Red Dead Redemption 2

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i7-14700KF paired with the Intel Arc B390 ranks 2568 out of 2902 tested combos in Red Dead Redemption 2. This places the combination in the bottom 12% of all tested systems, a position driven almost entirely by the graphics solution. The Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, with its lone 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 placing it just 1.3% above the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% above the GeForce 800M, 2.5% above the GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% above the GT 710. These are not competitive margins; they represent a GPU that is effectively in the entry-level segment of the benchmark database.

The CPU, by contrast, is a high-end part. The Core i7-14700KF ranks in the 94th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 70163. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F at 69996 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX at 69875 (0.4% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X at 69515 (0.9% behind). The only rival ahead is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K at 70879, which leads by 1%. In raw compute, this CPU is competitive with flagship-class parts from both AMD and Intel, yet the measured FPS in Red Dead Redemption 2 tells a different story.

What the data shows is a massive imbalance. The CPU has the headroom to push far higher frame rates, but the GPU becomes the limiting factor at every resolution and settings tier. At 1080p Low, the combo manages 51 FPS average; at 1080p Ultra, that drops to 23 FPS. At 1440p, the spread is 38 FPS on Low down to 17 FPS on Ultra. At 4K, the results fall below playable thresholds entirely, with a 25 FPS average on Low and just 11 FPS on Ultra. The combination ranks where it does because the GPU's performance ceiling is extraordinarily low relative to the CPU's capability. This is a system that would benefit from a different graphics card far more than any CPU upgrade.

# Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS rows provide a clear hierarchy of playable settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 51 FPS, which is the only settings tier that approaches smooth gameplay for this combination. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 39 FPS average, with a minimum of 33 FPS and a maximum of 44 FPS; this is playable but with noticeable dips. The High preset at 1080p drops to 32 FPS average, and Ultra falls to 23 FPS, both of which are below the threshold for comfortable action gameplay.

At 2560x1440, the situation becomes more constrained. Low delivers 38 FPS average, which is borderline acceptable for slower-paced exploration but may feel stuttery in combat sequences. Medium at 1440p averages 29 FPS with a minimum of 24 FPS and a maximum of 33 FPS, which is marginal. High at 1440p averages 24 FPS, and Ultra drops to 17 FPS, both of which are not recommended for actual play.

At 3840x2160, none of the settings tiers produce acceptable results. Low averages 25 FPS, Medium averages 19 FPS (min 16, max 22), High averages 16 FPS, and Ultra averages 11 FPS. The 4K resolution should be avoided entirely with this combination.

The data points toward a single recommendation: 1080p Low is the only preset that consistently stays above 50 FPS. If the user prioritizes visual fidelity over frame rate, 1080p Medium is the highest tier that maintains an average above 35 FPS, but the 33 FPS minimum indicates potential stutter in demanding scenes. For any resolution above 1080p, the Low preset is the only option that keeps averages above 30 FPS, and even then only at 1440p (38 FPS). The measured rows show no scenario where Ultra settings are viable for gameplay, as the highest Ultra average across all resolutions is 23 FPS at 1080p.

# FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system in Red Dead Redemption 2?

A: The only configuration that achieves an average above 50 FPS is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which produces 51 FPS. At 1440p, Low drops to 38 FPS, and at 4K, even Low only reaches 25 FPS.

Q: Can this system handle 4K resolution in Red Dead Redemption 2?

A: No. The highest average at 3840x2160 is 25 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 19 FPS, High averages 16 FPS, and Ultra averages 11 FPS. All of these are well below playable thresholds.

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

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 1.3% above the GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% above the GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% above the GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% above the GT 710 (1443). All of these are in the same performance tier.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this combination?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The Core i7-14700KF ranks in the 94th percentile among all CPUs, while the Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile among all GPUs. The FPS results across all resolutions and settings are consistent with a GPU-limited system.

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

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 51 FPS while Ultra averages 23 FPS. This represents a 28 FPS drop, or roughly 55% lower performance, when moving from Low to Ultra.

Q: Does the Medium preset provide stable frame pacing?

A: The Medium preset has recorded minimum and maximum values. At 1080p, it ranges from 33 to 44 FPS with a 39 FPS average. At 1440p, it ranges from 24 to 33 FPS with a 29 FPS average. At 4K, it ranges from 16 to 22 FPS with a 19 FPS average. The spread between minimum and maximum is roughly 11 FPS at each resolution, indicating consistent but low performance.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four settings tiers, providing a complete picture of performance scaling.

At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset delivers an average of 11 FPS, which is the lowest measured result in the entire dataset. High settings at 4K average 16 FPS. Medium settings at 4K average 19 FPS, with a minimum of 16 FPS and a maximum of 22 FPS. Low settings at 4K average 25 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra at 4K shows a steady decline: 25 to 19 to 16 to 11 FPS, with each settings tier costing roughly 4-6 FPS on average.

At 2560x1440, the results improve but remain limited. Low settings average 38 FPS. Medium settings average 29 FPS, with a minimum of 24 FPS and a maximum of 33 FPS. High settings average 24 FPS. Ultra settings average 17 FPS. The scaling pattern at 1440p is similar to 4K: 38 to 29 to 24 to 17 FPS from Low to Ultra, with the largest single drop occurring between Low and Medium (9 FPS).

At 1920x1080, the best results in the dataset appear. Low settings average 51 FPS, the only configuration to exceed 50 FPS. Medium settings average 39 FPS, with a minimum of 33 FPS and a maximum of 44 FPS. High settings average 32 FPS. Ultra settings average 23 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 51 to 39 to 32 to 23 FPS, showing a consistent degradation of roughly 8-12 FPS per settings tier.

Comparing across resolutions, the resolution scaling is steep. At Low settings, 1080p achieves 51 FPS, 1440p achieves 38 FPS (a 25% reduction), and 4K achieves 25 FPS (a 51% reduction from 1080p). At Medium settings, 1080p achieves 39 FPS, 1440p achieves 29 FPS, and 4K achieves 19 FPS. At High settings, 1080p achieves 32 FPS, 1440p achieves 24 FPS, and 4K achieves 16 FPS. At Ultra settings, 1080p achieves 23 FPS, 1440p achieves 17 FPS, and 4K achieves 11 FPS.

The minimum and maximum values are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the range is 33-44 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 24-33 FPS. At 4K Medium, the range is 16-22 FPS. This suggests that the Medium preset has a variance of roughly 10-11 FPS regardless of resolution, which indicates that frame pacing issues scale proportionally with average performance.

# GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the dominant factor in this combination's performance, and the data shows why. The GPU is built on Intel's Xe3-LPG architecture, using the Panther Lake chip on a 3 nm process node. It features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 raster operations pipelines, and 12 ray tracing cores. The base clock is 300 MHz with a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s, the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 7.680 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is 15.36 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

The memory subsystem is entirely system-shared. The memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared," and bandwidth is "System Dependent." This is a significant limitation for a game like Red Dead Redemption 2, which has large texture assets and open-world streaming requirements. The GPU's TDP is 80 W, and it operates as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a slot width of "IGP" and no power connectors. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The GPU's benchmark presence is minimal: a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482. This places it at the 9th percentile among all GPUs. The nearest rivals are all NVIDIA parts from the entry-level segment: the GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% behind), the GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% behind), the GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% behind), and the GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% behind). These are not gaming GPUs by modern standards; they are legacy or low-power parts.

In Red Dead Redemption 2, the GPU's limitations manifest clearly. The game's minimum requirements are not met in any meaningful way at higher settings. The 12 ray tracing cores are present, but the game does not appear to benefit from them in the measured FPS data. The system-shared memory means that the GPU competes with the CPU for memory bandwidth, which is "System Dependent" and therefore not quantified in the fact pack. The boost clock of 2500 MHz is respectable, but the low shading unit count and memory constraints cap the GPU's real-world output.

The 9th percentile ranking among all GPUs means that 91% of GPUs in the benchmark database outperform this part. In the context of Red Dead Redemption 2, which is a demanding open-world title, this translates to the sub-30 FPS averages seen at most settings and resolutions. The GPU is the single largest factor in the combo's 2568th rank out of 2902 tested combinations.

# CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a high-performance desktop processor that is dramatically underutilized in this combination. It belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture (Raptor Lake-R codename) using a 10 nm process node. The CPU features 20 cores and 28 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The thermal design power is 125 W, and it uses the Intel Socket 1700. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with ECC memory support enabled.

The cache hierarchy is substantial: 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 33 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The part number is SRN3Y, and the launch MSRP is $384. The multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking. The production status is Active, and the release date is 2023-10-16.

The CPU's benchmark scores are consistently strong across multiple test suites. In Cinebench R15, it scores 4452 in multi-core and 628 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 18550 in multi-core and 2618 in single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 44167 in multi-core and 6235 in single-core. Geekbench results show 21462 in multi-core and 2578 in single-core. PassMark results include a multithread score of 52425, a single-thread score of 4480, floating point math at 134393, integer math at 183056, data compression at 694963, data encryption at 40046, and extended instructions at 40660.

The CPU's average benchmark score is 70163, placing it at the 94th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are all within 1%: the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F at 69996 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX at 69875 (0.4% behind), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X at 69515 (0.9% behind), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K at 70879 (1% ahead). This places the i7-14700KF in the same performance class as flagship desktop and high-end mobile parts from both AMD and Intel.

In Red Dead Redemption 2, the CPU's role is to feed the GPU with draw calls, physics calculations, and AI logic. The 20 cores and 28 threads provide ample parallel processing capability, and the 5.60 GHz boost clock ensures strong single-threaded performance for game logic. However, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 51 FPS; if the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see similar FPS across different settings tiers, but instead we see a clear decline from 51 FPS at Low to 23 FPS at Ultra.

The CPU's 94th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 9th percentile ranking illustrates the imbalance. The CPU has the headroom to support far higher frame rates, but the GPU cannot deliver them. In a balanced system, this CPU would typically be paired with a GPU in the 80th percentile or higher. The combo rank of 2568 out of 2902 is a direct consequence of this mismatch. The CPU contributes positively to the system's overall capability, but its contribution is masked by the GPU's performance ceiling.