Red Dead Redemption 2

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600X paired with the Intel Arc B390 delivers a profoundly GPU-limited experience in Red Dead Redemption 2, with the combo ranking 2568th out of 2902 tested combinations. This places the pairing in the bottom 12% of all configurations, a position driven almost entirely by the graphics solution's low placement in the benchmark hierarchy—the Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, while the Ryzen 5 7600X holds a far stronger 79th percentile among CPUs. The data shows a system where the processor’s headroom is effectively untapped, as frame rates collapse at every resolution and preset level tested.

How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame of 2568 out of 2902 is a stark indicator of where this pairing falls in the broader landscape of tested hardware. With only 334 combinations performing worse, this setup is firmly in the lower quartile of gaming performance for Red Dead Redemption 2. The discrepancy between the CPU and GPU percentiles is the defining characteristic: the Ryzen 5 7600X, with an avgBenchmarkScore of 27636, sits among capable mid-range processors, while the Arc B390’s avgBenchmarkScore of 1482 places it at the very bottom of the GPU distribution.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in synthetic testing—the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X and Intel Core i5-12600K, both at a 0.2% deltaPct—demonstrate that the processor is competitive with established mid-range options. Conversely, the GPU’s nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% deltaPct) and GeForce 800M (1.5% deltaPct), which are entry-level parts from a decade ago. This juxtaposition means the combo’s rank is almost exclusively a function of the graphics card’s limitations. In practical terms, the measured FPS data shows the CPU is never the bottleneck; even at the lowest settings and resolution, the system fails to approach the frame rates that a 7600X is capable of supporting.

When comparing to all tested combos, the 2568th position indicates that the vast majority of systems—even those with older or lower-tier CPUs—achieve better results in this game, provided they have a more capable GPU. The data suggests that a user upgrading from a weaker processor would see negligible gains in Red Dead Redemption 2 unless the GPU is also replaced, as the Arc B390 caps performance across the board.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X or the Intel Arc B390 the limiting factor in this game?

A: The Intel Arc B390 is overwhelmingly the limiting factor. The GPU ranks at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, while the CPU ranks at the 79th percentile among all CPUs. This massive gap, combined with the low FPS across all settings, indicates the graphics card is the bottleneck.

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

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 51, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration where the system approaches playable territory, though it remains below the 60 FPS threshold many consider standard.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390's avgBenchmarkScore of 1482 is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463) and 1.5% higher than the GeForce 800M (1460). It also leads the GeForce GT 625 OEM by 2.5% and the GeForce GT 710 by 2.7%, placing it at the very bottom of the performance spectrum.

Q: Does increasing resolution have a severe impact on performance?

A: Yes. At High settings, average FPS drops from 32 at 1920x1080 to 24 at 2560x1440 and further to 16 at 3840x2160. This represents a 50% reduction from 1080p to 4K, confirming the GPU’s inability to handle higher pixel counts.

Q: What settings provide the most consistent frame pacing?

A: Medium settings at 1920x1080 show min FPS of 33 and max FPS of 44, with an average of 39. This is the only preset with a recorded minimum above 30 FPS, suggesting it offers the most stable experience among the tested options.

Q: Is the CPU's single-threaded performance relevant to this game's results?

A: Not meaningfully. The Ryzen 5 7600X scores 1965 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is strong, but the measured FPS data shows that even at low settings the system only reaches 51 FPS at 1080p. The GPU’s limitations prevent the CPU’s single-threaded strength from being utilized.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390, based on the Xe3-LPG architecture and Panther Lake chip, is the primary determinant of this combo’s performance in Red Dead Redemption 2. Its specifications reveal a part designed for integrated graphics duty rather than discrete gaming performance: the GPU operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, with memory classified as "System Shared" and bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." This reliance on shared system memory, rather than dedicated VRAM, is a critical limitation for a game like Red Dead Redemption 2, which benefits from substantial memory bandwidth.

The GPU’s shading units number 1536, with 48 texture mapping units and 24 raster output pipelines, alongside 12 ray tracing cores. These figures, while not directly comparable without rival data, translate to a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS provides a theoretical ceiling that the measured FPS data shows is rarely approached in practice. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482, combined with its 9th percentile ranking, underscores its position among the weakest tested graphics solutions.

The Arc B390 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning it can technically run the game’s modern rendering features. However, the benchmark results indicate that these features have little practical benefit given the raw performance deficit. The GPU’s TDP of 80 W and its designation as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors suggest it is intended for portable or compact devices, not high-end gaming. In this context, the measured FPS values—ranging from a high of 51 at 1080p Low to a low of 11 at 4K Ultra—are consistent with a part that is severely underpowered for AAA gaming.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system’s capabilities across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its best results: 51 FPS on Low, 39 FPS on Medium, 32 FPS on High, and 23 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset shows a min FPS of 33 and max FPS of 44, indicating some frame pacing variance, but it remains the most playable option at this resolution. The jump from Low to Medium incurs a 12 FPS loss (from 51 to 39), while High drops another 7 FPS, and Ultra falls to nearly half of the Low setting’s performance.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance scales down proportionally. Low settings produce 38 FPS, Medium drops to 29 FPS (with a min of 24 and max of 33), High yields 24 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 17 FPS. The pattern holds: each settings tier costs roughly 7-9 FPS, with Low being the only preset that remains above 30 FPS. At 3840x2160, the results are uniformly poor. Low settings manage 25 FPS, Medium falls to 19 FPS (min 16, max 22), High drops to 16 FPS, and Ultra reaches a dismal 11 FPS. These numbers confirm that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combo under any settings configuration.

The lack of min and max FPS data for most presets—only Medium settings at each resolution include these values—limits the analysis of frame consistency. However, the available data points (1080p Medium: 33-44; 1440p Medium: 24-33; 4K Medium: 16-22) show that the spread narrows as resolution increases, which is typical of a GPU that is fully saturated. The overall trend is monotonic: lower resolutions and lower settings consistently yield higher FPS, with no anomalies suggesting CPU interference.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling data reveals a GPU that struggles with pixel throughput, a classic symptom of memory bandwidth limitations. At High settings, the average FPS progresses from 32 at 1080p to 24 at 1440p to 16 at 4K. This represents a 25% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 33% drop from 1440p to 4K, totaling a 50% reduction from the lowest to highest tested resolution. The scaling pattern is nearly linear, suggesting the GPU’s render output units and memory subsystem are consistently saturated.

At Low settings, the drop is more severe in absolute terms: 51 FPS at 1080p falls to 38 FPS at 1440p (a 25% decrease) and then to 25 FPS at 4K (a 34% decrease from 1440p). The overall reduction from 1080p to 4K is 51%, mirroring the High preset’s behavior. Medium settings show a similar trajectory: 39 FPS to 29 FPS to 19 FPS, with the 4K figure representing a 51% drop from 1080p. Ultra settings, which start at 23 FPS at 1080p, drop to 17 FPS at 1440p and 11 FPS at 4K, a 52% reduction.

This consistent ~50% performance loss from 1080p to 4K across all settings is a strong indicator that the Arc B390 is the limiting component. A CPU-bound system would typically show less severe scaling at higher resolutions, as the GPU becomes more of a factor. Here, the near-uniform scaling suggests the GPU is purely pixel-bound, with the Ryzen 5 7600X’s 12 threads and 32 MB of L3 cache providing ample headroom that goes unused. The system shared memory architecture, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," likely contributes to this behavior, as the GPU competes with the CPU for memory access.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the optimal experience for this combo is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which delivers 51 FPS on average. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth frame rate, and it represents a 12 FPS improvement over Medium settings at the same resolution. The trade-off in visual fidelity is significant—Low settings will disable or reduce many of the game’s graphical features—but the playability gain is substantial. At Medium settings, the 39 FPS average with a 33 FPS minimum remains playable for those who prioritize visuals, but the experience will be less consistent.

For users willing to accept lower frame rates, 2560x1440 with Low settings offers 38 FPS, which is marginally below the 1080p Medium result but provides higher resolution. This is a viable compromise for users with 1440p displays who cannot downsample. However, the data suggests that 4K is not worth pursuing under any settings; even Low produces only 25 FPS, which falls below the threshold for comfortable play. Ultra settings are categorically discouraged at all resolutions, with the best case being 23 FPS at 1080p, which is stutter-prone and will likely result in a poor experience.

The Medium settings at 1080p, with a min FPS of 33 and max of 44, offer the best frame pacing of any preset that includes min/max data. This suggests that while the average is lower than Low settings, the frame delivery is more consistent, potentially avoiding the hitching that can occur at higher averages with wider variance. Ultimately, the recommendation is to play at 1080p Low for maximum fluidity, or 1080p Medium if visual quality is prioritized and the user can tolerate occasional dips below 40 FPS. The data shows no scenario where this combo delivers a high-refresh-rate experience, so settings should be chosen to maintain a stable baseline rather than chase peak FPS.