Rust

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D paired with the AMD Radeon RX 570 produces a very specific performance profile in Rust, one that is defined by a stark imbalance between a high-end 2025 processor and an entry-level 2017 graphics card. Benchmark results show this combination ranks 2822 out of 2953 tested combos in this game, placing it in the bottom percentile of all systems evaluated. This low ranking is not a reflection of the CPU, which is exceptionally capable, but rather a direct consequence of the GPU’s age and limited resources. The data reveals a system where the graphics card is the overwhelming bottleneck at every resolution and settings level, with the CPU’s substantial multi-threading power left largely unused in most scenarios. The following analysis breaks down the measured frames per second, the roles of each component, and what these numbers indicate about real-world playability.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 2822 out of 2953 tested configurations in Rust places it in the 96th percentile from the bottom, meaning roughly 96% of all tested combos deliver higher average frame rates. This is a poor result for a system built around a flagship Ryzen 9 9900X3D, which itself sits in the 91st percentile among all CPUs tested. The disconnect between the CPU’s high standing and the combo’s low ranking underscores that the GPU is the limiting factor. The RX 570’s own percentile ranking is 74th among all GPUs, but that figure is based on synthetic benchmarks like Geekbench and 3DMark, which do not translate into competitive Rust performance at modern resolutions.

Examining the nearest rivals for each component provides context. The Ryzen 9 9900X3D has an average benchmark score of 54,762, which is 0.6% lower than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF’s 55,093, and 1.3% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K’s 54,053. These are essentially statistical ties, indicating the 9900X3D is not a performance outlier in synthetic tests, yet in Rust, the combo still languishes. For the RX 570, its average benchmark score of 28,766 is 0.4% below the AMD Radeon RX 6800M’s 28,874 and 0.7% above the AMD Radeon R9 M295X’s 28,580. Again, the synthetic scores suggest a mid-pack GPU, but the measured FPS in Rust tells a different story, as the 4 GB VRAM and older architecture struggle with the game’s demands.

The rank of 2822 out of 2953 is not a measure of the CPU’s capability; it is a measure of the entire system’s output. In Rust, this output is capped by the RX 570’s ability to render frames. Even at 1080p Low settings, where the CPU should have the least pressure, the average FPS is only 66, which is playable but far from the high refresh rates that the 9900X3D could theoretically support with a modern GPU. The data suggests that swapping the RX 570 for a more recent graphics card would dramatically improve this ranking, as the CPU is clearly not the constraint. The 0.6% deltaPct to the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF in synthetic scores is irrelevant when the GPU cannot push past 66 FPS.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 570 is built on the Polaris 20 chip using a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with a transistor count of 5,700 million on a 232 mm² die. Its architecture is GCN 4.0, and it has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The GPU’s base clock is 1168 MHz with a boost clock of 1244 MHz, and its memory operates at 1750 MHz, which translates to 7 Gbps effective on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s. The 4 GB of GDDR5 memory is a critical limitation in Rust, a game known for heavy texture streaming and large world data.

Benchmark results show the RX 570 achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 880, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 42,752, and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 32,084. These figures place it at the 74th percentile among all GPUs, but synthetic tests do not capture real-world Rust performance. The measured FPS data shows that the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM is a severe bottleneck, particularly at higher resolutions. At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 18 with a minimum of 15 and a maximum of 21, which is nearly unplayable. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average rises to 66, but this is still far below what a modern GPU would deliver.

The RX 570’s pixel rate is 39.81 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 159.2 GTexel/s, with an FP32 performance of 5.095 TFLOPS. These numbers indicate a GPU that was mid-range in 2017, but Rust’s post-2018 updates have increased graphical demands. The card’s 150 W TDP and dual-slot design are modest, but the 4 GB memory is simply insufficient for Rust’s larger maps and higher quality textures. The nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, has a synthetic score only 0.4% higher, yet that mobile GPU has far more memory and newer architecture, which would yield dramatically better Rust FPS. The data shows that the RX 570’s role in this combo is to be the primary constraint, capping performance at 66 FPS even in the least demanding scenario tested.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge, and manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a TDP of 120 W. The CPU features 128 MB of L3 cache, along with 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. Its memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, and it uses the AMD Socket AM5 with PCIe Gen 5, offering 24 lanes from the CPU. The processor’s release date is January 2025, and it has a launch MSRP of $599.

In synthetic benchmarks, the 9900X3D shows excellent multi-threaded performance. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 47,737, and its single-core score is 6,739. In Geekbench, it scores 22,884 multicore and 3,041 single-core. The Passmark multithread score is 56,154, with a single-thread score of 4,646. These numbers place it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 54,762. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, scores 55,093, only 0.6% higher, indicating the 9900X3D is at the top of its class.

However, in Rust, the CPU’s role is diminished because the GPU cannot keep up. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 66, which is likely CPU-bound given the low graphical load. Yet, even if the CPU could push 200 FPS, the RX 570 would limit it. The CPU’s high single-thread performance, as evidenced by a 3DMark single-thread score of 1,269 and a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 679, should excel in Rust’s physics and server-side calculations, but the measured FPS does not reflect this. The data indicates that the 9900X3D is not the bottleneck; the GPU is. For instance, at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS drops to 12, which is purely a GPU limitation, as the CPU has ample headroom to process the game logic at that frame rate.

FAQ

Q: Why does this combo rank so low (2822 out of 2953) despite having a high-end CPU?

A: The rank is determined by measured FPS in Rust, and the AMD Radeon RX 570’s 4 GB VRAM and older GCN 4.0 architecture cap performance. The CPU’s synthetic percentile of 91 is irrelevant when the GPU cannot render frames quickly enough.

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

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 66, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. No other settings or resolution combination exceeds this figure in the measured data.

Q: Is the 4 GB VRAM on the RX 570 sufficient for Rust at 4K?

A: No. At 3840x2160 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 18, with a minimum of 15 and maximum of 21. At Ultra settings, it drops to 12 average FPS, indicating the VRAM and GPU are overwhelmed.

Q: How does the RX 570 compare to its nearest rival based on synthetic scores?

A: The RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28,766, which is 0.4% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 6800M’s 28,874 and 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon R9 M295X’s 28,580. These are close scores, but synthetic benchmarks do not reflect Rust’s specific demands.

Q: Does the Ryzen 9 9900X3D ever become the limiting factor in this combo?

A: The data suggests the CPU is never the primary bottleneck. Even at 1080p Low, the GPU caps FPS at 66. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 47,737 shows it has far more capability than the GPU can utilize in Rust.

Q: What do the measured FPS numbers say about the GPU’s pixel rate?

A: The RX 570 has a pixel rate of 39.81 GPixel/s, which is adequate for 1080p but insufficient for 4K. At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 12 to 27 depending on settings, confirming the GPU’s fill rate is a limiting factor.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases, which is expected when the GPU is the bottleneck. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average FPS is 66. Moving to 2560x1440 with Low settings, the average drops to 46, a reduction of 20 FPS or roughly 30%. At 3840x2160 with Low settings, the average is 27, which is a 59% drop from 1080p. This scaling is typical for a GPU with limited memory bandwidth and pixel throughput.

For Medium settings, the trend is similar but with lower absolute numbers. At 1080p, the average is 44 FPS with a minimum of 38 and maximum of 51. At 1440p, it drops to 31 FPS with a range of 26 to 35. At 4K, the average falls to 18 FPS with a range of 15 to 21. The scaling from 1080p to 4K for Medium settings is a 59% reduction, consistent with the Low settings pattern.

High settings show a more pronounced drop. At 1080p, the average is 38 FPS. At 1440p, it is 26 FPS, a 32% reduction. At 4K, it is 15 FPS, a 61% drop from 1080p. Ultra settings are the most demanding, with 1080p yielding 29 FPS, 1440p yielding 20 FPS, and 4K yielding 12 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 4K is 59% for Ultra, similar to other settings.

This scaling indicates that the RX 570’s 224.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 4 GB VRAM are insufficient for higher resolutions. The CPU’s role is minimal in this scaling; the 9900X3D’s performance does not change with resolution, but the GPU’s workload does. The data shows that even at 1080p, the system is GPU-bound, as evidenced by the large FPS differences between Low and Ultra settings at the same resolution. For example, at 1080p, Low yields 66 FPS, while Ultra yields 29 FPS, a 56% reduction, which is purely due to GPU rendering load.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the best experience in Rust with this combo is achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which produces an average of 66 FPS. This is the only configuration that approaches a smooth 60+ FPS experience. Medium settings at 1080p yield 44 FPS, which is playable but may feel less fluid during intense moments, especially given the minimum FPS of 38. High settings at 1080p drop to 38 FPS, and Ultra falls to 29 FPS, both of which are below the ideal threshold for a survival game where quick reactions matter.

At 2560x1440, Low settings provide 46 FPS, which is acceptable but not ideal. Medium at 1440p gives 31 FPS, and High gives 26 FPS, while Ultra is 20 FPS. These are all below 60 FPS and may result in noticeable stuttering. At 3840x2160, even Low settings only reach 27 FPS, making 4K impractical for this combo. The data clearly shows that 1080p Low is the sweet spot for maximizing frame rate, while Medium at 1080p is a compromise for better visuals at the cost of 22 FPS.

For players who prioritize visual fidelity over frame rate, Medium at 1080p with 44 FPS is the best balance, as it offers improved textures and effects compared to Low while maintaining a playable frame rate. High and Ultra settings are not recommended at any resolution due to the significant FPS drops, with 4K Ultra being nearly unplayable at 12 FPS. The measured data does not include VSync or frame pacing information, but the minimum FPS values for Medium at 1080p (38) and 1440p (26) suggest some frame time variance.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS data for this combo in Rust is as follows, organized by resolution and settings.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average 66 FPS, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Medium: Average 44 FPS, minimum 38 FPS, maximum 51 FPS.
• High: Average 38 FPS, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Ultra: Average 29 FPS, no minimum or maximum recorded.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average 46 FPS, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Medium: Average 31 FPS, minimum 26 FPS, maximum 35 FPS.
• High: Average 26 FPS, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Ultra: Average 20 FPS, no minimum or maximum recorded.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average 27 FPS, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Medium: Average 18 FPS, minimum 15 FPS, maximum 21 FPS.
• High: Average 15 FPS, no minimum or maximum recorded.
• Ultra: Average 12 FPS, no minimum or maximum recorded.

These numbers show a consistent pattern: at each settings level, the FPS drops by roughly 30-40% when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and another 40-50% when moving from 1440p to 4K. The only configuration that exceeds 60 FPS is 1080p Low. The minimum FPS values are only provided for Medium settings at each resolution, which are 38, 26, and 15 respectively. These minimums are notably lower than the averages, indicating potential frame drops during complex scenes, which could affect gameplay smoothness.

The data also reveals that the difference between Low and Ultra settings at any given resolution is substantial. At 1080p, the spread is 37 FPS (66 vs 29). At 1440p, it is 26 FPS (46 vs 20). At 4K, it is 15 FPS (27 vs 12). This wide gap underscores the GPU’s inability to handle higher quality presets, as each step from Low to Ultra adds significant rendering load. For a game like Rust, where base building and PvP encounters require consistent frame rates, the 1080p Low setting is the only viable option for a competitive experience. All other settings either fall below 60 FPS or, in the case of 4K, below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum for playable frame rates.