Rust

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces a very specific set of results in Rust, and the data shows a combination that is heavily constrained by the graphics processor. With a combo rank of 2710 out of 2953 tested combinations, this pairing sits in the lower percentile of systems, indicating that it is not built for high-refresh-rate gaming in this title. The measured frames per second across all resolutions and settings confirm that while the CPU has sufficient computational power, the Intel Arc B370, which operates as an integrated graphics processor with system-shared memory, becomes the definitive bottleneck. This analysis will break down the measured performance, explain the role of each component, and provide practical settings recommendations based strictly on the data in the fact pack.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average FPS this combo can achieve in Rust?

A: The highest average FPS measured is 69, which occurs at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only configuration in the data that approaches a playable 60 FPS threshold, though it falls short of higher refresh rate targets.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to all other tested combinations in Rust?

A: The combo ranks 2710 out of 2953 tested combinations. This places it in the bottom portion of the ranking, indicating that the majority of other CPU and GPU pairings deliver higher performance in this game.

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

A: The data indicates the GPU is the primary limiting factor. The Intel Arc B370 has a percentile rank of 5 against all GPUs, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has a percentile rank of 77 against all CPUs. The GPU’s low benchmark score and the system-shared memory architecture heavily constrain frame rates.

Q: What is the difference in performance between Low and Ultra settings at 1920x1080?

A: At 1920x1080, the average FPS drops from 69 on Low settings to 30 on Ultra settings. This represents a significant 56.5% reduction in average frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does increasing resolution from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 improve or degrade performance?

A: Performance degrades substantially with higher resolution. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 69 at 1920x1080 to 28 at 3840x2160. This shows a clear scaling pattern where the GPU struggles more as pixel count increases.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F?

A: The launch MSRP is $170. This is the only pricing information available in the data, and no cost analysis is provided for the Intel Arc B370.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the defining component in this pairing, and not in a positive way. Its benchmark results are exceptionally low, with a percentile rank of just 5 against all GPUs. The only benchmark score available for this GPU is 1184 in the 3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 test. To contextualize this, the nearest rivals in the data include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which scores 1186, and the ATI Radeon HD 5770, which scores 1190. The Arc B370 is 0.2% behind the Mobility Radeon HD 5570 and 0.5% behind the HD 5770. These are legacy parts, and the comparison underscores how limited the Arc B370’s raw performance is.

The GPU’s architecture is Xe3-LPG, built on a 3 nm process by Intel, with a chip named Panther Lake. It has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation pipelines. The boost clock is 2400 MHz, while the base clock is 300 MHz. Critically, the memory is listed as "System Shared," meaning the GPU does not have its own dedicated video memory. The memory bus width and type are also "System Shared," and the bandwidth is "System Dependent." This architectural choice means the GPU relies on the system’s main memory, which introduces latency and bandwidth constraints that are particularly problematic for a game like Rust, which has large, dynamically changing worlds.

The GPU’s thermal design power is 25 W, and it has a slot width of "IGP," indicating it is an integrated graphics processor. It has 10 ray tracing cores, and its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, with a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS. Despite supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, the raw throughput is simply insufficient for demanding gaming workloads. In Rust, the measured FPS data shows that even at Low settings, the average frame rate only reaches 69 at 1920x1080. This is a strong indicator that the GPU is saturated at this point, and any increase in graphical quality or resolution leads to immediate and severe frame rate drops.

How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame for this specific pairing in Rust is 2710 out of 2953 tested combinations. This places it in the 91.8th percentile of the ranking, meaning it is worse than roughly 92% of all tested systems. This is a very low ranking, and it reflects the significant imbalance between the CPU and GPU. The CPU alone is a relatively capable part, but the GPU drags the entire system down to the bottom tier of performance.

To understand the CPU’s standalone capability, the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has an avgBenchmarkScore of 25005 and a percentile rank of 77 against all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are all within a narrow band: the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F scores 24964, which is 0.2% slower; the Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24935, which is 0.3% slower; and the Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911, which is 0.4% slower. On the other side, the AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25103, which is 0.4% faster. This shows that the 8400F is a solid mid-range processor, competing closely with other six and eight-core parts.

Conversely, the Intel Arc B370 has an avgBenchmarkScore of 1184 and a percentile rank of 5. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, which is 0.2% faster, and the AMD FirePro M2000, which is 1.4% slower. The GPU is performing at a level comparable to graphics cards from over a decade ago. The combination of a 77th percentile CPU with a 5th percentile GPU results in a system that is overwhelmingly GPU-bound in Rust. The data shows that the CPU has plenty of headroom, but the GPU cannot translate that into higher frame rates. The ranking of 2710 out of 2953 is a direct consequence of this severe bottleneck.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system’s limitations across different resolutions and settings. The data includes average FPS for all configurations, with minimum and maximum FPS only available for Medium settings at each resolution.

At 1920x1080, the performance is as follows: Low settings yield an average of 69 FPS, which is the highest average in the entire dataset. High settings drop to an average of 39 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 and a maximum of 53. Ultra settings reduce the average to 30 FPS. The step from Low to High is a 43.5% drop in average frame rate, while the step from High to Ultra is a 23.1% drop. This indicates that the GPU is highly sensitive to settings changes, even at the lowest resolution.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down further. Low settings average 48 FPS. High settings average 27 FPS. Medium settings average 32 FPS, with a minimum of 27 and a maximum of 37. Ultra settings average 20 FPS. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is from 69 to 48 FPS, a 30.4% reduction. The drop from 1080p Ultra to 1440p Ultra is from 30 to 20 FPS, a 33.3% reduction. This shows that the GPU’s performance is heavily impacted by the increase in pixel count, with every resolution step causing a significant loss in frame rate.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes largely unplayable. Low settings average 28 FPS. High settings average 16 FPS. Medium settings average 19 FPS, with a minimum of 16 and a maximum of 22. Ultra settings average 12 FPS. The data shows that even at the lowest settings, the system cannot maintain a consistent 30 FPS at 4K. The difference between 1440p Low and 4K Low is from 48 to 28 FPS, a 41.7% reduction. The difference between 1440p Ultra and 4K Ultra is from 20 to 12 FPS, a 40% reduction.

The Medium settings data points are the only ones with min and max FPS values. At 1920x1080 Medium, the range is 39 to 53, which is a 14 FPS spread. At 2560x1440 Medium, the range is 27 to 37, a 10 FPS spread. At 3840x2160 Medium, the range is 16 to 22, a 6 FPS spread. The narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is becoming more consistently saturated, leaving less variance in frame times. The overall data shows a system that is only suitable for 1080p gaming on Low settings, and even then, it is barely above the 60 FPS mark.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal configuration for this combo is clearly 1920x1080 with Low settings, which produces an average of 69 FPS. This is the only preset in the entire dataset that achieves an average frame rate above 60. For a game like Rust, where survival mechanics require responsiveness, this is the only viable option for a reasonably smooth experience. The data shows that dropping to this setting from High at the same resolution results in a 30 FPS improvement, which is substantial.

If a player has a 1440p monitor, the best choice is also Low settings, which averages 48 FPS. This is playable, but it is below the 60 FPS threshold. The data shows that Medium settings at this resolution drop to 32 FPS, and High drops to 27 FPS. The step from Low to Medium at 1440p is a 16 FPS loss, which is significant. Therefore, for 1440p, Low settings are the only reasonable choice, and even then, the experience will not be as smooth as at 1080p.

For 4K resolution, the data indicates that no settings preset is viable. The highest average FPS at this resolution is 28 on Low, which is below the threshold for comfortable play. The Ultra setting averages just 12 FPS, which is a slideshow. The data strongly suggests avoiding 4K with this combo, as even the lowest quality preset cannot deliver acceptable performance. The difference between 1080p Low and 4K Low is a 41 FPS drop, which demonstrates the GPU’s inability to handle high pixel counts.

In summary, the recommended settings are 1920x1080 with Low. This provides the best balance of visual fidelity and frame rate, though it sacrifices most graphical effects. If a player is willing to accept lower frame rates, 1440p Low is a secondary option, but it will not be as responsive. The data does not support using Medium, High, or Ultra settings at any resolution, as they all result in average frame rates below 50, with most falling below 40. For a competitive survival game, prioritizing frame rate over visual quality is the only practical approach with this hardware.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a Zen 4 architecture processor, codenamed Phoenix, built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The CPU’s thermal design power is 65 W. It supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus, and its memory bandwidth is 83.2 GB/s. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die.

In terms of raw compute, the 8400F performs well. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 20851, and its single-core score is 2943. The Passmark multithread score is 24389, and the singlethread score is 3685. The 3DMark single-thread score is 951, and the max-threads score is 6165. The CPU’s percentile rank of 77 against all CPUs places it in the upper-middle range, competing closely with the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, which is only 0.2% slower in average benchmark score. This indicates that the CPU has ample processing power for gaming workloads, including the complex simulation and physics calculations that Rust requires.

However, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU’s performance is not the limiting factor in this system. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 69 FPS, but at 1080p Ultra, it drops to 30 FPS. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rate would remain relatively constant across settings, as the CPU workload does not change significantly with graphical quality. Instead, the large frame rate drops with increasing settings and resolution point directly to the GPU being the constraint. The CPU has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, which is sufficient for single-threaded tasks, and its 12 threads can handle multi-threaded workloads. The data from the Passmark physics test, which scores 1332, also suggests adequate performance for game physics.

The CPU’s memory support for DDR5 and dual-channel configuration provides a high bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, which is beneficial for the system-shared memory architecture of the Intel Arc B370. However, even with this bandwidth, the GPU cannot leverage it effectively, as evidenced by the low frame rates. The CPU’s role in this system is to feed the GPU, and it does so without issue. The bottleneck is clearly the GPU, and the CPU has significant headroom. In a system with a more capable graphics card, the 8400F would likely perform much better, but in this pairing, its potential is wasted. The combo rank of 2710 out of 2953 reflects this imbalance, where a capable CPU is paired with a severely underpowered GPU, resulting in a system that is only suitable for low-resolution, low-settings gaming.