Rust

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600G paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT presents a peculiar case in Rust: a last-gen six-core CPU with an integrated GPU driving one of the fastest RDNA 2 graphics cards of its generation. The measured data reveals a combo that is heavily skewed by resolution, showing where the CPU holds the system back and where the GPU’s raw muscle takes over. This analysis breaks down the measured FPS across three resolutions and four settings presets, using only the provided benchmark results to explain what this pairing does in practice.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is steep but not uniform, and the pattern tells a clear story about the limiting component. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combo averages 155 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 137 FPS, a reduction of 18 FPS. At 4K Low, the average falls to 85 FPS, which is 70 FPS below the 1080p result. That is a 45% decrease from 1080p to 4K on Low, indicating that the GPU is increasingly the bottleneck as pixel count rises.

The same trend appears on Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the average is 133 FPS. At 1440p Medium, it drops to 97 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it falls to 57 FPS. The gap between 1440p and 4K here is 40 FPS, nearly double the gap between 1080p and 1440p (36 FPS). This accelerating decline at higher resolutions is classic GPU-bound behavior, where the RX 6800 XT’s compute and memory bandwidth are being saturated by the 4K pixel workload.

High settings show a similar curve. The 1080p High average is 119 FPS, 1440p High is 82 FPS, and 4K High is 48 FPS. The delta from 1080p to 1440p is 37 FPS, while the delta from 1440p to 4K is 34 FPS—a more linear decline than Medium. Ultra settings, however, are the most punishing: 90 FPS at 1080p, 62 FPS at 1440p, and just 37 FPS at 4K. The 4K Ultra result is the lowest in the entire dataset, and it sits 53 FPS below the 1080p Ultra figure.

What this scaling says about the limiting component is that the Ryzen 5 4600G is the primary constraint at 1080p, where the GPU has headroom to push beyond 150 FPS on Low, but the CPU’s six cores and 12 threads cannot feed the RX 6800 XT fast enough to sustain higher frame rates. At 4K, the situation reverses: the GPU becomes the clear limiter, as the FPS difference between Low (85 FPS) and Ultra (37 FPS) is 48 FPS, proving that the graphics card’s workload is the dominant factor. The data shows a system that is CPU-limited at low resolutions and GPU-limited at high resolutions, with the crossover point somewhere between 1440p and 4K depending on the preset.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the best experience per the data depends heavily on the target resolution, but there is a clear standout preset for each. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers 133 FPS average with a minimum of 113 FPS and a maximum of 153 FPS. This is the only preset at 1080p with min/max figures, and the 20 FPS spread between min and max suggests stable frame pacing. High at 1080p offers 119 FPS, which is only 14 FPS slower than Medium, but the lack of min/max data for High means we cannot verify its stability. Ultra at 1080p drops to 90 FPS, which is still playable but represents a 43 FPS penalty over Medium for marginal visual gains.

At 1440p, Medium again provides the most balanced row: 97 FPS average with a minimum of 82 FPS and a maximum of 111 FPS. Low at 1440p reaches 137 FPS, but that preset sacrifices too much visual quality in a survival game where spotting distant players matters. High at 1440p is 82 FPS, which is acceptable, but the 15 FPS gap between High and Medium is not worth the visual upgrade when Medium already holds a 82 FPS minimum. Ultra at 1440p is 62 FPS, which is borderline for a competitive title.

At 4K, the recommendation shifts to Low, which averages 85 FPS. Medium at 4K is 57 FPS with a minimum of 49 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold many players consider playable. High at 4K is 48 FPS, and Ultra is 37 FPS; both are too slow for a game where reaction time matters. For 4K, Low is the only preset that keeps the average above 60 FPS, and the data indicates that any higher preset will result in a sub-60 FPS experience.

The overall best experience per the measured rows is 1080p Medium, offering 133 FPS average with a guaranteed 113 FPS floor. If you insist on higher resolution, 1440p Medium is the next best option, with a 97 FPS average and an 82 FPS minimum. For 4K, accept Low settings or consider a different GPU pairing, as the RX 6800 XT cannot deliver playable frame rates on Medium or above at that resolution in Rust.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run Rust at 4K smoothly?

A: Only on Low settings, where it averages 85 FPS. Medium at 4K drops to 57 FPS, High to 48 FPS, and Ultra to 37 FPS, so any preset above Low will fall below 60 FPS.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck at 1080p?

A: The data suggests the Ryzen 5 4600G is the limiting factor at 1080p. On Low settings, the combo reaches 155 FPS, but the RX 6800 XT is capable of far higher frame rates in less CPU-bound titles, indicating the CPU cannot feed the GPU enough data to push beyond that level.

Q: What is the best setting for a 1440p monitor?

A: Medium is the strongest choice, with a 97 FPS average and an 82 FPS minimum. Low is faster at 137 FPS but sacrifices visual clarity, while High at 82 FPS and Ultra at 62 FPS are both slower than Medium’s average.

Q: How much FPS do I lose going from 1080p to 4K on the same settings?

A: On Low, the drop is 70 FPS (155 to 85). On Medium, the drop is 76 FPS (133 to 57). On High, the drop is 71 FPS (119 to 48). On Ultra, the drop is 53 FPS (90 to 37).

Q: Does the RX 6800 XT’s 16 GB VRAM help at 4K in Rust?

A: The 16 GB VRAM is present, but the measured FPS at 4K (85 FPS on Low, 57 FPS on Medium) shows that the GPU’s compute throughput, not memory capacity, is the limiting factor. The card is simply not fast enough for high presets at 4K in this game.

Q: Is this combo better for competitive play or high-fidelity gaming?

A: The data shows it is better suited for competitive play at 1080p, where Medium gives 133 FPS and Low gives 155 FPS. High-fidelity gaming at 4K is not viable, as even Medium only reaches 57 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Ryzen 5 4600G and the RX 6800 XT ranks 1287 out of 3723 tested combos in Rust. This places it in the 34.6th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning roughly one-third of combos tested are slower and two-thirds are faster. Given that the GPU alone sits in the 85th percentile among all GPUs and the CPU sits in the 71st percentile among all CPUs, the combo’s middle-of-the-pack rank is a direct consequence of the CPU’s relative weakness in Rust.

The rank reflects the CPU’s role as a bottleneck in this specific game. Rust is known for heavy single-thread and multi-thread CPU load, and the Ryzen 5 4600G’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 13593 and single-core score of 1919 are modest compared to higher-end options. The data shows that the RX 6800 XT is overqualified for this CPU at 1080p, where the FPS ceiling is 155 on Low. At 4K, the GPU becomes the limiter, but the rank is still dragged down by the fact that many other combos pair faster CPUs with similar or better GPUs.

Compared to the CPU’s nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 4600G has an average benchmark score of 17507, which is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE (17482) and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core 7 150U (17395). It is 0.6% behind the AMD Ryzen 3 8300GE (17614) and 0.8% behind the Intel Core i3-14100T (17648). These are all sub-1% differences, meaning the CPU’s performance is statistically similar to those four alternatives. The GPU’s nearest rivals show a wider spread: the RX 6800 XT’s average score of 48477 is 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A1000 Mobile (47743), but 2.5% behind the Intel Arc A550M (49737), 3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (49957), and 3% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (50001).

The combo rank of 1287 out of 3723 suggests that this pairing is not a top-tier setup for Rust, but it is far from the bottom. The data indicates that a user with this combo is getting a playable experience at 1080p and 1440p on Medium settings, but the rank would improve significantly with a stronger CPU that could better feed the RX 6800 XT at lower resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT is the dominant component in this combo, with a percentile rank of 85 among all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 48477. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is ample for Rust’s texture streaming at 1440p and 4K. The GPU’s boost clock of 2250 MHz and game clock of 2015 MHz are high for the RDNA 2 architecture, and its 4608 shading units deliver 20.74 TFLOPS of FP32 compute.

In Rust, the GPU’s role becomes clear when comparing the measured FPS across settings. At 1080p Low, the FPS is 155, but at 1080p Ultra, it is 90—a 65 FPS drop that is entirely attributable to the GPU’s rendering workload. The GPU’s 16 GB VRAM is not the limiting factor at any resolution, as the FPS differences between presets are driven by shading, texture filtering, and pixel output, not memory capacity. The card’s 128 ROPs and 288 TMUs handle the geometry and texturing tasks, but the 4K results (85 FPS on Low, 37 FPS on Ultra) show that the GPU’s raw compute is insufficient for high presets at that resolution.

The RX 6800 XT’s 300 W TDP and 700 W suggested PSU are not reflected in the FPS data, but they are relevant context for a builder considering this combo. The GPU’s PCIe 4.0 x16 interface is underutilized by the Ryzen 5 4600G, which only supports PCIe Gen 3, but the measured FPS does not indicate any bandwidth-related penalties. The GPU’s performance in Rust is consistent with its overall benchmark score, which places it 1.5% ahead of the RTX A1000 Mobile but 3% behind the RTX 5070 Ti and RX Vega 64.

The GPU’s role in this combo is to provide headroom at 1080p and 1440p, where the CPU is the bottleneck, and to become the limiting factor at 4K. The data shows that the GPU is not the weak link until you reach 4K High or Ultra, where it falls below 60 FPS. At 1080p and 1440p, the GPU has more than enough power to drive Rust at high frame rates, but the CPU’s six cores hold the system back from reaching the GPU’s full potential.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra), with averages for all rows and min/max figures only for the Medium preset at each resolution.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves 155 FPS average. Medium at 1080p averages 133 FPS, with a minimum of 113 FPS and a maximum of 153 FPS. High averages 119 FPS, and Ultra averages 90 FPS. The Medium row is the only one with full data, showing a 40 FPS range between min and max, which indicates some frame time variance but no catastrophic drops.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 137 FPS. Medium averages 97 FPS, with a minimum of 82 FPS and a maximum of 111 FPS—a 29 FPS range. High averages 82 FPS, and Ultra averages 62 FPS. The step from Low to Medium at 1440p is a 40 FPS drop, while the step from Medium to High is 15 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 20 FPS.

At 3840x2160, Low averages 85 FPS. Medium averages 57 FPS, with a minimum of 49 FPS and a maximum of 66 FPS—a 17 FPS range. High averages 48 FPS, and Ultra averages 37 FPS. The 4K Medium minimum of 49 FPS is below 60, confirming that 4K Medium is not a smooth experience. The 4K Ultra average of 37 FPS is the lowest measured value in the entire dataset.

Cross-referencing the Medium preset across resolutions, the FPS drops from 133 at 1080p to 97 at 1440p (a 27% decrease) and then to 57 at 4K (a 41% decrease from 1440p). The min FPS follows a similar path: 113 at 1080p, 82 at 1440p, and 49 at 4K. The max FPS drops from 153 to 111 to 66 across the same resolutions. These figures show that the Medium preset is playable at 1080p and 1440p, but not at 4K.

For the Low preset, the FPS drops from 155 at 1080p to 137 at 1440p (an 18 FPS loss) and then to 85 at 4K (a 52 FPS loss). The 4K Low result is the only 4K preset that stays above 60 FPS. High preset drops from 119 at 1080p to 82 at 1440p (37 FPS loss) and then to 48 at 4K (34 FPS loss). Ultra preset drops from 90 at 1080p to 62 at 1440p (28 FPS loss) and then to 37 at 4K (25 FPS loss).

The data reveals that the gap between Low and Ultra widens as resolution increases: at 1080p, the difference is 65 FPS (155 vs 90), at 1440p it is 75 FPS (137 vs 62), and at 4K it is 48 FPS (85 vs 37). This non-linear scaling indicates that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily loaded that even dropping from Ultra to Low only recovers 48 FPS, whereas at 1080p, the same preset change recovers 65 FPS because the CPU is the limiting factor at Low.