Rust

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 paired with the Intel Core i5-11400F in Rust delivers a highly resolution-dependent experience, moving from a fluid 1080p performer to a 4K slideshow on maximum settings. The data shows a 56th-percentile GPU (58th percentile vs all GPUs) and a 71st-percentile CPU working together, but the game's demands at 4K Ultra (30 FPS) clearly outpace this combination's capabilities. At 1440p, the combo hits a solid 67 FPS on High, making it a viable high-refresh-rate setup, while 1080p Low reaches 173 FPS, indicating the CPU can feed the GPU well at lower resolutions. The measured results place this combo at rank 1295 out of 2953 tested configurations, confirming it as a mid-tier performer for Rust, with the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck as resolution scales upward.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU and GPU combo in Rust?

A: Based on the measured FPS, 2560x1440 on High settings provides the best balance, delivering 67 FPS average. This is above the 60 FPS threshold, whereas 4K High drops to 40 FPS, and 1080p High reaches 98 FPS but with less visual fidelity than 1440p.

Q: How much performance does the Ultra preset cost compared to High?

A: The data shows a significant penalty: at 1080p, Ultra averages 75 FPS versus 98 FPS on High (a 23 FPS drop). At 1440p, Ultra averages 51 FPS versus 67 FPS on High (a 16 FPS drop). At 4K, Ultra averages 30 FPS versus 40 FPS on High (a 10 FPS drop).

Q: Does this combo handle 4K gaming in Rust?

A: Only at Low settings, where it averages 70 FPS. At Medium it drops to 47 FPS, High to 40 FPS, and Ultra to 30 FPS, making 4K playable only with significant graphical compromises.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals based on average benchmark scores?

A: The RX 7700 scores 15,852 on average. It is 0.1% slower than the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15,862), 1% slower than the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (16,014), 1.1% faster than the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15,679), and 1.7% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16,129).

Q: Is the CPU a bottleneck at 1080p in Rust?

A: The data suggests not at lower settings: 1080p Low achieves 173 FPS, and 1080p Medium hits 116 FPS. The i5-11400F’s 6-core, 12-thread configuration with a 4.40 GHz boost appears sufficient to maintain high frame rates, as the GPU is likely the limiting factor at higher presets.

Q: What is the frame rate range for Medium settings across resolutions?

A: At 1080p, Medium averages 116 FPS with a 99-133 FPS range. At 1440p, it averages 80 FPS with a 68-92 FPS range. At 4K, it averages 47 FPS with a 40-54 FPS range, showing consistent scaling.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with a Navi 32 chip, featuring 2560 shading units and 96 ROPs. Its memory configuration is substantial: 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus delivering 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s role in Rust becomes increasingly critical as resolution rises, given that the game’s draw calls and texture loads scale aggressively. With a boost clock of 2459 MHz and a game clock of 2041 MHz, the card has enough raw throughput for 1080p and 1440p, but the 4K results (40 FPS on High, 30 FPS on Ultra) show that the 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 compute is insufficient for maxed-out 4K in this title.

The GPU’s benchmark percentile (58th vs all GPUs) places it in the upper-middle tier, but its nearest rivals—such as the RTX 3060 Ti (1.7% faster) and RX 9060 (1% faster)—indicate it is not a top-tier part. In Rust, the 16 GB VRAM is ample, as the game does not appear to be VRAM-limited even at 4K, evidenced by the smooth scaling from 1080p to 1440p before hitting a wall at 2160p. The GPU’s 96 ROPs and 236.1 GPixel/s pixel rate become the limiting factor at 4K, where fill-rate demands outpace the card’s capabilities.

The measured FPS deltas between Low and Ultra settings highlight the GPU’s workload. At 1080p, the jump from Low (173 FPS) to Ultra (75 FPS) represents a 56.6% performance reduction, indicating that the GPU is heavily taxed by the higher presets. At 1440p, the same transition drops from 119 to 51 FPS (a 57.1% reduction), and at 4K from 70 to 30 FPS (a 57.1% reduction). This consistent drop pattern suggests the GPU’s shading and ROP throughput, not memory bandwidth, is the primary constraint at higher settings. The 624.1 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient, but the 25.18 TFLOPS compute is simply overwhelmed by Rust’s lighting and shadow effects at Ultra.

Resolution Scaling

The resolution scaling data reveals a clear pattern: performance degrades predictably as pixel count increases, but the severity depends on the preset. From 1080p to 1440p, High settings drop from 98 FPS to 67 FPS, a 31.6% reduction. From 1440p to 4K, High drops from 67 FPS to 40 FPS, a 40.3% reduction. This indicates that the GPU becomes more of a bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the CPU (i5-11400F) has enough headroom to maintain frame rates at lower pixel counts.

The scaling is consistent across presets. For Medium settings, 1080p averages 116 FPS, 1440p averages 80 FPS (a 31% drop), and 4K averages 47 FPS (a 41.3% drop from 1440p). Low settings show the most dramatic scaling: 1080p hits 173 FPS, 1440p drops to 119 FPS (a 31.2% drop), and 4K falls to 70 FPS (a 41.2% drop). This consistent ~31% drop from 1080p to 1440p and ~41% drop from 1440p to 4K across all presets strongly indicates that the GPU is the limiting component, as the CPU’s performance would not scale linearly with resolution.

At 1080p, the data suggests the CPU is keeping up well, as Low settings reach 173 FPS, which is a high enough frame rate that the GPU is likely still the primary limiter. The fact that 4K Low (70 FPS) is comparable to 1440p High (67 FPS) shows that the user can trade resolution for settings to achieve similar performance. The 4K Medium result (47 FPS) with a minimum of 40 FPS indicates that even this mid-tier preset struggles to maintain smooth gameplay at 2160p, making 1440p the practical ceiling for this combo if the user wants High or Ultra settings.

Settings Recommendations

For this specific combination, the best experience per the measured rows is 2560x1440 on High settings, yielding 67 FPS average. This provides a good balance between visual fidelity and smoothness, as the frame rate is above the 60 FPS threshold for most monitors. The 1080p High setting (98 FPS) is also excellent, but 1440p offers more screen real estate without a major frame rate penalty. At 4K, the only playable option is Low (70 FPS), but the visual quality loss is substantial, making 1080p Medium (116 FPS) or 1440p High a better choice for most users.

If the user prioritizes frame rate over visuals, 1080p Low (173 FPS) is the clear winner, offering esports-level smoothness. However, the data shows that 1080p Medium (116 FPS) provides a 43 FPS advantage over High (98 FPS) while presumably offering better than minimal graphics. The Medium preset at 1440p (80 FPS) is also a strong option, delivering a 13 FPS improvement over High (67 FPS) with only a modest visual downgrade. The Ultra preset is not recommended at any resolution, as it drops below 60 FPS even at 1080p (75 FPS) and falls to 30 FPS at 4K.

The measured data shows diminishing returns when moving from High to Ultra. At 1080p, High averages 98 FPS, but Ultra drops to 75 FPS (a 23.5% reduction) for what is typically a marginal visual improvement. At 1440p, the drop is from 67 to 51 FPS (a 23.9% reduction), and at 4K from 40 to 30 FPS (a 25% reduction). This consistent ~24% penalty makes Ultra a poor choice. The recommended path is: for maximum fidelity at playable frame rates, use 1440p High; for high refresh rates, use 1080p Medium or Low; and avoid 4K unless the user is willing to accept Low settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo’s performance in Rust across three resolutions and four settings presets.

1080p (1920x1080): The best results come at Low settings, with an average of 173 FPS. Medium settings average 116 FPS, with a recorded range of 99 to 133 FPS. High settings average 98 FPS, and Ultra settings average 75 FPS. The 1080p results show a clear hierarchy, with Low being 49% faster than High and 130% faster than Ultra.

1440p (2560x1440): Low settings average 119 FPS, which is still highly playable. Medium settings average 80 FPS, with a range of 68 to 92 FPS. High settings average 67 FPS, and Ultra settings average 51 FPS. The 1440p numbers show a 78% difference between Low and Ultra (119 vs 51 FPS), indicating that the GPU is struggling with the higher preset.

4K (3840x2160): Low settings average 70 FPS, which is the only preset that maintains playability. Medium settings average 47 FPS, with a range of 40 to 54 FPS. High settings average 40 FPS, and Ultra settings average 30 FPS. The 4K results are the most revealing: even Low settings (70 FPS) are only marginally above the 60 FPS threshold, and the Ultra preset (30 FPS) is barely playable.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset shows the most consistent minimum-to-maximum spread. At 1080p, the range is 99-133 FPS (a 34 FPS spread), at 1440p it is 68-92 FPS (a 24 FPS spread), and at 4K it is 40-54 FPS (a 14 FPS spread). This narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is becoming fully saturated, reducing frame time variance. The data also shows that the jump from Medium to High costs 18 FPS at 1080p, 13 FPS at 1440p, and 7 FPS at 4K, while the jump from High to Ultra costs 23 FPS at 1080p, 16 FPS at 1440p, and 10 FPS at 4K, indicating that Ultra is disproportionately expensive.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Rocket Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. It features 12 MB of shared L3 cache and supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, yielding 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU’s benchmark scores show it is a solid mid-range part: it achieves a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 14,340 and a single-core score of 2,024, with a Geekbench multicore score of 7,737 and a single-core score of 1,777. Its percentile vs all CPUs is 71, placing it well above average.

In Rust, the CPU’s role is most evident at lower resolutions and settings where the GPU is not fully saturated. The 1080p Low result of 173 FPS shows that the i5-11400F can feed the RX 7700 effectively, as this frame rate would be difficult to achieve if the CPU were a significant bottleneck. The 3dmark single-thread score of 868 and the Passmark single-thread score of 2,981 indicate strong per-core performance, which is crucial for Rust’s physics and entity update calculations. The 4.40 GHz boost clock is likely the key factor in maintaining high frame rates at 1080p.

However, the CPU’s limitations become apparent when comparing to its nearest rivals. The i5-11400F has an average benchmark score of 17,177, which is 0.3% faster than the AMD EPYC 7H12 (17,120), 0.4% slower than the Intel Core i5-12450H (17,239), 0.6% slower than the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G (17,278), and 0.6% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U (17,074). This places it in a tightly contested performance bracket, but the 6-core/12-thread configuration is adequate for Rust’s current engine. The CPU’s TDP of 65 W and 14 nm process node suggest it is not a high-power part, but its 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is sufficient for the game’s data streaming needs.

The data indicates that the CPU is not the primary bottleneck in this combo for most settings. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting factor, as the frame rates drop to 30-70 FPS regardless of CPU performance. At 1440p, the CPU still has headroom, as evidenced by the 119 FPS result at Low settings. Only at 1080p with High or Ultra settings does the GPU become the sole limiter, but the CPU’s 12 threads ensure that the game’s background processes do not cause stuttering. The i5-11400F’s 71st percentile ranking confirms it is a capable partner for the RX 7700, and the measured results show that users should focus on GPU settings rather than CPU upgrades to improve Rust performance.