Red Dead Redemption 2

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

The Intel Core i7-13700K brings 16 cores and 24 threads to this pairing, running on the Raptor Lake architecture with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The processor is built on a 10 nm process node and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel memory bus. With 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, the CPU has substantial on-die storage for game data, which matters for an open-world title like Red Dead Redemption 2 that streams large environments.

Benchmark data positions this CPU at the 89th percentile against all processors, with an average benchmark score of 46881. Its nearest rivals show tight competition: the AMD Ryzen 9 5900 scores 46971 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 scores 47022 (0.3% higher), while the AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX and Intel Xeon w3-2535 each score 46654 and 46653 respectively (0.5% lower). This places the i7-13700K in a narrow band where no single rival holds a decisive advantage.

Looking at synthetic workload results, the CPU's scaling behavior is revealing. The 3DMark scores climb from 1136 in single-thread, to 2262 with 2 threads, 4469 with 4 threads, 8193 with 8 threads, 10717 with 16 threads, and peak at 12412 with max threads. This progression shows diminishing returns beyond 8 threads, which is typical for gaming workloads that rarely scale linearly across all 24 threads. The Cinebench R23 results reinforce this: a single-core score of 2116 versus a multi-core score of 30745 indicates strong per-core efficiency that game engines can exploit.

The PassMark single-thread score of 4333 paired with a multithread score of 45887 suggests that individual cores are fast enough to handle the primary game thread, while the remaining threads can manage background tasks, physics, and AI. For Red Dead Redemption 2 specifically, the measured FPS results at lower resolutions and settings hint that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck in most configurations, as the GPU consistently becomes the limiting factor as resolution increases.

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

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel Core i7-13700K?

A: The launch MSRP of the Intel Core i7-13700K is $409.

Q: How does the Intel Core i7-13700K compare to its closest rival in overall benchmark scores?

A: The i7-13700K scores 46881 on average, which is 0.2% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 5900's 46971 and 0.3% lower than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375's 47022. It is 0.5% higher than both the AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX and Intel Xeon w3-2535, which score 46654 and 46653 respectively.

Q: What is the best average FPS achieved at 1080p with this CPU+GPU combo?

A: The highest average FPS at 1920x1080 is 79 FPS, achieved with Low settings. The Medium preset delivers 59 FPS, High delivers 49 FPS, and Ultra drops to 36 FPS.

Q: Does the Intel Arc B570's 10 GB VRAM become a limiting factor in Red Dead Redemption 2?

A: The data shows that at 3840x2160, the Ultra preset only reaches 18 FPS average, while Low settings reach 39 FPS. This large gap suggests that the GPU's compute capacity and memory bandwidth (380.0 GB/s over a 160-bit bus) are the primary constraints rather than VRAM capacity alone, since even Low settings at 4K cannot achieve playable frame rates.

Q: What percentile does the Intel Arc B570 rank at compared to all GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc B570 ranks at the 65th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20556.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B570 compare to the Intel Arc A750 in benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Arc B570 scores 20556 on average, which is 0.1% lower than the Intel Arc A750's 20582. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534 (0.1% lower), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X scores 20662 (0.5% higher).

# How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the Intel Core i7-13700K and Intel Arc B570 ranks 2335 out of 2902 tested combos in Red Dead Redemption 2. This places the pairing in the lower half of tested configurations, which is a notable finding given that both components are relatively recent releases. The CPU sits at the 89th percentile among all processors, and the GPU sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, yet their combined performance in this specific game ranks at roughly the 20th percentile of all combos tested.

This discrepancy suggests that the pairing underperforms relative to what each component's individual benchmark scores might predict. The data indicates that the GPU is likely the binding constraint, given that its percentile rank is significantly lower than the CPU's. However, the combo's rank also implies that many other CPU+GPU pairings achieve better results in this title, potentially due to the Arc B570's driver overhead or architectural inefficiencies in this specific game engine.

The gap between the combo's rank and the component percentiles is worth investigating. When a CPU at the 89th percentile pairs with a GPU at the 65th percentile, one might expect the combo to land somewhere in the middle, yet the 2335th position out of 2902 combos suggests the GPU's performance in Red Dead Redemption 2 is considerably worse than its average benchmark scores indicate. The measured FPS data confirms this interpretation: at 1080p Low settings, the combo achieves 79 FPS, which is respectable but not exceptional for a CPU with this level of single-thread performance.

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

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS ranges from 36 to 79 depending on the preset. Low settings deliver 79 FPS average, Medium delivers 59 FPS with a minimum of 50 and maximum of 68, High delivers 49 FPS, and Ultra drops to 36 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 43 FPS, indicating that the GPU's performance scales significantly with graphical complexity.

Moving to 2560x1440, the average FPS drops across all settings. Low achieves 59 FPS, Medium achieves 44 FPS with a range of 38 to 51, High achieves 37 FPS, and Ultra achieves 27 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at this resolution is 32 FPS, a narrower gap than at 1080p, which suggests the GPU is becoming more saturated as pixel count increases.

At 3840x2160, the results show severe performance degradation. Low settings produce 39 FPS average, Medium produces 29 FPS with a range of 25 to 34, High produces 24 FPS, and Ultra produces just 18 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 21 FPS, indicating that even the lowest settings cannot escape the GPU's limitations at 4K resolution.

The data shows clear scaling patterns: at 1080p, the combo can achieve playable frame rates even at High settings (49 FPS), but at 1440p, only Low settings (59 FPS) remain comfortably above 60 FPS territory. At 4K, no setting achieves the 60 FPS threshold, and even Low settings barely reach 39 FPS.

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

Examining the scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the bottleneck. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 79 at 1080p to 59 at 1440p to 39 at 4K. This represents a 25.3% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 50.6% drop from 1080p to 4K. At High settings, the progression is 49 FPS at 1080p, 37 FPS at 1440p, and 24 FPS at 4K, which is a 24.5% drop followed by a 51.0% drop.

These percentage declines are relatively consistent across settings, which is a hallmark of GPU-limited performance. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see FPS remain relatively flat as resolution increases, since the CPU workload stays roughly constant while the GPU workload grows. Instead, the FPS drops proportionally with the increase in pixel count, confirming that the Intel Arc B570 is the limiting component in this pairing.

The data also shows that the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, Ultra delivers 45.6% of Low's FPS (36 vs 79). At 1440p, Ultra delivers 45.8% of Low's FPS (27 vs 59). At 4K, Ultra delivers 46.2% of Low's FPS (18 vs 39). This consistent ratio suggests that the GPU's compute resources are being utilized in a predictable manner across resolutions, with the pixel fill rate being the primary constraint.

The 10 GB of GDDR6 memory with 380.0 GB/s bandwidth over a 160-bit bus may also contribute to the scaling behavior. At 4K, the memory bandwidth requirement increases substantially, and the Arc B570's bandwidth may not be sufficient to feed the GPU's shader units efficiently at higher resolutions.

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

For users targeting 60 FPS as a playability threshold, the data shows that only 1080p Low settings (79 FPS) and 1440p Low settings (59 FPS) come close to or exceed this mark. At 1080p Medium, the 59 FPS average is just below the threshold, while 1440p Medium (44 FPS) falls well short.

If 30 FPS is the minimum acceptable frame rate, the options expand considerably. At 1080p, all settings except Ultra meet this criterion, with High (49 FPS) and Medium (59 FPS) providing comfortable margins. At 1440p, Low (59 FPS), Medium (44 FPS), and High (37 FPS) all exceed 30 FPS. At 4K, only Low (39 FPS) and Medium (29 FPS) approach or exceed 30 FPS, with Medium just missing the mark.

The Medium preset at 1080p offers a balanced experience: 59 FPS average with a minimum of 50 and maximum of 68, indicating consistent frame delivery. This preset likely provides a good visual quality to performance ratio, though the data does not specify which specific graphical features each preset enables. At 1440p, the Medium preset (44 FPS) offers the best balance for users who prioritize resolution over frame rate.

For users with higher refresh rate displays, the 1080p Low preset (79 FPS) is the only measured configuration that approaches 80 FPS, though the High preset at 49 FPS may be preferable if visual fidelity outweighs the frame rate difference. At 4K, no preset delivers a fully smooth experience, with even Low settings (39 FPS) falling below the 60 FPS mark.

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

The Intel Arc B570 is built on the Xe2-HPG architecture using a 5 nm process from TSMC, featuring 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die. The GPU has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 80 render output units, along with 18 ray tracing cores. Its base and boost clocks are both 2500 MHz, and the memory operates at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective speed.

The 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus provides 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's compute capabilities include 11.52 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 23.04 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, with a pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s. The card consumes 150 W TDP and requires a 450 W power supply, connecting via PCIe 4.0 x8.

In Red Dead Redemption 2, the GPU's performance is the dominant factor in the measured FPS results. The 65th percentile ranking against all GPUs places the Arc B570 in the mid-range tier, and the game's demanding rendering requirements amplify its limitations. The nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20534, 0.1% lower), the Intel Arc A750 (20582, 0.1% higher), the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20480, 0.4% lower), and the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (20662, 0.5% higher).

The benchmark scores from 3DMark Steel Nomad show a DX12 score of 2649, while Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 83514 and 96844 respectively. PassMark results are more mixed, with DirectX 11 scoring 118, DirectX 12 scoring 72, and DirectX 9 scoring 164. The G3D score of 14195 and GPU compute score of 7281 indicate moderate overall performance, but the game-specific results suggest that Red Dead Redemption 2 may not fully leverage the GPU's architecture efficiently.

The 10 GB VRAM capacity is likely sufficient for this game at most settings, but the 160-bit memory bus and 380.0 GB/s bandwidth may struggle with the high-resolution textures and streaming demands of the open world. The FPS data supports this theory, as the performance degradation from 1080p to 4K follows a pattern consistent with memory bandwidth saturation rather than compute limitations alone.