Rust

The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER in Rust delivers a dataset that clearly illustrates a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s 16 cores and 32 threads provide ample headroom for the game’s simulation and physics threads. The measured frames per second (FPS) across 1080p, 1440p, and 4K resolutions with Low, Medium, High, and Ultra settings reveal a system whose performance ceiling is dictated by the graphics card, not the processor. This analysis breaks down the raw numbers, contextualizes the combo’s ranking, and offers practical settings guidance based solely on the provided measured data.

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

The Ryzen 9 9950X3D is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge, and built on TSMC’s 4 nm process. It runs at a base clock of 4.30 GHz and boosts up to 5.70 GHz, with 128 MB of L3 cache. In Rust, a survival game known for its server-side simulation and complex entity interactions, the CPU’s role is to maintain a steady frame pacing, particularly when many players, structures, and objects are on screen. In this test, the CPU’s capabilities are largely masked by the GPU, as the measured FPS at 1080p Low hits 152 average FPS, a figure that suggests the processor is far from being a limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the RTX 2070 SUPER is still able to push well over 100 FPS, indicating that the Ryzen 9 9950X3D is feeding it enough data to saturate its rendering pipeline. The 16 cores and 32 threads are more than sufficient for Rust’s typical load, which rarely scales beyond a handful of threads. The CPU’s high single-thread performance—evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2259 and a Geekbench single-core score of 3064—contributes to the overall responsiveness, but the measured frame rates do not illustrate a scenario where the CPU is the bottleneck. The data shows a clear pattern: as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K, the average FPS drops sharply across all settings, which is a hallmark characteristic of a GPU-bound situation. For instance, at 1080p High the average is 86 FPS, but at 4K High it falls to 35 FPS. This is a 2.46x reduction, while the pixel count increases by 4x, indicating that the GPU is struggling to process the higher resolution. The CPU’s role, while critical, is not the constraining factor in any of the measured configurations. Rather, the RTX 2070 SUPER’s Turing architecture GPU, with 2560 shading units and 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, defines the performance ceiling. The CPU’s 128 MB of L3 cache and high boost clock (through the 5.70 GHz) scale well with Rust’s logic, but the frame rate numbers show that the graphics card’s rasterization throughput is what separates the FPS tiers. In summary, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D provides the processing headroom; the RTX 2070 SUPER determines the actual playable FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database, this specific combination of CPU and GPU ranks 2160th out of 3723 tested combos, placing it in the lower-middle tier of all possible pairings. That rank of 2160 is a global percentile position—out of 3723 combinations, it sits near the 58th percentile (since 2160/3723 is 0.58). This is not a top-tier pairing, and the measured results reflect that this is a mid-range to upper-mid-range system, but it is not a high-end combination. The RTX 2070 SUPER’s overall benchmark percentile is 65%, meaning it performs better than 65% of all GPUs, but it is a 2019 GPU, while the Ryzen 9 9950X3D is a 2025 CPU, so the pairing is inherently imbalanced. The GPU’s nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (avg score 20480, -1% delta), the RTX 3070 Mobile (avg 20534, -1.2%), the Intel Arc B570 (avg 20556, -1.3%), and the Intel Arc A750 (avg 20582, -1.5%). Note these are all within 1.5% of the RTX 2070 SUPER’s average score of 20282, so the RTX 2070 SUPER sits in a tight competitive cluster, but it is at the lower end of that group. In terms of the combo’s rank in Rust specifically, the 2160th place out of 3723 combos means that 1563 combos perform worse, and 2160 combos perform better. This places it in the upper-middle to middle class of the total ranking. The benchmark shows that this combo can achieve playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but it struggles at 4K, especially with higher settings. This is a classic sign of a graphics card that is just enough for 1440p gameplay but not for 4K. The CPU is not the reason for the low rank; the GPU is. If the same CPU were paired with a more powerful GPU, the rank would improve dramatically. The data indicates that the combo’s ranking is a reflection of the GPU’s age and performance class, not the CPU’s capabilities. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D is a top-tier CPU, ranking in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, but its performance is wasted on this GPU for this game, as the frame rates are limited by the graphics card.

Resolution Scaling

Resolution scaling is the most informative metric in this dataset, showing a typical GPU-bound progression. As the resolution increases, the demand on the GPU’s pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth increases, and the RTX 2070 SUPER’s 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus (448 GB/s) starts to become a limiting factor. The measured FPS at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K show a clear pattern of slowdown, with each step up in resolution taking a significant chunk out of the average frame rate.

At 1080p Low, the system averages 152 FPS. At 1080p Medium, 102 FPS. At 1080p High, 86 FPS. At 1080p Ultra, 65 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra is a 57% reduction in FPS (from 152 to 65).

Moving to 1440p, the same settings yield 104 FPS (Low), 70 FPS (Medium), 59 FPS (High), and 45 FPS (Ultra). Compared to 1080p, the drop is about 31% for Low (152 to 104), 31% for Medium (102 to 70), 31% for High (86 to 59), and 30% for Ultra (65 to 45). This is a consistent ~31% reduction across all settings, which is typical of a GPU-bound scenario at these resolutions, as the GPU’s total pixel output is the limiting factor.

At 4K (3840x2160), the average FPS drops to 62 (Low), 41 (Medium), 35 (High), and 27 (Ultra). Comparing 1080p to 4K, the Low setting drops from 152 to 62 FPS, a 59% reduction. Medium drops from 102 to 41 (60% reduction). High drops from 86 to 35 (59% reduction). Ultra drops from 65 to 27 (58% reduction). This is a massive hit, and it explains the 4K results being the weakest.

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is not linear with the pixel count (4x), but the GPU is hitting its limits. The 4K results at High (35 FPS) and Ultra (27 FPS) are unplayable for most, while 4K Low (62 FPS) is borderline playable. At 1440p, the system provides a better experience: 1440p High (59 FPS) is on the edge of smoothness, while 1440p Low (104 FPS) and 1440p Medium (70 FPS) are more comfortable. This scaling shows that the limiting component is the GPU. The CPU’s performance is not the issue; the RTX 2070 SUPER’s 2560 shading units and 8 GB of VRAM cannot sustain high frame rates at 4K, especially with the higher-quality shader settings. The 4K average FPS at Ultra is 27, which is below the 30 FPS minimum playable threshold. The data shows that for this combo, 1080p is the best resolution to achieve high refresh rates, while 1440p is a balance, and 4K is only viable with Low settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured data includes average FPS for all twelve configurations, plus some min and max values for the Medium settings. Here is the full breakdown:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 152 FPS average.
• Medium: 102 FPS average, with a min of 87 FPS and a max of 117 FPS.
• High: 86 FPS average.
• Ultra: 65 FPS average.

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 104 FPS average.
• Medium: 70 FPS average, with a min of 60 FPS and a max of 81 FPS.
• High: 59 FPS average.
• Ultra: 45 FPS average.

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 62 FPS average.
• Medium: 41 FPS average, with a min of 35 FPS and a max of 48 FPS.
• High: 35 FPS average.
• Ultra: 27 FPS average.

The 1080p results show that the system can deliver very high frame rates at 1080p Low (152 FPS) and Medium (102 FPS). At 1080p High, it’s 86 FPS, which is still good and playable. At 1080p, the min/max data for Medium settings shows a range of 87-117 FPS, which indicates a variance of 30 FPS, likely due to scenes with more entities. The 1440p results are a step down: 1440p Low (104 FPS) is very playable, 1440p Medium (70 FPS) is solid, 1440p High (59 FPS) is on the edge, and 1440p Ultra (45 FPS) is less smooth. The 1440p Medium min/max of 60-81 FPS shows a range of 21 FPS. At 4K, the system struggles: 4K Low (62 FPS) is the only 4K setting that is above 60 FPS, which is a strong result for a 4K resolution, but 4K Medium (41 FPS), High (35 FPS), and Ultra (27 FPS) are all below the 60 FPS ideal, and 4K Ultra is below 30 FPS, which is not smooth. The 4K Medium min/max of 35-48 FPS shows a range of 13 FPS, which is tight but still low.

The average FPS across all settings at each resolution shows that the system is best at 1080p, good at 1440p, and weak at 4K. The data indicates that the RTX 2070 SUPER is the limiting factor at 4K, as the CPU could handle higher frame rates if the GPU were not the limiting factor. The 1080p Low result of 152 FPS is the maximum in the dataset, and it confirms the CPU’s ability to push frames, but the GPU’s rendering is the ceiling at higher resolutions.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Rust with this CPU+GPU combo?

A: According to the measured data, 1080p provides the highest average FPS across all settings, from 152 FPS at Low to 65 FPS at Ultra. 1440p is also playable, with 1440p Low averaging 104 FPS, but 4K is only recommended for Low settings (62 FPS average) and is not ideal for High or Ultra (35 and 27 FPS).

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 9950X3D or the RTX 2070 SUPER the bottleneck in this system?

A: The data shows that the RTX 2070 SUPER is the limiting factor. At 1080p Low, the CPU can push 152 FPS, but as resolution increases to 4K, the FPS drops dramatically (to 62 on Low), showing the GPU is struggling to render the higher resolution. The CPU’s benchmarks (e.g., Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42018, single-core 2259) indicate it is a high-end processor, but the GPU’s 8 GB of memory and 2560 shading units cannot keep up at 4K.

Q: What is the minimum FPS for the Medium setting at 1440p?

A: The measured data shows that at 2560x1440 Medium, the average FPS is 70, with a minimum of 60 FPS and a maximum of 81 FPS.

Q: What is the average FPS for 1080p High?

A: At 1920x1080 High, the average FPS is 86, with no minimum or maximum provided in the data.

Q: Is this combo ranked as a high-end or low-end configuration in the database?

A: The combo rank is 2160 out of 3723 tested combos, which places it in the lower-middle of the ranking. The GPU’s percentile is 65th, and its average score is 20282, sitting near the RTX 3070 Mobile and Intel Arc B570, which shows it is an older, lower-performing GPU by current standards.

Q: How does the RTX 2070 SUPER perform relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 2070 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 20282. Its nearest rival, the Quadro M4000M, has a score of 20480, which is 1% higher. The RTX 3070 Mobile (20534), Intel Arc B570 (20556), and Intel Arc A750 (20582) are 1.2%, 1.3%, and 1.5% higher, respectively. This shows that the RTX 2070 SUPER is slightly less powerful than these four competitors, all within a 1.5% margin.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the best settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and the desired frame rate. For 1080p, the data supports high settings: 1080p High averages 86 FPS, which is smooth, and 1080p Ultra averages 65 FPS, which is still above 60 FPS. If a player prefers a higher frame rate, 1080p Medium (102 FPS) is a good choice, and 1080p Low (152 FPS) is excellent for competitive play. For 1440p, the best balance is 1440p Medium, which averages 70 FPS, with a minimum of 60 FPS, which is the minimum for a good 60 FPS experience. 1440p High (59 FPS) is borderline, and 1440p Low (104 FPS) is better if the user wants a high refresh rate. For 4K, the data recommends only 4K Low, which averages 62 FPS, but the user should be aware that 4K Medium (41 FPS) and 4K High (35 FPS) are below 60 FPS, and 4K Ultra (27 FPS) is below 30 FPS, which is not smooth. The measured data shows that the system is best at 1080p, where it can achieve high frame rates even at Ultra settings. If the user prioritizes visual fidelity, 1080p Ultra with 65 FPS average is the highest setting that still keeps the average above 60 FPS. If the user prioritizes frame rate, 1080p Low at 152 FPS is the fastest. For 1440p, Medium is the best choice for a 60+ FPS experience, as it averages 70 FPS, while High is limited to 59 FPS. For 4K, the user must choose Low to get a playable 62 FPS, but the dip in quality may be noticeable. The measured min/max data for the Medium settings across all resolutions shows that the frame rate is stable, with the 1440p Medium min of 60 FPS ensuring a consistent 60 FPS, which is considered a good experience for a survival game. In summary, the data suggests that the best experience for this combo is at 1080p, with 1080p High or Ultra providing a solid balance of quality and performance, or 1440p Medium for a higher resolution with a 70 FPS average. 4K is only viable for Low, so it is not recommended for a smooth experience.