Revolution Idle

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-14400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 lands at rank 2736 out of 2986 tested combinations in Revolution Idle. That places this combo in the bottom 8% of all tested systems, a striking position for a CPU that otherwise performs well in synthetic benchmarks. The CPU itself sits at the 83rd percentile against all processors, but the GPU tells a different story — the Intel Arc B370 rests at just the 5th percentile against all GPUs. This massive gap between CPU capability and GPU capability defines the entire performance profile of this system.

The data suggests a severe bottleneck. The CPU is a modern 10-core, 16-thread part with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, while the GPU is an integrated-class solution with system-shared memory. In a genre like idle gaming, where the workload is often light and background-oriented, one might expect the CPU to carry the experience. However, the benchmark results indicate otherwise: this combo ranks near the bottom, meaning the GPU's limitations are likely preventing the system from achieving playable frame rates even at lower resolutions.

When compared to other tested combos, this pairing sits in the bottom decile. The nearest CPU rivals — the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, Intel Core i9-11900, AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS, and Intel Core i7-12800H — all have similar average CPU scores (within 0.5% of the i5-14400F), yet the overall combo ranking remains low. This reinforces the conclusion that the GPU is the limiting factor, not the processor. The Arc B370's nearest GPU rivals are all legacy parts like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M, which is telling.

---

FAQ

Q: Is this combo better suited for CPU-heavy tasks or gaming?

A: The CPU benchmarks are strong — the i5-14400F scores 21,645 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3,055 in single-core — but the gaming results are poor. Revolution Idle runs at 13 FPS on 4K High settings. The data suggests this combo is far more capable in productivity workloads than in gaming.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals?

A: The i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32,279. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, scores 32,233 (0.1% slower), while the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS scores 32,354 (0.2% faster). The Intel Core i9-11900 is 0.2% faster, and the Intel Core i7-12800H is 0.5% slower. These are all within a hair of each other.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile, and why does it matter?

A: The Intel Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile against all GPUs, which is extremely low. It scores 1,184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This means the GPU is among the weakest tested, and it directly impacts gaming performance in Revolution Idle.

Q: Can this system handle 1080p gaming in Revolution Idle?

A: Yes, but only at lower settings. At 1080p Low, it achieves 56 FPS average. At 1080p Medium, it drops to 43 FPS. At 1080p High, it reaches 41 FPS. Ultra settings bring it down to 26 FPS, which is borderline playable.

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

A: The Arc B370 scores 1,184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1,186 (0.2% faster), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190 (0.5% faster), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192 (0.7% faster), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1,168 (1.4% slower). All are within a narrow band.

Q: What does the combo's rank of 2736 out of 2986 indicate?

A: It indicates that this system is in the bottom 8% of all tested combinations for Revolution Idle. Despite the capable CPU, the GPU's low percentile drags the entire combo down, making it a poor choice for this game at higher settings or resolutions.

---

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drops from 1080p to 4K are severe and reveal a system that is heavily GPU-limited. Starting at 1080p High, the combo averages 41 FPS. Moving to 1440p High, it drops to 26 FPS — a 37% reduction. At 4K High, it falls to 13 FPS, which is a 68% reduction from 1080p. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU that cannot keep up with pixel throughput demands.

At Low settings, the pattern is similar but with slightly higher absolute numbers. 1080p Low yields 56 FPS, 1440p Low yields 36 FPS (a 36% drop), and 4K Low yields 19 FPS (a 66% drop from 1080p). The consistency of these percentage drops across settings suggests that the GPU's raw fill rate is the limiting factor, not any particular setting or feature.

The Medium settings row provides the only min/max data in the pack. At 1080p Medium, the average is 43 FPS with a minimum of 36 and maximum of 49. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 27 FPS with a minimum of 23 and maximum of 31. At 4K Medium, the average is 14 FPS with a minimum of 12 and maximum of 16. The tight range between min and max FPS suggests the workload is consistent, with no sudden spikes or drops — typical of an idle game that runs a steady simulation loop.

The resolution scaling behavior implies that the CPU is not the bottleneck. If the CPU were limiting, we would expect similar FPS across resolutions, since the simulation workload would remain constant. Instead, FPS drops roughly proportionally with pixel count, which points squarely at the Arc B370's limited pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. These are very low figures for modern gaming, and the data reflects that.

---

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 56 FPS, which is the only configuration in the entire dataset that reaches a smooth 60 FPS territory. Medium settings average 43 FPS (min 36, max 49), High settings average 41 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 26 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 13 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is 15 FPS — suggesting that Ultra settings impose a heavy additional load.

At 2560x1440, performance becomes marginal. Low settings average 36 FPS, which is playable but not smooth. Medium settings average 27 FPS (min 23, max 31), High settings average 26 FPS, and Ultra settings drop to 16 FPS. The difference between Medium and High at this resolution is only 1 FPS, indicating that these two presets are similarly demanding on the GPU.

At 3840x2160, the combo is largely unsuitable for playable framerates. Low settings average 19 FPS, Medium settings average 14 FPS (min 12, max 16), High settings average 13 FPS, and Ultra settings average just 9 FPS. None of these configurations approach 30 FPS, let alone 60 FPS. The 4K results are consistently below the threshold for a comfortable gaming experience.

The data shows a clear pattern: each resolution step up roughly halves the frame rate at the same settings. From 1080p to 1440p, the FPS drops by roughly 35-40% across all settings. From 1440p to 4K, the FPS drops by another 45-50%. This is a geometric scaling that matches the pixel count increase (1080p has about 2.1 million pixels, 1440p about 3.7 million, 4K about 8.3 million).

---

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the only truly smooth experience is at 1080p Low, which averages 56 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches the standard 60 FPS target. If the player values consistency, 1080p Low is the clear choice. The 43 FPS average at 1080p Medium is playable, and the min FPS of 36 is still above the 30 FPS playability threshold, making it a reasonable alternative if visual quality is preferred over raw smoothness.

At 1440p, the choices are more constrained. Low settings at 36 FPS average is the best option, but it is still below the 60 FPS target. Medium at 27 FPS is borderline, and High at 26 FPS offers no meaningful improvement over Medium. Ultra at 16 FPS is not recommended. For players who insist on 1440p, Low settings are the only viable choice, and even then the experience will not be smooth by modern standards.

4K is effectively off the table. The best 4K result is 19 FPS at Low settings, which is below the 30 FPS minimum for playability. Medium at 14 FPS, High at 13 FPS, and Ultra at 9 FPS are all unplayable. The data strongly suggests that players should either drop to 1080p or accept that 4K is not feasible with this hardware in Revolution Idle.

The Medium settings row is the only one with min/max data, which allows for a stability check. At 1080p Medium, the range is 36 to 49 FPS, a 13 FPS spread. At 1440p Medium, the range is 23 to 31 FPS, an 8 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range is 12 to 16 FPS, a 4 FPS spread. This suggests that as resolution increases, the frame rate becomes more consistent, but at a much lower average level.

---

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a substantial amount of cache for a mid-range desktop part.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU performs admirably. It scores 21,645 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3,055 in single-core. Passmark results show 81,524 in integer math, 61,319 in floating-point math, and 31,5521 in data compression. These are strong numbers that place the CPU at the 83rd percentile against all processors. The average benchmark score of 32,279 is competitive with its nearest rivals, all of which are within 0.5% of this figure.

However, in Revolution Idle, the CPU's role appears to be secondary. The resolution scaling pattern — where FPS drops proportionally with pixel count — indicates that the CPU is not the limiting factor. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would remain constant across resolutions. Instead, the GPU's limitations dominate the performance picture. The CPU is likely more than capable of handling the simulation logic of an idle game, but it cannot compensate for the GPU's low fill rate.

The CPU's architecture supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and its dual-channel memory bus provides adequate bandwidth for most workloads. However, the GPU uses system-shared memory, which means the CPU and GPU compete for the same memory resources. This could exacerbate performance issues in memory-intensive scenarios, though the benchmark data does not directly measure this effect.

---

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The GPU features 1,280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its compute capabilities are rated at 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS for FP16.

The GPU's memory is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM. This means memory bandwidth is "System Dependent" and will vary based on the CPU's memory configuration. This is a significant limitation for gaming, as dedicated GPUs typically have much higher bandwidth available. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, both of which are low for modern gaming workloads.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the Arc B370 scores 1,184, placing it at the 5th percentile against all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all legacy parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1,186), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1,190), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1,192), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1,168). This places the Arc B370 in the same performance tier as GPUs from over a decade ago, which explains the poor gaming results.

The GPU's 25 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate it is designed for power efficiency rather than performance. This is typical of integrated solutions, but it means the Arc B370 is fundamentally unsuited for demanding gaming workloads. In Revolution Idle, the GPU's low fill rate and shared memory bandwidth result in sub-30 FPS performance at 1440p and above, and only marginal playability at 1080p Low. The data clearly shows that the GPU is the primary bottleneck in this combo, limiting the otherwise capable CPU from delivering a good gaming experience.