Red Dead Redemption 2

# Red Dead Redemption 2 with Intel Core Ultra 5 235 + Intel Arc B390

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 paired with the Intel Arc B390 integrated GPU delivers a revealing look at how a modern, power-efficient CPU behaves when shackled to an extremely weak graphics solution in Red Dead Redemption 2. The measured data shows a combo that ranks at 2568 out of 2902 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 11% of all tested systems, with the Arc B390's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 landing it at the 9th percentile among all GPUs. This is a system where the CPU's substantial headroom is almost entirely irrelevant to the gaming experience, as the GPU becomes the overwhelming bottleneck at every resolution and settings level tested.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K in Red Dead Redemption 2 is stark and revealing, showing a component that is utterly overwhelmed by pixel count. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 51 FPS at 1920x1080 to 38 FPS at 2560x1440, a 25% reduction, and then further down to 25 FPS at 3840x2160, which represents a 51% drop from the 1080p baseline. This scaling pattern indicates that the limiting component — the Arc B390's integrated graphics — is being taxed almost entirely by resolution, with the CPU's 14 cores and 24 MB of shared L3 cache sitting idle.

The Medium settings row provides the only complete dataset with min and max FPS values, and it shows a similar trajectory: 39 FPS average at 1080p, dropping to 29 FPS at 1440p (a 26% decrease), and then to 19 FPS at 4K (a 51% decrease from 1080p). The High settings row follows the same pattern, with 32 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p (25% lower), and 16 FPS at 4K (50% lower). The consistency of these percentage drops across all three settings presets strongly suggests that the bottleneck is purely fill-rate and pixel-processing bound, not compute or geometry bound.

At Ultra settings, the picture becomes even more dire: 23 FPS at 1080p, 17 FPS at 1440p (26% lower), and 11 FPS at 4K (52% lower). The fact that the relative scaling remains nearly identical regardless of quality preset indicates that the Arc B390's 24 ROPs and 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate are the fundamental constraints. This is not a scenario where a particular setting taxes a specific hardware unit; rather, every pixel rendered costs the same regardless of how complex the shading is, and the GPU simply cannot push enough pixels.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranking of 2568 out of 2902 tested combinations places this system in the lowest percentile of all tested hardware pairings for Red Dead Redemption 2. To contextualize this ranking, consider that the GPU alone sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs in the benchmark database, while the CPU sits at the 89th percentile among all CPUs. This massive discrepancy — 89th percentile CPU with a 9th percentile GPU — creates a profoundly unbalanced system where the processor's capabilities are effectively wasted in gaming workloads.

The data implies that this combo is not merely weak in absolute terms but is also inefficient in utilization. The CPU's average benchmark score of 46062 places it in a dead heat with the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030, deltaPct 0.1), Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098, deltaPct -0.1), AMD EPYC 4364P (45970, deltaPct 0.2), and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960, deltaPct 0.2). These rivals represent a wide range of platforms and form factors, yet all score within 0.2% of each other, indicating that the Ultra 5 235 is a well-rounded performer in synthetic tests. However, in a GPU-bound game like Red Dead Redemption 2, this CPU performance is largely irrelevant to the final frame rate.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark paint a grim picture: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, deltaPct 1.3), NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, deltaPct 1.5), NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, deltaPct 2.5), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, deltaPct 2.7). These are all legacy or entry-level mobile/desktop parts from over a decade ago. The Arc B390's score of 1482 is marginally ahead of these, but the deltaPct values of 1.3% to 2.7% are so small as to be within run-to-run variance. This positions the B390 as a part that is competitive with ancient low-end hardware, not with anything modern.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution built on the Xe3-LPG architecture with a Panther Lake chip, fabricated on Intel's 3 nm process. Its specifications reveal why it performs so poorly: 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with 12 ray tracing cores. The boost clock of 2500 MHz and base clock of 300 MHz are respectable for an iGPU, but the memory configuration is the critical weakness — the B390 uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. This means the GPU is competing with the CPU for the same DDR5 memory bandwidth (the CPU's dual-channel memory bus provides 102.4 GB/s), and the effective GPU memory bandwidth is far below what any discrete graphics card would offer.

The FP32 compute of 7.680 TFLOPS and texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s sound adequate on paper, but the 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate combined with the shared memory bottleneck explains the catastrophic 4K performance. At 3840x2160, the GPU must fill over 8.3 million pixels per frame, and with a pixel rate of 60 GPixel/s, the theoretical maximum fill-rate-bound frame rate is just over 7 FPS before any shading or texture work. The measured 16 FPS at High settings at 4K actually exceeds this theoretical bound, suggesting that not all pixels require full shading passes, but the math shows how close to the absolute limit this part is operating.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 and 9th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirm that this is not a gaming part. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API support, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6 are modern, but the raw hardware throughput is insufficient for any serious gaming at resolutions above 1080p, and even at 1080p it struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher quality settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data provides 12 distinct data points across three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the best performance comes from Low settings with an average of 51 FPS, which is the only configuration that exceeds 50 FPS. Medium settings yield 39 FPS (min 33, max 44), High settings yield 32 FPS, and Ultra settings yield 23 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 55% performance reduction, from 51 to 23 FPS, which is a substantial cost for the visual quality improvements that Ultra settings provide.

At 2560x1440, the performance drops across the board. Low settings average 38 FPS, Medium averages 29 FPS (min 24, max 33), High averages 24 FPS, and Ultra drops to 17 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 55%, identical to the 1080p scaling, which reinforces that the GPU is being scaled uniformly. The minimum FPS values for Medium settings at 1440p (24 FPS) and 1080p (33 FPS) show that even the worst-case frame times are within a playable range at lower resolutions, but the 4K Medium minimum of 16 FPS is firmly in unplayable territory.

At 3840x2160, the results are consistently below playable thresholds. Low settings average 25 FPS, Medium averages 19 FPS (min 16, max 22), High averages 16 FPS, and Ultra averages just 11 FPS. The 4K Ultra result of 11 FPS is a slideshow by any standard, and even the best 4K result (25 FPS at Low) falls short of the 30 FPS threshold generally considered the minimum for acceptable console-style gaming. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low settings — 51 to 25 FPS, a 51% reduction — is exactly what would be expected from a fill-rate-bound GPU, as 4K has exactly four times the pixels of 1080p, and the performance scales roughly with the square root of the pixel count.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Red Dead Redemption 2 at 1080p with playable frame rates?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, where the average FPS is 51. Medium settings drop to 39 FPS average (33 FPS minimum), and High settings fall to 32 FPS, which is borderline playable. Ultra settings at 1080p average only 23 FPS, which is not smooth.

Q: What is the best resolution for this system?

A: The data clearly shows 1920x1080 as the only viable resolution. At 2560x1440, the best average is 38 FPS at Low settings, and at 3840x2160, the best average is 25 FPS at Low settings. Neither 1440p nor 4K offers a consistent 30+ FPS experience even at the lowest quality preset.

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 only 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% ahead of the GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% ahead of the GT 710 (1443). These are all legacy low-end parts from a decade ago.

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

A: The GPU is overwhelmingly the limiting factor. The CPU ranks at the 89th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 46062, while the GPU ranks at the 9th percentile. The FPS scaling with resolution (approximately 50% reduction from 1080p to 4K across all settings) is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck.

Q: What settings preset gives the best balance of quality and performance at 1080p?

A: Medium settings at 1080p provide the best balance, with 39 FPS average and a minimum of 33 FPS. This keeps the frame rate above 30 FPS at all times, while Low settings (51 FPS) sacrifice significant visual quality, and High settings (32 FPS) risk dropping below 30 FPS in demanding scenes.

Q: Is the Arc B390's memory configuration a problem?

A: Yes, the GPU uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning it shares the CPU's DDR5 dual-channel memory bus (102.4 GB/s). This is a fundamental limitation compared to discrete GPUs with dedicated memory, and it contributes to the GPU's poor performance in memory-intensive scenarios.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is a 14-core, 14-thread desktop processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 14769 in Cinebench R23 multicore, 2085 in single-core, and 37816 in Passmark multithread, with a single-thread score of 4516. Its overall percentile rank against all CPUs is 89th, with an average benchmark score of 46062, placing it in a statistical dead heat with the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030, +0.1%), Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098, -0.1%), AMD EPYC 4364P (45970, +0.2%), and AMD EPYC 7303 (45960, +0.2%).

For Red Dead Redemption 2, this CPU has more than enough processing power. The game's performance at 4K Ultra (11 FPS) versus 1080p Low (51 FPS) demonstrates that the CPU can feed the GPU with data at a rate that allows a 364% performance swing based purely on GPU load. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see a plateau in FPS as resolution decreases, but instead, the FPS scales consistently with GPU load. The CPU's 14 threads and 5.00 GHz boost clock are more than sufficient for a game from 2018, and the 24 MB L3 cache helps maintain smooth frame pacing in open-world scenarios with many NPCs and physics objects.

However, the CPU's capabilities are wasted in this configuration. The Arc B390 integrated GPU cannot utilize the CPU's full potential, and the system would likely perform identically with a much weaker processor. The data implies that the Core Ultra 5 235 is being held back by its GPU counterpart, and that this combo would benefit far more from a discrete GPU upgrade than from any CPU upgrade. The CPU's 89th percentile ranking and strong synthetic scores suggest it would pair well with a mid-range discrete GPU, but as configured, it is a high-performance processor driving an extremely low-performance graphics solution.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the only configuration that provides a consistently playable experience is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which averages 51 FPS. This is the only setting that achieves a 50+ FPS average, and it provides enough headroom to avoid noticeable stuttering. The Medium settings at 1080p, with an average of 39 FPS and a minimum of 33 FPS, are also playable and offer better visual quality, but the margin above 30 FPS is slim, and any demanding scene could push the frame rate below the playability threshold.

For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, 1080p High settings (32 FPS average) are technically playable but will feel less smooth, and 1080p Ultra (23 FPS) should be avoided entirely. At 1440p, only Low settings (38 FPS) approach playability, and Medium settings (29 FPS average, 24 FPS minimum) will produce noticeable stuttering. At 4K, all settings are unplayable, with the best result being 25 FPS at Low settings, which is still below the minimum for a smooth experience.

The data suggests that the optimal configuration is 1080p Medium, as it provides the best balance between visual fidelity and frame rate stability. The 33 FPS minimum ensures that the frame rate never drops below the 30 FPS threshold, while the 39 FPS average offers acceptable smoothness. The 1080p Low setting, while faster, sacrifices significant visual quality for a 31% FPS improvement (51 vs 39), which is not worth the visual downgrade for most players. The recommendation is clear: play at 1080p, use Medium settings, and accept that this system is not capable of delivering high refresh rates or high resolutions in Red Dead Redemption 2.