Road 96

The Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B570 pairing delivers a playable experience in Road 96, but the data shows that settings management is critical to maintaining smooth frame rates, particularly at higher resolutions. The measured rows indicate that the Medium preset offers the best balance of visual fidelity and performance, providing a consistent frame rate without the steep performance penalty associated with Ultra settings. At 1920x1080, Medium yields an average of 106 FPS, which is a substantial improvement over the 67 FPS average seen at Ultra. This 39 FPS difference highlights that the Ultra preset demands significantly more from the hardware, while the jump from Low to Medium is a more modest 39 FPS increase from 145 FPS, suggesting that Medium captures most of the visual uplift without sacrificing the fluidity of the experience. As resolution increases, the importance of this choice becomes more pronounced, making Medium the recommended starting point for this combination.

Settings Recommendations

The benchmark data for Road 96 with this hardware configuration clearly indicates that the Medium settings preset provides the most favorable experience across all tested resolutions. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset achieves an average of 106 FPS, with a minimum of 90 FPS and a maximum of 122 FPS, demonstrating a stable frame time distribution that avoids severe dips. This is contrasted sharply with the Ultra preset, which drops to an average of 67 FPS at the same resolution, a reduction of 39 FPS that introduces noticeable stutter in a narrative-driven adventure title where smooth camera pans are essential. The High preset sits between these extremes at 85 FPS, but it still trails Medium by 21 FPS, indicating that the extra graphical fidelity offered by High does not translate into a proportionally better experience when frame rate stability is considered.

Moving to 2560x1440, the pattern persists. Medium maintains an average of 67 FPS, with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 78 FPS, which remains comfortably within the range of smooth gameplay. High at this resolution drops to 54 FPS, and Ultra falls to 43 FPS, both of which are increasingly likely to introduce perceptible lag during fast scene transitions. At 3840x2160, the Medium preset averages 36 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS, which is borderline playable but shows the limits of this combination. The Low preset at 4K achieves 49 FPS, which is higher than Medium but sacrifices too much visual detail for a game that relies on atmospheric storytelling. The data suggests that for users prioritizing a consistent frame rate, Medium is the optimal choice, as it delivers the highest average FPS with recorded minimums that prevent the experience from becoming choppy.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B570’s specifications play a decisive role in the measured performance, particularly its 10 GB of GDDR6 memory and 160-bit memory bus, which provide a bandwidth of 380.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is sufficient for the texture loads typical of an adventure game like Road 96, but the data shows that the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions and settings. The GPU’s base and boost clock are both 2500 MHz, and it operates with 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 80 render output units. These specifications translate into a pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s, which are adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming but struggle to maintain high frame rates at 4K with demanding presets.

The benchmark results for the Arc B570 show it ranks in the 65th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20556. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, which scores 20534 with a delta of 0.1%, and the Intel Arc A750, which scores 20582 with a delta of -0.1%. This places the B570 in a competitive position, but the measured FPS data reveals that its performance in Road 96 is heavily influenced by the settings preset. The drop from 145 FPS at 1080p Low to 23 FPS at 4K Ultra represents a 122 FPS swing, which is a clear indication that the GPU’s compute resources, while capable at lower loads, are overwhelmed by the combination of high resolution and maximum graphical features. The 19,600 million transistors on a 5 nm process node from TSMC, with a die size of 272 mm², provide the raw hardware, but the data suggests that the 10 GB frame buffer is not the limiting factor; rather, it is the shader and texture throughput that caps performance at higher settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400, with its 6 cores and 6 threads, presents a contrasting bottleneck profile in this pairing. Its base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.10 GHz, combined with a 9 MB shared L3 cache, provide adequate single-threaded performance for Road 96, which is not a heavily threaded title. The CPU’s benchmark scores, such as 6629 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 935 in single-core, place it in the 47th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 2254. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 with a delta of -0.2% and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 with a delta of 0.4%, indicating that the i5-9400 is a mid-pack performer.

In the context of the measured FPS, the CPU’s role becomes evident at 1080p Low settings, where the GPU is not fully taxed, and the frame rate reaches 145 FPS. This high frame rate suggests that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with enough draw calls to sustain a high level of performance. However, as the resolution increases to 1440p and 4K, the frame rates drop significantly, indicating that the GPU becomes the limiting factor, not the CPU. The CPU’s 65 W TDP and dual-channel DDR4 memory support with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s are sufficient for this game, but the data does not show any scenario where the CPU causes a frame rate collapse independent of the GPU. The fact that the 4K Ultra preset averages only 23 FPS, while the CPU is likely idle, confirms that this pairing is GPU-limited in the most demanding scenarios.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-9400 and Intel Arc B570 ranks 2324 out of 2903 tested combos in Road 96, placing it in the lower half of the database. This ranking is reflective of the measured FPS data, which shows that while the combo can achieve high frame rates at lower settings, it falls behind other pairings when pushed to higher resolutions. The rank of 2324 out of 2903 means that approximately 80% of tested combinations perform better in this game, which is a significant finding for users expecting high-end performance from this hardware. The data indicates that this combo is better suited for 1080p gaming, where it can leverage its strengths, rather than for 4K or even high-refresh-rate 1440p gaming.

The ranking is consistent with the GPU’s position in the 65th percentile and the CPU’s 47th percentile, suggesting that neither component is top-tier, and their combined performance reflects their individual mid-range standings. The measured results show that at 1080p Medium, the combo achieves 106 FPS, which is a solid result, but at 4K Medium, it drops to 36 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. This variance in performance across resolutions is a key factor in its low ranking, as other combos with more balanced hardware can maintain higher frame rates at 1440p and 4K. The data suggests that users with this combo should focus on 1080p gaming to get the most out of the hardware, as the ranking indicates it is not competitive at higher resolutions.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data shows a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 145 FPS, which drops to 92 FPS at 2560x1440 and further to 49 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 96 FPS drop from 1080p to 4K, or a 66% reduction in frame rate. The Medium preset shows a similar trend, with 106 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p, and 36 FPS at 4K, a 70 FPS drop. The High preset follows with 85 FPS at 1080p, 54 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K, and the Ultra preset drops from 67 FPS at 1080p to 43 FPS at 1440p and 23 FPS at 4K.

This scaling behavior indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component, as the frame rate drops are proportional to the increase in pixel count. The transition from 1080p to 1440p results in a roughly 35-40% performance loss across all settings, while the transition from 1440p to 4K results in a further 45-50% loss. This is consistent with a GPU that has a finite pixel throughput, and the data shows that the CPU is not a limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the frame rate drops are not accompanied by any CPU-related stutter. The 4K results, particularly the 23 FPS average at Ultra, confirm that this combo is not designed for 4K gaming, and the resolution scaling analysis suggests that 1440p is the practical ceiling for this hardware, with 1080p being the sweet spot for high frame rates.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured FPS values are as follows: Low settings average 145 FPS, Medium settings average 106 FPS with a minimum of 90 FPS and a maximum of 122 FPS, High settings average 85 FPS, and Ultra settings average 67 FPS. The 39 FPS gap between Low and Medium is notable, but the 21 FPS gap between Medium and High is smaller, and the 18 FPS gap between High and Ultra is the smallest of the transitions. This suggests that the visual difference between High and Ultra is not worth the performance cost, while the jump from Low to Medium provides the most significant improvement in visual quality per frame lost.

At 2560x1440, the data shows Low averaging 92 FPS, Medium averaging 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 FPS and a maximum of 78 FPS, High averaging 54 FPS, and Ultra averaging 43 FPS. The minimum FPS of 57 FPS at Medium is within the range of smooth gameplay, but the 43 FPS at Ultra is approaching the lower limit of playability. At 3840x2160, the results are more constrained: Low averages 49 FPS, Medium averages 36 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 41 FPS, High averages 29 FPS, and Ultra averages 23 FPS. The 4K Medium result, with a minimum of 30 FPS, is technically playable but leaves little headroom, and the 4K Ultra result of 23 FPS is not recommended for a smooth experience. The lack of recorded minimums for Low, High, and Ultra settings at 1080p and 1440p suggests that the frame times were consistent, but the available data for Medium settings shows a spread of 32 FPS at 1080p, 21 FPS at 1440p, and 11 FPS at 4K, indicating that frame pacing becomes more stable as resolution increases.

FAQ

Q: What is the best settings preset for this hardware in Road 96?

A: The Medium preset is recommended, as it provides the highest average FPS with recorded minimums that prevent stuttering. At 1080p, it averages 106 FPS with a minimum of 90 FPS, while at 1440p it averages 67 FPS with a minimum of 57 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B570 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc B570 has an average benchmark score of 20556, which is 0.1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20534) and 0.1% lower than the Intel Arc A750 (20582). This places it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs.

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

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 145 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 23 FPS, showing a 122 FPS decrease that is proportional to the pixel count increase, while the CPU’s performance remains adequate.

Q: What is the maximum resolution this combo can handle smoothly?

A: The combo can handle 1440p with Medium settings, averaging 67 FPS. At 4K, the Medium preset drops to 36 FPS with a minimum of 30 FPS, which is borderline, while 4K Ultra is not recommended at 23 FPS.

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

A: The combo ranks 2324 out of 2903 tested combos in Road 96, placing it in the lower 20% of all configurations. This reflects its mid-range CPU and GPU performance.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide a significant visual improvement over High?

A: The performance data shows a 18 FPS drop from High to Ultra at 1080p (85 to 67 FPS), and a similar 11 FPS drop at 1440p (54 to 43 FPS). This suggests the visual gains are not justified by the frame rate loss.