS, which is playable for some but falls below smooth thresholds. High settings at 1080p yield 29 FPS, and Ultra yields 21 FPS—both are borderline for action sequences.

At 2560x1440, Low settings produce 35 FPS, which matches 1080p Medium but at a higher resolution. This could be a viable alternative for users with 1440p displays who prioritize resolution over detail. However, 35 FPS is still below the 47 FPS of 1080p Low, so the latter remains the best for frame rate. Medium at 1440p drops to 26 FPS, and High to 22 FPS, with Ultra at 16 FPS—these are not recommended for gameplay.

At 3840x2160, no setting is playable. Low averages 23 FPS, Medium 17 FPS, High 14 FPS, and Ultra 10 FPS. Even the lowest preset fails to reach 30 FPS, so 4K is not a viable option for this combo.

The recommendation is to play at 1920x1080 with Low settings if frame rate is the priority. The 47 FPS average is the highest measured, and the lack of min FPS data for Low settings suggests the frame time variance is not recorded, but the average is sufficient. For users willing to accept lower frame rates, 1080p Medium at 35 FPS offers better visual fidelity, but the drop of 12 FPS (26%) may not justify the graphical improvement. The data does not include a preset between Low and Medium, so there is no intermediate option. Given the GPU’s 5th percentile ranking, optimizing for frame rate over visuals is the logical choice.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers four settings (Low, Medium, High, Ultra) across three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160). Each resolution shows a consistent ordering: Low has the highest average, followed by Medium, then High, with Ultra lowest.

At 1920x1080, Low averages 47 FPS with no min or max recorded. Medium averages 35 FPS, with a min of 30 and max of 40. High averages 29 FPS, with no min or max. Ultra averages 21 FPS, with no min or max. The spread from Low to Ultra is 26 FPS, a 55% reduction. Medium’s min of 30 FPS is notable because it indicates that even the worst frames stay at 30, whereas High and Ultra lack recorded min values, suggesting the data collection did not capture them.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 35 FPS. Medium averages 26 FPS, with a min of 22 and max of 30. High averages 22 FPS. Ultra averages 16 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 19 FPS, a 54% reduction. The Medium preset’s min of 22 FPS is lower than 1080p Medium’s min of 30, reflecting the added pixel load.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 23 FPS. Medium averages 17 FPS, with a min of 15 and max of 20. High averages 14 FPS. Ultra averages 10 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 13 FPS, a 57% reduction. The Medium preset at 4K has the only complete min/max data across all resolutions, showing a 5 FPS range from 15 to 20, which indicates tight frame pacing but at an unplayable level.

Comparing across resolutions at the same setting: Low goes from 47 FPS at 1080p to 35 FPS at 1440p to 23 FPS at 4K. Medium goes from 35 to 26 to 17. High goes from 29 to 22 to 14. Ultra goes from 21 to 16 to 10. The average drop from 1080p to 4K is roughly 51%, regardless of setting, which reinforces that the GPU’s resolution scaling is the dominant factor. The highest single recorded FPS is 47 at 1080p Low, and the lowest is 10 at 4K Ultra. The only min/max data available is for Medium settings: 1080p Medium (min 30, max 40), 1440p Medium (min 22, max 30), and 4K Medium (min 15, max 20). Those ranges are narrow, indicating stable frame delivery at Medium settings, but the averages themselves are too low for demanding play.