Rust

The Intel Core i5-11400F and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT pairing produces a highly capable Rust machine, but the data reveals a system that is consistently held back by the processor in certain scenarios. This 6-core, 12-thread Rocket Lake CPU, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, sits at the 75th percentile among all tested CPUs. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR4 memory support are adequate for the game's demands. The RX 7800 XT, based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 60 ray accelerators, is a far more powerful component, ranking in the 76th percentile of all GPUs. The combination of a mid-range CPU from 2021 with a high-end GPU from 2023 creates a bottleneck dynamic that is clearly visible in the measured FPS data across different resolutions and settings.

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

The Intel Core i5-11400F provides six physical cores and twelve threads, a configuration that is generally sufficient for modern gaming workloads. Its base clock of 2.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz are the primary drivers of its single-threaded performance, which is critical for Rust's simulation and world-update logic. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU posts a single-thread score of 868 in 3DMark and 2,029 in Cinebench R23, indicating it has solid per-core strength. However, the game's performance at lower resolutions and settings suggests that this CPU's ceiling is being reached.

The data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 172.9 FPS on average. This high frame rate is a direct result of the GPU having less pixel work to do, allowing the CPU's thread scheduling and game logic to become the limiting factor. The gap between the CPU's multi-threaded capabilities, as shown by a 14,372 score in Cinebench R23, and its performance in a live game environment highlights that Rust is not purely a test of core count. The 12-thread count is beneficial, but the architecture's overall throughput appears to cap performance in CPU-bound scenarios. When compared to its nearest rivals, the i5-11400F is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U and Intel Core i7-1260P, with a deltaPct of 0 and -0.2 respectively. This indicates that its processing power is in a specific tier, and the RX 7800 XT is often waiting for the CPU to feed it data.

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

Q: What is the best resolution for this CPU-GPU combo to achieve a high refresh rate experience in Rust?

A: Based on the measured data, 2560x1440 with Low settings is the sweet spot for high refresh rates, yielding an average of 138.5 FPS. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the average jumps to 172.9 FPS, but the frame rate gains from the GPU are less efficient as the CPU becomes more of a bottleneck.

Q: How does the RX 7800 XT's performance compare to its direct rivals?

A: The RX 7800 XT has an average benchmark score of 32,619, placing it in the 76th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD FirePro S9300 X2, is nearly identical with a deltaPct of 0.2, while the NVIDIA P104-100 is slightly slower with a deltaPct of -0.4.

Q: Does upgrading from 1080p to 1440p severely impact performance on High settings?

A: The data shows a significant drop. At 1920x1080 High settings, the average FPS is 112.4. Moving to 2560x1440 High settings reduces the average to 80.2 FPS, a decrease of roughly 28.6%. This indicates that the GPU is being utilized more heavily at the higher resolution.

Q: Is this system more CPU-bound or GPU-bound in Rust?

A: The evidence points to a CPU-bound system at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low (172.9 FPS) and Ultra (86.2 FPS) settings is substantial, showing the GPU's scaling with workload. However, the frame rates at 1080p Low are still far below what the RX 7800 XT is theoretically capable of, suggesting the i5-11400F is limiting the maximum achievable FPS.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the CPU in this combo?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F had a launch MSRP of $157. This is a useful reference point for understanding its market positioning relative to the GPU, which had a launch MSRP of 499 USD.

Q: Can this setup handle 4K gaming in Rust?

A: It can, but not at high frame rates. At 3840x2160 with High settings, the average FPS is 49.3. Lowering to Medium settings yields 55.8 FPS, and only at Low settings does it break past 60 FPS with an average of 83.8. Ultra settings at 4K drop to an unplayable 34 FPS average.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

In the benchmark database, this specific combination of the Intel Core i5-11400F and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT ranks 624th out of 1,717 tested combos for Rust. This places it in the top 36.3% of all systems tested. This rank is a reflection of the balance between the two components. The RX 7800 XT is a powerful GPU, but it is paired with a CPU that, while competent, is not in the same performance tier. The rank suggests that while this system will deliver a smooth experience at 1080p and 1440p with adjusted settings, it is not an optimal pairing for pushing maximum frame rates. Many combos above it will feature more recent, higher-core-count CPUs that can better feed the GPU's raw power. The 624th rank indicates a solid mid-to-high-tier setup that is capable but not without its limitations, particularly in CPU-intensive scenes common in Rust's large multiplayer servers.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the system's scaling. At 1920x1080, the average frame rates are as follows: Low settings produce 172.9 FPS, Medium settings produce 134.2 FPS, High settings produce 112.4 FPS, and Ultra settings produce 86.2 FPS. This represents a wide spread of 86.7 FPS between the lowest and highest settings, showing that the GPU has significant headroom.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: Low settings at 138.5 FPS, Medium at 94.3 FPS, High at 80.2 FPS, and Ultra at 57.7 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra is 80.8 FPS, a similar pattern to 1080p, but the overall numbers are lower, confirming the increased load on the GPU. The jump from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is a reduction of 34.4 FPS, which is substantial.

At 3840x2160, the system's limits are more apparent. The averages are: Low settings at 83.8 FPS, Medium at 55.8 FPS, High at 49.3 FPS, and Ultra at 34 FPS. Here, the frame rate drop from 1440p Low to 4K Low is 54.7 FPS. The Ultra setting at 4K is the only configuration that falls below 60 FPS, and the 34 FPS average would be considered a poor experience for a competitive or action-oriented game like Rust.

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

The scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a classic bottleneck shift. At 1080p Low, the system hits 172.9 FPS. When moving to 1440p Low, the FPS drops to 138.5, a decrease of 19.9%. This relatively modest drop indicates that the CPU is still a significant factor, as the GPU is not being pushed hard enough to cause a massive frame rate decline. At 4K Low, the FPS falls to 83.8, a 39.5% drop from 1440p. This larger decrease shows the GPU is now becoming the primary limiting component, as the pixel fill rate demand quadruples.

The trend is consistent across all settings. At High settings, the drop from 1080p (112.4 FPS) to 1440p (80.2 FPS) is 28.6%, and then to 4K (49.3 FPS) is another 38.5% decrease. This pattern confirms that the RX 7800 XT's performance scales predictably with resolution, while the i5-11400F's performance ceiling is exposed at lower resolutions. The data strongly suggests that at 1080p, the CPU is the limiting factor, preventing the GPU from achieving even higher frame rates. At 4K, the GPU's raw compute power becomes the constraint, and the CPU is no longer the primary bottleneck. For users with high refresh rate 1080p monitors, this combo will leave performance on the table; for 1440p or 4K users, it becomes a more balanced system.

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

Choosing the optimal settings depends on the target resolution and refresh rate. For 1920x1080 users with a 144Hz monitor, the Medium preset at 134.2 FPS offers the best balance, providing a smooth experience while maintaining better visual fidelity than Low. High settings at 112.4 FPS are also viable if the monitor is 120Hz, but Medium is a safer bet for consistent frame times. Ultra at 86.2 FPS is playable but does not maximize the high refresh rate potential.

For 2560x1440 users, the Low preset at 138.5 FPS is ideal for competitive play or high refresh rate (144Hz) monitors. If visual quality is a priority, High at 80.2 FPS is a solid choice for a 75Hz or 100Hz display. Medium at 94.3 FPS is a good middle ground, but High offers a more noticeable visual improvement for a modest FPS cost. Ultra at 57.7 FPS is borderline, dipping below 60 FPS, and is not recommended for a smooth experience.

For 3840x2160 users, the data shows that only the Low preset at 83.8 FPS provides a consistently smooth frame rate. Medium at 55.8 FPS and High at 49.3 FPS are playable on a 60Hz screen but will exhibit noticeable stuttering in busy scenes. Ultra at 34 FPS is not recommended for any gameplay scenario. The best overall experience for this combo, considering the balance between CPU and GPU, is likely 1440p with High settings, as it provides a strong visual experience while keeping the average FPS above 80, a level that most users find responsive and fluid.