Red Dead Redemption 2

Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates for Red Dead Redemption 2 with the Intel Core i7-14700KF and Intel Arc B570 show a steep and consistent performance cliff as resolution climbs. At 1080p High, the combo averages 49 FPS; stepping up to 1440p High drops that to 37 FPS, and at 4K High the average falls to 24 FPS. That is a 51% reduction from 1080p to 4K at High settings, which points directly at the GPU as the binding constraint.

The scaling pattern is telling. Moving from 1080p to 1440p at High settings costs 12 FPS (49 to 37), while moving from 1440p to 4K costs another 13 FPS (37 to 24). The near-linear drop indicates that the Arc B570's pixel throughput and memory bandwidth are being exhausted long before the CPU becomes a factor. At Low settings, the same resolution ladder shows 79 FPS at 1080p, 59 FPS at 1440p, and 39 FPS at 4K — again, a roughly 25% loss at each step, confirming that pixel-count scaling is the dominant variable.

At 4K Ultra, the average collapses to 18 FPS, which is unplayable by any reasonable standard. Even at 1080p Ultra, the average is only 36 FPS, suggesting that the Ultra preset's additional shading and lighting costs overwhelm the GPU's 380.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 11.52 TFLOPS FP32 throughput. The data shows that 4K is only viable at Low settings (39 FPS), and even then it barely clears a 30 FPS baseline.

What does this say about the limiting component? The CPU's benchmark profile — a 94th percentile ranking among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 70163 — is far above what this game's engine demands at these frame rates. The GPU, by contrast, sits at the 65th percentile among all GPUs. When frame rates halve from 1080p to 4K at every settings tier, that is the signature of a GPU-bound scenario. The CPU is effectively idle headroom; the Arc B570 is the ceiling.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570's measured performance in Red Dead Redemption 2 is defined by its memory subsystem and compute throughput. The card carries 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, yielding 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base and boost clocks are both 2500 MHz, with memory clocked at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The GPU has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output units, with 18 ray tracing cores. Peak pixel rate is 200.0 GPixel/s and texture rate is 360.0 GTexel/s.

These specifications map directly onto the measured results. At 1080p Medium, the average is 59 FPS with a minimum of 50 FPS — the only settings tier where the card holds a 50 FPS floor. At 1080p Low, it reaches 79 FPS, which is the highest average in the entire dataset. But the card's 160-bit memory bus becomes a liability as resolution increases. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 44 FPS, and at 4K Medium it falls to 29 FPS with a minimum of 25 FPS.

The VRAM capacity of 10 GB is not the bottleneck in this game's measured data — the bandwidth is. Red Dead Redemption 2's open-world streaming at 4K demands more memory throughput than the 380.0 GB/s can supply at High or Ultra presets. The gap between 4K Low (39 FPS) and 4K Medium (29 FPS) is 10 FPS, which is a 34% loss for one settings tier. That is a steep price for the visual uplift that Medium provides, and it underscores how sensitive this GPU is to memory pressure.

The GPU's benchmark context reinforces this reading. Its average benchmark score is 20556, placing it at the 65th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, which scores 20534 (a 0.1% delta), and the Intel Arc A750, which scores 20582 (a -0.1% delta). The B570 is effectively tied with both — but in this game, the measured FPS at 4K Ultra (18 FPS) shows that the card's real-world gaming performance lags its synthetic benchmark standing. The PassMark G3D score of 14195 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2649 are moderate, but they do not translate into playable 4K High frame rates here.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU/GPU combo in Red Dead Redemption 2?

A: 1080p is the only resolution where the combo achieves consistently playable averages across all settings. At 1080p Low, the average is 79 FPS; at Medium, 59 FPS; at High, 49 FPS; and at Ultra, 36 FPS. Every 1440p and 4K tier falls below 60 FPS.

Q: Can the Intel Arc B570 handle 4K in this game?

A: Only at Low settings, where the average is 39 FPS. At Medium, it drops to 29 FPS; at High, 24 FPS; and at Ultra, 18 FPS. The data shows that 4K is not viable beyond Low settings for a playable experience.

Q: How does the Intel Core i7-14700KF influence the frame rates?

A: The CPU's benchmark score (70163 average, 94th percentile) vastly exceeds the demands of this game at these frame rates. The measured FPS scaling is nearly perfectly tied to resolution and settings changes, which indicates the GPU is the limiting component, not the CPU.

Q: Is the Ultra preset worth using?

A: No. At 1080p Ultra, the average is 36 FPS, which is 13 FPS lower than High (49 FPS). At 1440p Ultra, it falls to 27 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, 18 FPS. The cost of Ultra is too high relative to the visual benefit.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like at Medium settings?

A: The only settings tier with min/max data is Medium. At 1080p Medium, the range is 50 to 68 FPS; at 1440p Medium, 38 to 51 FPS; and at 4K Medium, 25 to 34 FPS. The spreads are roughly 18 FPS at each resolution, indicating moderate frame pacing volatility.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 2335 out of 2902 tested combinations for this game, placing it in the bottom 20% of all tested systems.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides a clear hierarchy for settings selection. The single best experience is 1080p Low, which delivers 79 FPS average — the highest frame rate in the entire dataset. However, Low settings sacrifice visual fidelity. The better trade-off is 1080p Medium, which yields 59 FPS average with a 50 FPS minimum. That minimum is the only one across all resolutions that stays above 48 FPS, making it the most consistent playable option.

At 1080p High, the average drops to 49 FPS, which is still playable but closer to the edge of comfort for fast-paced action. The jump from Medium to High costs 10 FPS (from 59 to 49), which is a 17% reduction. For users who prioritize image quality over frame rate, 1080p High is acceptable, but the data does not support going beyond that.

At 1440p, no settings tier reaches 60 FPS. Low achieves 59 FPS, which is technically playable but leaves no headroom. Medium drops to 44 FPS, and High to 37 FPS. For 1440p users, Low is the only viable choice, and even that is marginal.

At 4K, only Low (39 FPS) is remotely playable. Medium (29 FPS), High (24 FPS), and Ultra (18 FPS) all fall below the 30 FPS threshold that most users consider the bare minimum. The data is unambiguous: this combo should be run at 1080p Medium for the best balance of frame rate and visual quality, with 1080p Low as the fallback for users who demand 60+ FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080:

• Low: 79 FPS average
• Medium: 59 FPS average, 50 FPS minimum, 68 FPS maximum
• High: 49 FPS average
• Ultra: 36 FPS average

2560x1440:

• Low: 59 FPS average
• Medium: 44 FPS average, 38 FPS minimum, 51 FPS maximum
• High: 37 FPS average
• Ultra: 27 FPS average

3840x2160:

• Low: 39 FPS average
• Medium: 29 FPS average, 25 FPS minimum, 34 FPS maximum
• High: 24 FPS average
• Ultra: 18 FPS average

The pattern across all resolutions is consistent: Low is roughly 30-35% faster than Medium, Medium is roughly 20-25% faster than High, and High is roughly 25-30% faster than Ultra. The largest absolute gap is at 1080p, where Low (79 FPS) beats Ultra (36 FPS) by 43 FPS — a 119% improvement. At 4K, the gap between Low (39 FPS) and Ultra (18 FPS) is 21 FPS, a 117% improvement, showing that the settings ladder has a similar relative impact regardless of resolution.

The only tier with complete min/max data is Medium. At 1080p, the range is 50-68 FPS; at 1440p, 38-51 FPS; and at 4K, 25-34 FPS. The spread is approximately 18 FPS at each resolution, which suggests that frame time variance scales with resolution rather than remaining constant.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i7-14700KF is a 20-core, 28-thread processor based on Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 33 MB of shared L3 cache. Its TDP is 125 W, and it supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration.

Benchmark results show this is a top-tier CPU. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 44167, and single-core is 6235. Geekbench multi-core is 21462, and single-core is 2578. PassMark multi-thread is 52425, with single-thread at 4480. The average benchmark score of 70163 places it at the 94th percentile of all CPUs, with a launch MSRP of $384.

In the context of Red Dead Redemption 2, the CPU's role is almost entirely passive. The game's measured frame rates scale directly with GPU settings and resolution, which is the hallmark of a GPU-bound workload. The CPU's nearest rivals — the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (0.2% delta), AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.4% delta), AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (0.9% delta), and Intel Core Ultra 7 265K (-1% delta) — are all statistically tied in synthetic benchmarks, but none of that matters for this game.

At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 79 FPS, which is the highest average in the dataset. If the CPU were a limiting factor, we would expect to see frame rates plateau at higher resolutions or settings, with the CPU unable to feed the GPU. Instead, the data shows a monotonic decline from Low to Ultra at every resolution, with no evidence of a CPU ceiling. The 20-core, 28-thread configuration with 5.60 GHz boost is far more compute power than Red Dead Redemption 2's engine can utilize at these frame rates.

The data indicates that the i7-14700KF is not a bottleneck in this configuration. Users who pair this CPU with a stronger GPU would see higher frame rates in this game, as the CPU has substantial headroom. Conversely, the Arc B570's 65th percentile GPU ranking (average benchmark score 20556) is the clear performance limiter. The CPU's 94th percentile ranking is effectively wasted in this pairing for this specific game.