Rust

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is a balanced 1080p and 1440p gaming combination for Rust. The data shows this combo ranks 2438th out of 3723 tested combinations in this game, placing it in the upper half of all systems but with clear limitations at higher resolutions. The CPU provides six cores and twelve threads with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, while the GPU features 2048 shading units and 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. This analysis breaks down how these components interact specifically in Rust, where the game's demanding simulation and rendering load can shift between CPU and GPU bottlenecks depending on settings and resolution.

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

The Intel Core i5-11400F is a Rocket Lake-S desktop processor built on Intel's 14 nm process, with a die size of 276 mm². It offers 6 cores and 12 threads, which is sufficient for Rust's multi-threaded server and world simulation tasks. The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Its memory support is DDR4 in dual-channel configuration, providing 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The processor has a 65 W TDP and supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

Benchmark data places this CPU at the 71st percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 17177. In nearest rival comparisons, the i5-11400F is virtually tied with the AMD EPYC 7H12, which scores 17120 and is just 0.3% lower. It trails the Intel Core i5-12450H by 0.4% (17239) and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G by 0.6% (17278), while leading the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U by 0.6% (17074). These close margins indicate that the CPU's raw computational output is competitive with a range of other processors, though none of these rivals are direct gaming comparisons.

In Rust specifically, the CPU's single-thread performance matters for game logic and physics. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2024 and 3DMark single-thread score of 868 suggest solid per-core throughput. Multi-threaded results like Cinebench R23 multi-core at 14340 and PassMark multi-thread at 16908 show the CPU can handle parallel workloads when the game engine uses them. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 5619 and max-thread score of 5652 indicate that scaling plateaus beyond 8 threads, which aligns with Rust's typical usage patterns.

The GPU, meanwhile, is an RDNA 2.0 architecture part with 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. It has a base clock of 2055 MHz, boost clock of 2635 MHz, and game clock of 2410 MHz. The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory runs at 2190 MHz with 17.5 Gbps effective speed, yielding 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth across a 128-bit bus. With 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, the card delivers 10.79 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 337.3 GTexel/s texture fill rate. Its pixel rate is 168.6 GPixel/s.

The GPU's benchmark standing is at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 19765. Its nearest rivals show unusual company: the NVIDIA Tesla K40m is 0.6% higher (19885), the AMD FirePro D300 is 0.7% lower (19637), the AMD FirePro W7000 is 0.7% higher (19905), and the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 is 0.8% lower (19602). These are workstation cards, not gaming parts, so the RX 6650 XT's actual gaming performance relative to consumer GPUs is not directly reflected in these comparisons.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

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

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 143 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At the same resolution, Medium settings yield 96 FPS, High yields 81 FPS, and Ultra drops to 62 FPS.

Q: Can this system handle Rust at 4K resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, the combo averages 58 FPS on Low settings, 39 FPS on Medium, 33 FPS on High, and 25 FPS on Ultra. Only the Low preset approaches playable smoothness, while higher settings fall below 40 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its closest rivals in overall benchmark scores?

A: The i5-11400F scores 17177 on average. It is 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7H12 (17120) and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U (17074), but 0.4% behind the Intel Core i5-12450H (17239) and 0.6% behind the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G (17278).

Q: What GPU memory configuration does the RX 6650 XT use?

A: The card has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 2190 MHz with 17.5 Gbps effective speed.

Q: What is the FPS range for Medium settings at different resolutions?

A: At 1920x1080 Medium, the average is 96 FPS with a range of 82 to 110. At 2560x1440 Medium, the average is 66 FPS with a range of 56 to 76. At 3840x2160 Medium, the average is 39 FPS with a range of 33 to 45.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems in Rust?

A: This specific CPU and GPU combination ranks 2438th out of 3723 tested combos in Rust, which places it in the 65th percentile of all tested systems.

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

The measured FPS data reveals how the balance between CPU and GPU shifts as resolution increases. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo hits 143 FPS average, which is likely near the CPU's limit for Rust's simulation thread. Moving to 2560x1440 Low drops that to 98 FPS, a 31% reduction, and at 3840x2160 Low it falls to 58 FPS, another 41% drop. This pattern indicates that at Low settings, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution climbs, because the CPU has enough headroom to feed frames but the GPU's pixel throughput can't keep up.

For Medium settings, the scaling shows a similar trend but with lower starting points. From 96 FPS at 1080p, it drops to 66 FPS at 1440p (31% decrease) and then to 39 FPS at 4K (41% decrease from 1440p). The consistency of these percentage drops across Low and Medium suggests that the GPU's workload scales predictably with resolution, and the CPU is not becoming a limiting factor until very high frame rates are reached.

High settings show a slightly different pattern: 81 FPS at 1080p, 56 FPS at 1440p (31% drop), and 33 FPS at 4K (41% drop). The relative decrease from 1080p to 1440p is 31%, and from 1440p to 4K is 41%, matching the Low and Medium results. Ultra settings follow the same trajectory: 62 FPS at 1080p, 42 FPS at 1440p (32% drop), and 25 FPS at 4K (40% drop). This uniformity across all quality presets indicates that the limiting component at higher resolutions is consistently the GPU.

The 1080p Ultra result of 62 FPS is telling. At this resolution and preset, the CPU and GPU are both under significant load, but the fact that Low settings at 1080p achieve 143 FPS while Ultra only reaches 62 FPS suggests that the GPU's shading and texture work limits performance at higher quality settings. The CPU can deliver over 140 FPS in this game, so the i5-11400F is not the primary constraint at 1080p Low. At 4K, even Low settings only reach 58 FPS, confirming that the RX 6650 XT's 8 GB memory and 128-bit bus are the fundamental limits at higher resolutions.

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

At 1920x1080, the full settings sweep provides a clear picture. Low settings average 143 FPS, which is the highest result in the entire dataset. Medium settings average 96 FPS with a minimum of 82 and maximum of 110. High settings average 81 FPS, and Ultra drops to 62 FPS. The step from Low to Medium is a 47 FPS reduction, while the step from Medium to High is 15 FPS, and High to Ultra is 19 FPS. This shows that the largest performance cost comes from moving off Low settings, while subsequent quality increases have diminishing but still significant impacts.

At 2560x1440, the averages are 98 FPS for Low, 66 FPS for Medium (with a range of 56 to 76), 56 FPS for High, and 42 FPS for Ultra. The gap between Low and Medium at this resolution is 32 FPS, which is smaller in absolute terms than at 1080p but similar proportionally. The Medium to High step costs 10 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 14 FPS. Compared to 1080p, every setting loses roughly 30% of its average FPS at 1440p, which is consistent with the resolution scaling analysis.

At 3840x2160, the results are significantly lower. Low settings average 58 FPS, Medium averages 39 FPS (with a range of 33 to 45), High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. The Low to Medium step costs 19 FPS, Medium to High costs 6 FPS, and High to Ultra costs 8 FPS. At this resolution, even the Low preset barely maintains 60 FPS, and Medium settings provide what would be considered borderline playable performance at 39 FPS average. The minimum FPS recorded at 4K Medium is 33, which indicates occasional stutter below the average.

The min and max FPS data is only provided for Medium settings at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the range is 82 to 110 FPS, giving a spread of 28 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the range is 56 to 76, a 20 FPS spread. At 4K Medium, the range is 33 to 45, an 12 FPS spread. The narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests that frame time variance decreases when the GPU is the bottleneck, whereas at 1080p the CPU can cause more fluctuation.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo rank for Rust places this system at 2438th out of 3723 tested combinations. This means that roughly 65% of all tested systems perform better than this one in Rust, while 35% perform worse. The rank is specific to this game and this exact CPU-GPU pairing, so it reflects how the i5-11400F and RX 6650 XT interact with Rust's particular engine demands.

Given that the CPU sits at the 71st percentile and the GPU at the 65th percentile among their respective components, the combo rank of 2438 is slightly lower than either individual component's percentile. This indicates that Rust is somewhat more demanding on the GPU than the CPU, or that the combination of these two mid-range parts doesn't synergize as well as their individual standings might suggest. The CPU's 71st percentile and GPU's 65th percentile would naively predict a system around the 68th percentile, but the actual rank of 2438 out of 3723 puts it at roughly the 65th percentile of combos.

The rank also reflects that many other combos include higher-end GPUs paired with similar or weaker CPUs, which would outperform this setup in Rust's GPU-bound scenarios at higher resolutions. Conversely, combos with stronger CPUs but weaker GPUs would likely perform worse in this game, given that the GPU is the limiting factor at 1440p and above. The rank of 2438 is a mid-pack result, meaning this system is neither exceptional nor poor for Rust, but rather represents a typical mid-range build.

In practical terms, this rank means that users with this combo should expect Rust performance that is adequate for 1080p gaming with high settings, but they will need to lower settings or resolution to maintain smooth frame rates. The combo's position in the ranking also suggests that upgrading either component would yield meaningful gains, but the GPU would be the first bottleneck to address based on the resolution scaling data.

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

For 1080p gaming, the data shows that Medium settings provide the best balance of visual quality and performance. The 96 FPS average at Medium is well above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay, and the minimum of 82 FPS ensures consistent frame delivery without major dips. High settings at 81 FPS are also viable, but the drop from 96 to 81 FPS is noticeable, and the visual improvement may not justify the 15 FPS loss. Low settings at 143 FPS are excellent for competitive play, but the visual downgrade is substantial. Ultra at 62 FPS is playable but leaves little headroom for demanding scenes, and the minimum FPS for Ultra is not recorded, so stability is uncertain.

At 1440p, Medium settings again emerge as the recommended choice. The 66 FPS average with a 56 FPS minimum keeps gameplay mostly smooth, though occasional drops near 56 FPS may be noticeable on fast-moving scenes. High settings at 56 FPS are borderline, and the lack of min/max data for High makes it risky to recommend. Low settings at 98 FPS are the safest option for 1440p if frame rate consistency is the priority. Ultra at 42 FPS is not recommended for anything other than screenshots or slow-paced exploration.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. Low settings at 58 FPS is the only preset that approaches playable smoothness, but it falls short of 60 FPS. Medium at 39 FPS average with a 33 FPS minimum is playable for casual sessions but will struggle in combat or dense areas. High and Ultra at 33 and 25 FPS respectively are not recommended for active gameplay. For 4K, the best experience would be Low settings if playability is essential, or Medium if the user accepts lower frame rates in exchange for better visuals.

The overall recommendation across all resolutions is to start with Medium settings. At 1080p, Medium provides 96 FPS with a solid minimum of 82 FPS. At 1440p, Medium offers 66 FPS with a 56 FPS minimum, which is acceptable for most players. At 4K, Medium drops to 39 FPS, but this is still better than High's 33 FPS. The Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot where the game's visual quality is maintained while the frame rate remains within a reasonable range. Users seeking maximum smoothness should drop to Low, while those with lower frame rate tolerances can try High at 1080p only.