Revolution Idle

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X + Intel Arc B390 combo rank in Revolution Idle?

A: This combination ranks 2629 out of 2986 tested combos for this game, placing it in the bottom 12% of all configurations. The low ranking is driven primarily by the Intel Arc B390, which sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo achieves in Revolution Idle?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 62, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 39 FPS, and 3840x2160 Low yields 21 FPS.

Q: Does the Intel Arc B390 have dedicated VRAM?

A: No. The GPU uses System Shared memory, with a System Shared memory type and bus width. Memory bandwidth is listed as System Dependent, meaning performance scales with the host platform's memory subsystem rather than a dedicated VRAM pool.

Q: How does the Arc B390's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. It is 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).

Q: What is the CPU's multithreaded performance relative to its rivals?

A: The Ryzen 9 7900X has an average benchmark score of 53288. It sits 0.2% above the AMD EPYC 7313P (53206), 0.6% above the Intel Xeon 634 (52974), 0.3% below the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 (53469), and 0.6% below the Intel Core i7-14700F (53620). Its overall percentile is 91 among all CPUs.

Q: What is the difference between the best and worst measured FPS in this data?

A: The spread is 53 FPS. The best result is 62 FPS at 1080p Low, while the worst is 9 FPS at 4K Ultra. That is an 85% drop in average frame rate from the fastest to the slowest configuration tested.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the clear bottleneck in this configuration for Revolution Idle. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1482 places it at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all legacy NVIDIA parts from the GT 500/600/700 and 800M families. This is not a GPU designed for modern gaming workloads, and the measured frame rates reflect that.

The GPU's clock behavior is unusual for a discrete component. The base clock is 300 MHz, which is extremely low, but the boost clock reaches 2500 MHz. That boost figure is respectable, but the hardware cannot sustain meaningful performance in this idle game. The shading unit count is 1536, with 48 texture mapping units and 24 render output units. The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, but those theoretical figures do not translate into playable frame rates.

Memory configuration is the most significant limitation. The Arc B390 uses System Shared memory, meaning it borrows from the Ryzen 9 7900X's DDR5 pool rather than having its own VRAM. The memory bus width is also System Shared, and bandwidth is System Dependent. In an idle game like Revolution Idle, where the scene complexity can spike with large numbers of on-screen elements, shared memory introduces latency and bandwidth contention that a dedicated VRAM buffer would avoid. The system memory bandwidth of the Ryzen 9 7900X is 83.2 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 bus, but that is shared with the CPU's own workloads.

The GPU's power envelope is a low 80 W TDP with no power connectors, and it is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) in terms of slot width and bus interface. The architecture is Xe3-LPG on Intel's 3 nm process, built on the Panther Lake chip. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but API support is irrelevant when raw throughput is this constrained. The 12 ray tracing cores and 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute are present on paper, but the benchmark data shows the GPU delivering only 9-62 FPS depending on settings and resolution.

The deltaPct values against its nearest rivals are tight — within 2.7% — which means the Arc B390 is effectively in a class with decade-old entry-level parts. For Revolution Idle, which is not graphically demanding, this GPU still fails to deliver smooth frame rates at higher settings. The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at every resolution tested, as the CPU has ample headroom (91st percentile) to feed far more capable graphics hardware.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo averages 62 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 39 FPS, a 37% reduction. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 21 FPS, which is 66% below the 1080p result. This scaling pattern is consistent with a GPU that is severely bandwidth and fill-rate limited.

The High settings curve tells a similar story. At 1080p High, the average is 45 FPS. At 1440p High, it drops to 28 FPS (38% lower). At 4K High, it plunges to 15 FPS (67% lower than 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops — roughly 37-38% from 1080p to 1440p, and another 46-50% from 1440p to 4K — suggests the bottleneck is pixel throughput rather than scene complexity. The GPU's 24 ROPs and 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate are simply insufficient for 4K workloads.

Medium settings show the same trend with slightly better absolute numbers: 47 FPS at 1080p, 30 FPS at 1440p, and 16 FPS at 4K. The Medium preset also includes the only min/max data in the entire dataset. At 1080p Medium, the range is 40-54 FPS. At 1440p Medium, it narrows to 25-34 FPS. At 4K Medium, it is 13-18 FPS. The narrowing range at higher resolutions indicates the GPU is hitting consistent hardware limits rather than experiencing occasional spikes or stutters.

Ultra settings are nearly unplayable at any resolution. The 1080p Ultra average is 29 FPS, which is already below the 30 FPS threshold commonly considered the minimum for acceptable motion. At 1440p Ultra, the average drops to 18 FPS, and at 4K Ultra, it bottoms out at 9 FPS. The step from High to Ultra at each resolution costs roughly 35-40% of the frame rate, which is a heavy penalty for what is likely marginal visual improvement in an idle game.

The resolution scaling data indicates that the limiting component is unambiguously the GPU. A CPU-bound scenario would show smaller frame rate drops when resolution increases, because the CPU workload would remain roughly constant. Here, the 1080p-to-4K drop exceeds 66% at every settings level, which is classic GPU-bound behavior. The Ryzen 9 7900X, with its 12 cores and 24 threads, is not the constraint.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the only configuration that achieves a consistently playable experience is 1920x1080 with Low settings, which averages 62 FPS. This is the only data point above 60 FPS, and it is the recommended starting point for anyone prioritizing smooth frame rates. The 1080p Medium preset averages 47 FPS, which is acceptable for an idle game where twitch reflexes are not required, but it is a 24% reduction from Low.

At 1440p, the best option is Low settings at 39 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p drops to 30 FPS, and High falls to 28 FPS. None of these reach the 60 FPS target, but for an idle game, 30-40 FPS may be tolerable if the player prefers higher resolution. The data shows that dropping from High to Low at 1440p gains 11 FPS (from 28 to 39), which is a significant improvement for a single settings tier change.

At 4K, no preset delivers a playable frame rate. The best 4K result is Low at 21 FPS, followed by Medium at 16 FPS, High at 15 FPS, and Ultra at 9 FPS. Even the lowest settings at 4K are below 30 FPS, so players with 4K displays should either lower the resolution or accept a slideshow-like experience.

The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution. The 1080p Ultra average of 29 FPS is worse than the 1440p Low average of 39 FPS, meaning players can achieve higher frame rates at a higher resolution by dropping from Ultra to Low. The settings scaling is not linear — the jump from High to Ultra costs more performance than the jump from Medium to High at every resolution.

For the best experience per the measured data, the recommendation is 1080p Low if frame rate is the priority, or 1440p Low if resolution matters more and the player can tolerate 39 FPS. The Medium preset at 1080p (47 FPS) is a reasonable middle ground, as it provides the only min/max data showing a stable 40-54 FPS range. Avoid Ultra entirely, as it offers the worst performance-to-settings tradeoff in every resolution tier.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The full dataset comprises 12 measured configurations: 4 settings levels across 3 resolutions. The best overall result is 1920x1080 Low at 62 FPS average. The worst is 3840x2160 Ultra at 9 FPS average. The median average FPS across all configurations is 27.5 FPS.

1920x1080:

• Low: 62 FPS average
• Medium: 47 FPS average (min 40, max 54)
• High: 45 FPS average
• Ultra: 29 FPS average

At 1080p, the spread from Low to Ultra is 33 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 15 FPS, between Medium and High is 2 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 16 FPS. The data shows that High offers almost no benefit over Medium (2 FPS difference) but costs 15 FPS compared to Low. The Medium preset's min/max range of 40-54 FPS indicates reasonable frame pacing without severe drops.

2560x1440:

• Low: 39 FPS average
• Medium: 30 FPS average (min 25, max 34)
• High: 28 FPS average
• Ultra: 18 FPS average

At 1440p, the spread is 21 FPS. The step from Low to Medium costs 9 FPS, Medium to High costs 2 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 10 FPS. The Medium preset's range of 25-34 FPS shows tighter variance than the 1080p Medium result, suggesting the GPU is consistently near its limit rather than occasionally boosting. The 1440p Low result of 39 FPS is the second-best measured value in the entire dataset.

3840x2160:

• Low: 21 FPS average
• Medium: 16 FPS average (min 13, max 18)
• High: 15 FPS average
• Ultra: 9 FPS average

At 4K, the spread is 12 FPS. Low to Medium costs 5 FPS, Medium to High costs 1 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 6 FPS. The Medium range of 13-18 FPS shows that even the best-case frame times are below 20 FPS. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with the best average (21 FPS) still below the worst 1080p result (29 FPS Ultra).

The data reveals a consistent pattern: the gap between Medium and High is negligible (1-2 FPS) at every resolution, while the gaps between Low and Medium and between High and Ultra are substantial (5-16 FPS). This suggests that the High preset is poorly optimized relative to Medium, and that Ultra demands disproportionate GPU resources for its visual return.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor from the 7000 series, built on Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename. It uses a 5 nm process from TSMC, with 13,140 million transistors across a 2x 71 mm² die. The base clock is 4.70 GHz with a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The TDP is 170 W, and it fits the AMD Socket AM5 platform.

In terms of compute benchmarks, the 7900X is a strong performer. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 29300, and the single-core score is 2016.5. Geekbench results show 19267 multicore and 2617 single-core. PassMark multithread score is 51406, with a single-thread score of 4238. The 3DMark tests show scaling from 1093 (single-thread) to 12536 (max threads), with intermediate results of 2137 (2 threads), 4151 (4 threads), 7798 (8 threads), and 10972 (16 threads).

The CPU's cache hierarchy is substantial: 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC memory is supported. PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes is available for expansion. The integrated Radeon Graphics provides a fallback display output, though it is not used in this configuration.

For Revolution Idle, the CPU is not the limiting factor. The game is an idle genre title, which typically involves periodic calculations rather than continuous high-frequency updates. The 7900X's single-thread performance (4238 PassMark, 2617 Geekbench single-core) and multithreaded capability (51406 PassMark multithread) are far beyond what this game requires. The 91st percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms that this processor is in the top tier of available hardware.

The benchmark data supports this interpretation. The measured FPS scales almost entirely with resolution and settings, which are GPU-bound variables. If the CPU were the constraint, we would expect to see frame rates that are similar across resolutions, or at least that the 1080p results would be capped by CPU limits. Instead, the 1080p Low result of 62 FPS climbs from the 4K Ultra result of 9 FPS in a way that tracks GPU load almost perfectly.

The nearest rivals for the 7900X include the AMD EPYC 7313P (0.2% lower average score), Intel Xeon Phi 7290 (0.3% higher), Intel Xeon 634 (0.6% lower), and Intel Core i7-14700F (0.6% higher). These deltas are all within 1%, indicating that the 7900X is competitively positioned among high-end processors. In the context of this game, however, the CPU's headroom is effectively wasted because the Arc B390 cannot translate that compute capability into frame rate.

The CPU's 12 cores and 24 threads are ample for Revolution Idle's workload, and the high boost clock of 5.60 GHz ensures that single-threaded game logic runs with minimal latency. The data suggests that pairing this CPU with a more capable GPU would yield dramatically better results in this game, but within the measured configuration, the 7900X's role is to provide a stable platform that never becomes the bottleneck.