Rust

# How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT lands at rank 1207 out of 3723 tested combinations in Rust, placing it in the 67.6th percentile of all tested systems. This is a solidly above-average position, though not spectacularly elite — the data suggests a combo that sits comfortably in the upper-middle tier of what the database has recorded for this game.

What makes this ranking particularly interesting is the discrepancy between the two components' individual standings. The RX 7800 XT holds a percentile rank of only 51 against all GPUs, meaning roughly half of all tested graphics cards score higher in generic benchmarks. Meanwhile, the i5-12400 sits at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs. When the GPU is the weaker link in the pairing yet the combo still achieves a 67.6th percentile result in Rust, this hints that the game's demands align more favorably with the CPU's strengths than the GPU's raw compute might suggest.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals provides context for its standing. The i5-12400's average benchmark score of 18683 sits within a tight cluster: the AMD EPYC 7643 scores 18697 (-0.1%), the Intel Core i7-1355U scores 18730 (-0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 scores 18811 (-0.7%). Interestingly, the Intel Core i3-14100F trails at 18519, a +0.9% delta from the i5's perspective. This grouping shows the i5-12400 is priced into a performance niche where tiny percentage differences separate competitors.

On the GPU side, the RX 7800 XT's average benchmark score of 11627 places it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11680, -0.5% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (11528, +0.9%), and the NVIDIA Tesla K20c (11479, +1.3%). The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT scores 11842, a -1.8% delta. The fact that a modern RDNA 3.0 card sits this close to older and lower-tier products in aggregate benchmarks is noteworthy, though the Rust-specific results tell a more nuanced story.

The rank of 1207 out of 3723 means this combo outperforms roughly 2,500 other tested pairings. For a mainstream six-core CPU with a upper-midrange GPU, that is a strong showing. The data implies that Rust's optimization favors this particular balance of CPU throughput and GPU memory bandwidth — a point we will explore through the resolution scaling and component role sections below.

# Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data across four settings presets and three resolutions reveals clear guidance for the best experience. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 203 FPS average, which is extraordinarily high for a survival game known for demanding environments. Medium drops to 137 FPS, High to 115 FPS, and Ultra to 88 FPS. The gap from Low to Medium is 66 FPS (a 32.5% reduction), while the step from Medium to High costs another 22 FPS (16.1%), and High to Ultra costs 27 FPS (23.5%).

At 1440p, the pattern shifts. Low produces 140 FPS, Medium 94 FPS, High 79 FPS, and Ultra 60 FPS. The proportional drops are steeper here: Low to Medium loses 46 FPS (32.9%), Medium to High loses 15 FPS (16.0%), and High to Ultra loses 19 FPS (24.1%). Notice that the percentage losses are nearly identical to 1080p, suggesting a consistent scaling behavior in how settings impact performance regardless of resolution.

At 4K, the numbers become more constrained. Low yields 83 FPS, Medium 55 FPS, High 47 FPS, and Ultra 36 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is 28 FPS (33.7%), Medium to High is 8 FPS (14.5%), and High to Ultra is 11 FPS (23.4%). The 4K Medium setting has the only recorded min/max range in the dataset: 47 to 64 FPS, with an average of 55 FPS.

The best experience per the measured rows depends on the target display. For 1080p users, Medium at 137 FPS offers a strong balance — it is 66 FPS below Low but still far above the 60 FPS threshold, and it gains 22 FPS over High. The min FPS of 116 at 1080p Medium indicates the frame pacing stays well-controlled. For 1440p, Medium at 94 FPS with a min of 80 and max of 108 provides a smooth experience that avoids the sharp drop to 60 FPS seen at Ultra. At 4K, Medium at 55 FPS is the only preset that approaches playable territory, though the min of 47 FPS shows occasional dips below 60.

Ultra settings are difficult to recommend at any resolution. At 1080p Ultra hits 88 FPS, which is playable but costs 49 FPS versus Medium. At 1440p Ultra drops to 60 FPS exactly — marginal. At 4K Ultra falls to 36 FPS, which is below smooth gameplay thresholds. The data suggests that Medium is the sweet spot across all resolutions, offering the best compromise between visual fidelity and frame rate stability.

# Resolution Scaling

Tracing FPS from 1080p to 4K reveals how the bottleneck shifts between components. At Low settings, 1080p produces 203 FPS, 1440p produces 140 FPS (31.0% drop), and 4K produces 83 FPS (59.1% drop from 1080p). At Medium, the progression is 137 → 94 → 55 FPS, representing a 31.4% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a 59.9% drop from 1080p to 4K. High settings show 115 → 79 → 47 FPS, with drops of 31.3% and 59.1% respectively. Ultra follows the same pattern: 88 → 60 → 36 FPS, dropping 31.8% then 59.1%.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all four settings presets is striking. Regardless of whether the game runs at Low or Ultra, the 1080p-to-1440p penalty hovers around 31%, and the 1080p-to-4K penalty sits near 59%. This uniform scaling pattern indicates that the limiting factor changes predictably with resolution — the render resolution is scaling the workload in a consistent, linear fashion.

At 1080p Low, the 203 FPS figure suggests the CPU is the primary limiter. The GPU has headroom to render far more frames, but the i5-12400's six cores cannot feed the graphics pipeline fast enough. The fact that dropping from Medium to Low at 1080p yields a 66 FPS jump — the largest absolute gain in the dataset — reinforces this: the GPU is so unconstrained that reducing its workload translates directly into massive frame rate gains.

As resolution climbs to 4K, the GPU becomes the bottleneck. At 4K Ultra, the 36 FPS average shows the RX 7800 XT struggling with the pixel throughput required. The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth are substantial, but the 4K workload at Ultra pushes the 3840 shading units to their limit. The min FPS of 47 at 4K Medium (the only recorded min/max in the 4K tier) suggests that even Medium settings can cause frame drops during intense scenes.

The data implies that for this combo, 1440p is the resolution where CPU and GPU balance each other best. The 31% drop from 1080p is consistent with a GPU that is beginning to matter more, but the 140 FPS at Low and 94 FPS at Medium show neither component is completely overwhelmed. At 4K, the GPU takes over as the definitive limiter, and the CPU's role diminishes — evidenced by the smaller absolute FPS differences between settings at 4K compared to 1080p.

# FAQ

Q: Is this combo better suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming in Rust?

A: The data shows strong performance at both resolutions. At 1080p Medium, the combo averages 137 FPS with a minimum of 116 FPS. At 1440p Medium, it averages 94 FPS with a minimum of 80 FPS. Both are above 60 FPS thresholds, but 1440p utilizes the GPU more effectively — the 31% drop from 1080p is consistent with a balanced workload shift.

Q: What is the highest playable setting at 4K?

A: At 4K Medium, the combo averages 55 FPS with a recorded range of 47 to 64 FPS. This is the only 4K preset with min/max data, and the 47 FPS minimum indicates occasional dips below 60. 4K High drops to 47 FPS average, and 4K Ultra falls to 36 FPS — both below smooth playability.

Q: How does the RX 7800 XT's benchmark standing compare to its in-game performance?

A: The GPU holds a 51st percentile rank among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 11627, placing it near the GTX 1660 (11680, -0.5% delta). Yet in Rust, the combo achieves a 67.6th percentile rank. This suggests the GPU's architecture, particularly its 16 GB memory and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth, benefits Rust more than generic benchmarks indicate.

Q: Which component limits performance at 1080p Low settings?

A: The 203 FPS average at 1080p Low indicates the CPU is the bottleneck. The i5-12400's six cores and 12 threads, boosting to 4.40 GHz, cannot generate enough frames to saturate the GPU's capacity. The large FPS jump from Medium to Low at 1080p (66 FPS) confirms the GPU has significant headroom.

Q: Does the Ultra preset provide a consistent experience at any resolution?

A: Ultra at 1080p averages 88 FPS, at 1440p averages 60 FPS, and at 4K averages 36 FPS. The 60 FPS at 1440p Ultra is exactly at the threshold, and the 36 FPS at 4K is far below. Only 1080p Ultra offers a comfortable margin, but it sacrifices 49 FPS versus Medium.

Q: How does the CPU's nearest rival comparison affect expectations for Rust?

A: The i5-12400 scores 18683 average, within 0.7% of the Ryzen AI 5 330 (18811) and 0.3% of the Core i7-1355U (18730). These tiny deltas suggest that swapping among these CPUs would produce nearly identical Rust performance. The i3-14100F at 18519 (+0.9% delta) is also within a negligible margin.

# GPU Role

The RX 7800 XT brings substantial hardware to Rust. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivers 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth — a figure that matters for Rust's large, persistent world where texture streaming and asset loading are constant. The GPU's 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units provide the raw throughput for pixel-heavy scenes. Clock speeds range from a 1295 MHz base to a 2430 MHz boost, with a 2124 MHz game clock that represents typical sustained performance.

The memory configuration is particularly relevant to Rust's open-world nature. The 16 GB capacity means the GPU can hold vast texture sets and geometry without spilling to slower system memory. The 624.1 GB/s bandwidth ensures that data moves quickly between the memory and the compute units. At 4K, this becomes critical — the 47 FPS average at High settings and 36 FPS at Ultra show the GPU working hard to fill 3840x2160 pixels with the game's detailed environments.

The GPU's benchmark profile tells a cautionary tale. Its average score of 11627 places it at the 51st percentile, with nearest rivals including the GTX 1660 (11680, -0.5% delta) and the RX 6500 XT (11842, -1.8% delta). These are significantly older or lower-tier products, yet the aggregate scores cluster closely. However, the Rust-specific data reveals that the 7800 XT's strengths align with this game's demands. The 203 FPS at 1080p Low and 140 FPS at 1440p Low indicate the GPU is far from being the limiting factor at lower resolutions.

The pixel rate of 233.3 GPixel/s and texture rate of 583.2 GTexel/s provide theoretical ceilings, but the measured FPS shows the practical limits. At 4K Medium, the 55 FPS average with 47 FPS minimums suggests the GPU is hitting memory bandwidth constraints during complex scenes. The FP32 compute of 37.32 TFLOPS is substantial, yet Rust's shader complexity at 4K Ultra overwhelms it, producing just 36 FPS.

The GPU's 60 ray tracing cores are present but Rust does not appear to use them heavily based on the performance data. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility mean the GPU can handle modern rendering paths, but the consistent scaling across settings suggests traditional rasterization is the primary workload.

# CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a six-core, 12-thread processor based on Alder Lake architecture. Its base clock of 2.50 GHz boosts to 4.40 GHz, and the 18 MB of shared L3 cache (with 1.25 MB L2 per core and 80 KB L1 per core) provides ample on-die storage for game data. The 10 nm process node and 65 W TDP make it an efficient choice, while the dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support offers flexibility.

In Rust, the CPU's role becomes evident at lower resolutions. At 1080p Low, the 203 FPS average is likely CPU-bound — the GPU could render more frames, but the processor's six cores are feeding the pipeline as fast as possible. The 3dmark single-thread score of 910 and the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2257 show moderate per-core performance, which matters for Rust's main thread and physics calculations.

The multi-threaded capabilities are more substantial. Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 15989, and Geekbench multi-core reaches 8564. The Passmark multi-thread score of 18747 and the 3dmark max-threads score of 5890 indicate that the CPU can handle parallel workloads well. Rust benefits from this, as the game spawns multiple worker threads for world simulation, entity updates, and network processing.

The CPU's nearest rivals show it sits in a crowded field. The AMD EPYC 7643 scores 18697 (-0.1% delta), the Core i7-1355U scores 18730 (-0.3%), and the Ryzen AI 5 330 scores 18811 (-0.7%). The i3-14100F at 18519 is 0.9% behind. These sub-1% differences mean that for Rust gameplay, any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical results when paired with the same GPU.

The 72nd percentile rank among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 18683, places the i5-12400 in the upper tier but not the top. Its 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for Rust's current optimization, but the data hints that games with heavier multi-threading requirements would push this CPU harder. The 3dmark 16-thread score of 5873 versus the max-threads score of 5890 shows the CPU scales well to its full thread count, with minimal degradation.

At 4K, the CPU's role diminishes. The 31% FPS drop from 1080p to 1440p and another 40% drop to 4K (from 1440p) show the GPU becoming the primary bottleneck. The consistent percentage drops across settings at each resolution suggest the CPU maintains its frame generation rate regardless of GPU load, but it is no longer the limiting factor when pixel count rises.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The complete measured FPS dataset for this combo in Rust is as follows:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 203 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 137 FPS average, 116 FPS minimum, 157 FPS maximum
• High: 115 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 88 FPS average, no min/max recorded

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 140 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 94 FPS average, 80 FPS minimum, 108 FPS maximum
• High: 79 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 60 FPS average, no min/max recorded

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 83 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Medium: 55 FPS average, 47 FPS minimum, 64 FPS maximum
• High: 47 FPS average, no min/max recorded
• Ultra: 36 FPS average, no min/max recorded

The 1080p Medium setting provides the only min/max data at that resolution, showing a 116-157 FPS range. This 41 FPS spread indicates variability during intense gameplay moments. At 1440p Medium, the range narrows to 80-108 FPS (a 28 FPS spread), and at 4K Medium, it tightens further to 47-64 FPS (a 17 FPS spread). This pattern suggests that as the GPU becomes more stressed, frame time consistency actually improves — the GPU is working at full capacity and variations compress.

The scaling from Low to Ultra at each resolution follows a consistent pattern. At 1080p, the settings ladder is 203 → 137 → 115 → 88 FPS. At 1440p, it is 140 → 94 → 79 → 60 FPS. At 4K, it is 83 → 55 → 47 → 36 FPS. The Low-to-Medium drop is the largest step at every resolution (66, 46, and 28 FPS respectively), while the Medium-to-High step is the smallest (22, 15, and 8 FPS). The High-to-Ultra step is moderate (27, 19, and 11 FPS).

These numbers reveal that the Low preset offers diminishing returns in FPS terms at higher resolutions. At 4K, Low (83 FPS) versus Medium (55 FPS) is a 28 FPS difference, but the visual quality improvement from Medium may justify the drop for many players. The 4K Ultra figure of 36 FPS is the only measurement below 40 FPS in the entire dataset, underscoring the GPU's limits at maximum settings and resolution.