Road 96

Road 96 is an adventure title, and the benchmark data for this Intel Core i7-14700F + Intel Arc B370 combination reveals a system that is severely constrained by its graphics component, with the CPU providing more than enough headroom for the game’s demands. The measured frame rates show a clear pattern: the Arc B370 is the limiting factor at every resolution and settings level, while the i7-14700F’s 20 cores and 28 threads ensure that processing power is never the bottleneck. The data indicates that this combo is best suited for low-resolution, low-settings play, as any attempt to push visual fidelity results in a dramatic and often unplayable drop in performance.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core i7-14700F is a desktop processor from the Core 14th Gen series, built on Intel’s Raptor Lake architecture with a 10 nm process node. It features 20 cores and 28 threads, a base clock of 2.10 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. This configuration is massive overkill for Road 96, an adventure game that does not rely heavily on multi-threaded processing. The CPU’s benchmark scores reinforce this assessment, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 35122 and a single-core score of 4958. Its PassMark multithread score is 41317, and its Geekbench multicore score is 19620. The processor sits in the 91st percentile versus all CPUs, indicating it is a very powerful part.

In the context of Road 96, the CPU’s role is almost passive. The game’s performance is not dictated by the processor’s capabilities, as evidenced by the fact that even at the lowest settings and resolution, the frame rates are still limited by the GPU. The i7-14700F’s high single-thread performance, shown by its Cinebench R15 single-core score of 499 and PassMark single-thread score of 4257, is more than sufficient for the game’s logic and scene management. The processor’s 33 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache provide ample bandwidth for the game’s data, but none of this is being stressed. The data suggests that the CPU is idling relative to its potential, with the Arc B370 being the sole contributor to the low frame rates.

The nearest rivals for the i7-14700F in terms of average benchmark score include the Intel Xeon 6505P with a deltaPct of -0.2%, the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 at 0.3%, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X at 0.6%, and the AMD EPYC 7313P at 0.8%. These deltas are minimal, meaning the i7-14700F performs essentially on par with these other high-end chips. However, none of that matters for Road 96, because the game is not CPU-bound. The benchmark results show that even a much weaker CPU would likely produce identical frame rates in this title, as the Arc B370’s 5th percentile ranking (versus all GPUs) is the hard ceiling. The CPU’s 65 W TDP and support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory are irrelevant to the observed performance, since the bottleneck is entirely on the graphics side.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B370 is the clear performance bottleneck in this pairing. This GPU is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process node. It has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. Its memory is listed as "System Shared," with no dedicated VRAM, meaning it relies on the system’s main memory. The GPU’s specifications are modest: 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 render output units, and 10 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS, and the TDP is just 25 W. This is not a part designed for demanding gaming, and the benchmark data confirms this.

The Arc B370’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile versus all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 with a deltaPct of -0.2%, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 at -0.5%, the AMD Radeon HD 7650M at -0.7%, and the AMD FirePro M2000 at 1.4%. These are all older or low-end parts, and the Arc B370 is essentially in their performance class. For Road 96, this means the GPU is completely overwhelmed at higher settings and resolutions. The system-shared memory is a particular handicap, as it lacks the bandwidth of dedicated VRAM, which is critical for texture-heavy scenes.

The GPU’s low compute throughput is directly reflected in the measured FPS. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo averages 85 FPS, which is playable. However, moving to High settings at 1080p drops the average to 50 FPS, and Ultra settings yield only 39 FPS. The pattern worsens at higher resolutions. The Arc B370’s lack of dedicated VRAM means that as resolution increases, the pressure on system memory grows, leading to severe frame rate degradation. The boost clock of 2400 MHz is not enough to compensate for the low shader count and memory bandwidth. The data shows that this GPU is only viable for esports-level or very low-fidelity gaming, and Road 96 at anything beyond Low settings is a stretch.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The resolution scaling in the measured data is stark and tells a clear story of a GPU-bound system. At 1080p Low settings, the average FPS is 85. Dropping to 1440p Low reduces that to 54 FPS, a 36% decrease. At 4K Low, the average falls to 29 FPS, which is a 66% drop from the 1080p baseline. This dramatic decline indicates that the Arc B370 is running out of memory bandwidth and pixel throughput as the pixel count increases. The trend is consistent across all settings. For Medium settings, 1080p averages 62 FPS, 1440p averages 40 FPS, and 4K averages 21 FPS. The 4K Medium result also has a minimum FPS of 18, showing the GPU is hitting hard limits.

At High settings, the scaling is similar: 1080p yields 50 FPS, 1440p yields 32 FPS, and 4K yields 17 FPS. The 4K High result is essentially unplayable. For Ultra settings, the numbers are 39 FPS at 1080p, 25 FPS at 1440p, and 13 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1080p and 4K widens as settings increase, which is a classic sign of a GPU that cannot handle the fill rate demands. The CPU is not the limiting factor here because the i7-14700F’s performance is constant regardless of resolution; the frame rate drops are entirely attributable to the GPU’s inability to process more pixels.

This scaling pattern confirms that the Arc B370 is the bottleneck. If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see similar FPS at all resolutions, as the CPU work does not change with resolution. Instead, the FPS halves or worse when moving from 1080p to 4K, which is a clear GPU limitation. The system-shared memory is likely a major contributor, as the bandwidth available for the GPU is system-dependent and far below what a dedicated graphics card would offer. For players seeking to use this combo, the data suggests that 1080p is the maximum viable resolution, and even then, only Low or Medium settings are recommended for a smooth experience.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The Intel Core i7-14700F + Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 2680 out of 2903 tested combos for Road 96. This places it in the bottom 8% of all systems tested for this game. The rank is a direct consequence of the GPU’s weak performance, as the CPU is a high-end part that would rank much higher on its own. The i7-14700F is in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, but the Arc B370 is in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The combination’s overall rank is dragged down by the graphics component, which is the primary determinant of frame rates in this title.

This low ranking means that most other tested systems, even those with older CPUs, will outperform this combo in Road 96. The data shows that the combo’s performance is comparable to systems using GPUs like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 or AMD Radeon HD 7650M, which are over a decade old. The i7-14700F’s power is wasted in this configuration, as it can never be fully utilized. The combo rank of 2680 out of 2903 is a clear verdict: this is not a viable gaming setup for Road 96 beyond the most basic settings.

The rank also highlights a mismatch in component tiers. Pairing a top-tier CPU with an entry-level integrated GPU results in a system that is no better than a budget laptop from years ago. The benchmark results indicate that the combo’s average FPS across all tested configurations is heavily weighted toward the low end, with only the 1080p Low setting achieving a playable frame rate. For context, the combo rank is not a measure of stability or quality, but simply where it falls in the distribution of all tested combos. Being at 2680 out of 2903 means that over 92% of other systems tested for Road 96 delivered better performance.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the combo’s performance across three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the lowest resolution tested, the results are as follows. With Low settings, the average FPS is 85, which is the only configuration in the entire dataset that exceeds the standard 60 FPS threshold. Medium settings at 1080p produce an average of 62 FPS, with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS. High settings drop to an average of 50 FPS, and Ultra settings average 39 FPS. The 1080p results show a clear degradation as settings increase, but the framerates remain at least playable for a slow-paced adventure game at Low and Medium.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance declines significantly. Low settings average 54 FPS, which is a 36% drop from the 1080p Low result. Medium settings average 40 FPS, with a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS. High settings average 32 FPS, and Ultra settings average 25 FPS. None of these results are ideal for a smooth experience, and the minimum FPS values suggest potential stuttering. At 1440p, the combo is only suitable for Low settings, and even then, the frame rate is marginal.

At 3840x2160, the performance is largely unplayable. Low settings average 29 FPS, which is below the threshold for a playable experience. Medium settings average 21 FPS, with a minimum of 18 FPS and a maximum of 24 FPS. High settings average 17 FPS, and Ultra settings average 13 FPS. These numbers are far too low for any practical use. The data shows a consistent pattern: the Arc B370 cannot handle 4K resolution under any settings. The highest FPS at 4K is 29 (Low), which is still below 30 FPS, and the lowest is 13 (Ultra), which is a slideshow.

The min and max FPS values are only provided for Medium settings at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the range is 53 to 72 FPS, indicating some variance but generally stable performance. At 1440p Medium, the range is 34 to 46 FPS, showing a narrower but still fluctuating range. At 4K Medium, the range is 18 to 24 FPS, which is a tight band but at an unplayable level. The lack of min/max data for other settings suggests that the measurements were less variable, but the averages alone are sufficient to judge the performance.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the only setting that provides a consistently smooth experience is 1080p with Low settings, which averages 85 FPS. This is the recommended configuration for this combo. It offers a frame rate that is well above the 60 FPS target, ensuring responsive gameplay even during scenes with more action. The 1080p Medium setting, with an average of 62 FPS, is also viable, but it comes with a minimum FPS of 53, which could be noticeable in a game that relies on atmospheric storytelling. For players who prefer a higher visual quality, 1080p Medium is a reasonable compromise, but it is on the edge of the playable threshold.

At 1440p, the data suggests that only Low settings are acceptable, with an average of 54 FPS. This is below the 60 FPS ideal but may be tolerable for a slower-paced adventure game. However, the drop from 85 FPS at 1080p Low to 54 FPS at 1440p Low is significant, and the game will feel less fluid. The 1440p Medium setting (40 FPS) and High setting (32 FPS) are not recommended, as they fall below the 30-40 FPS range that is generally considered the minimum for playable frame rates. Ultra at 1440p (25 FPS) is unplayable.

For 4K resolution, there are no recommended settings. Even Low settings at 4K average only 29 FPS, which is below the standard playable threshold. The Medium, High, and Ultra settings at 4K (21, 17, and 13 FPS respectively) are all far too low. This resolution should be avoided entirely with this combo. The data indicates that the Arc B370 is not capable of rendering Road 96 at 4K with any degree of playability, regardless of settings.

The best overall experience, per the measured rows, is 1080p Low. This delivers the highest average FPS (85) and ensures the game runs smoothly. If visual fidelity is a priority, 1080p Medium is the highest setting that maintains an average above 60 FPS, but the minimum FPS of 53 suggests occasional dips. Players should avoid 1440p and 4K entirely, as the performance is not sufficient for a comfortable experience. The combo’s low rank (2680 out of 2903) confirms these limitations, and the settings recommendations reflect the reality that this system is only suitable for low-resolution, low-fidelity gaming.