Rust

The Intel Core i5-12400 paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces a very constrained gaming experience in Rust, with the measured frame rates indicating that the integrated graphics solution is the primary factor limiting performance across all tested resolutions. The data shows a clear and dramatic collapse in frame rates as resolution increases, moving from a playable 69 FPS average at 1080p Low to an unplayable 12 FPS average at 4K Ultra. This pattern strongly indicates that the GPU is the bottleneck, as the CPU’s performance headroom cannot compensate for the rendering demands placed on the Arc B370’s limited execution resources.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a textbook case of GPU-bound performance degradation. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves an average of 69 FPS, but this drops to 48 FPS at 1440p and further to 28 FPS at 4K. This represents a 59% reduction in performance from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, which aligns with the increasing pixel count demanding more from the rendering pipeline. The Arc B370’s 20 ROPs and 40 TMUs are simply insufficient to maintain throughput as the pixel workload quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

The scaling pattern holds across all settings presets. At High settings, the average FPS goes from 39 at 1080p to 27 at 1440p and 16 at 4K, a consistent drop of roughly 30-40% for each resolution step. Medium settings show a similar trend: 46 FPS at 1080p, 32 at 1440p, and 19 at 4K. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, with averages of 30, 20, and 12 FPS across the three resolutions respectively. These numbers suggest that the GPU’s fill rate and shading capacity are the limiting factors, as the CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads are not being saturated at these low frame rates.

Interestingly, the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low (69 FPS) and Ultra (30 FPS) is 39 FPS, while at 4K, the difference shrinks to 16 FPS (28 vs 12). This convergence indicates that at higher resolutions, the pixel processing becomes so dominant that settings-based workload differences matter less relative to the sheer resolution overhead. The data suggests that even dropping to Low settings cannot rescue 4K performance, as the 28 FPS average remains below acceptable playability thresholds.

FAQ

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

A: According to the measured data, 1080p is the only resolution where the combo approaches playable frame rates, with a 69 FPS average at Low settings and 46 FPS at Medium. Both 1440p and 4K resolutions produce averages below 50 FPS even at Low settings, with 4K at 28 FPS being particularly weak.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 1440p?

A: The data shows a significant drop across all settings. At Low, the average falls from 69 FPS to 48 FPS, a 21 FPS reduction. At High, it drops from 39 FPS to 27 FPS, and at Ultra, from 30 FPS to 20 FPS. This represents roughly a 30% performance penalty across the board.

Q: Is the Ultra preset viable at any resolution?

A: No. The highest average recorded for Ultra settings is 30 FPS at 1080p, which drops to 20 FPS at 1440p and 12 FPS at 4K. These numbers are all below the threshold for smooth gameplay, indicating that Ultra is not a practical choice for this hardware combination.

Q: Does lowering settings help at 4K?

A: Lowering settings from Ultra to Low improves the average from 12 FPS to 28 FPS at 4K. While this is a substantial relative improvement, the absolute numbers remain low. The 28 FPS average at 4K Low is still far below the 69 FPS achievable at 1080p Low, confirming that resolution has a larger impact than settings.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, which places it just 0.2% below the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186) and 0.5% below the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190). It is 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168), indicating it sits in the lower tier of GPU performance.

Q: What is the frame time consistency like for this combo?

A: The measured data includes minimum and maximum FPS values only for Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the range is 39 to 53 FPS, at 1440p Medium it is 27 to 37 FPS, and at 4K Medium it is 16 to 22 FPS. These ranges suggest moderate frame pacing variability within each resolution.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Panther Lake chip and Xe3-LPG architecture. Its specifications reveal why it struggles with Rust: 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and only 20 raster operation pipelines. The GPU operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts to 2400 MHz, with a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute is rated at 6.144 TFLOPS, which is low for modern gaming workloads.

The memory configuration is particularly limiting. The Arc B370 uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the system’s main RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. This shared memory architecture introduces bandwidth constraints that are "System Dependent" according to the data. In Rust, which is known for its large world rendering and frequent texture streaming, this shared memory setup likely contributes to the severe frame rate drops at higher resolutions where memory bandwidth demands increase substantially.

The GPU’s performance percentile of 5 versus all GPUs places it in the bottom tier of available graphics hardware. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 is the only benchmark recorded, and its nearest rivals are all older or lower-end parts like the ATI Radeon HD 5770. This positioning explains why even at 1080p Low, the combo only manages 69 FPS. The GPU’s 10 ray tracing cores and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate do not translate into practical gaming performance in Rust when the fundamental rasterization throughput is this limited.

The power envelope of 25 W TDP indicates this is an efficiency-focused part, but that efficiency comes at the cost of raw performance. The "IGP" slot width and lack of dedicated power connectors confirm this is an integrated solution, not a discrete card. Based on the measured data, the GPU is unequivocally the limiting component, as frame rates scale almost entirely with resolution and settings changes that affect GPU workload rather than CPU workload.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-12400 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2710 out of 2953 tested combinations in Rust. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested configurations, which is consistent with the low GPU performance percentile. The rank of 2710 indicates that the vast majority of other hardware combinations deliver better frame rates in Rust, even accounting for different CPU-GPU pairings.

The CPU itself performs reasonably well in synthetic benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 18683 and a percentile of 72 versus all CPUs. This suggests the processor is not the primary weakness of this combo. However, the GPU’s percentile of 5 drags the overall gaming performance down dramatically. The combination of a mid-range CPU with a bottom-tier GPU creates a significant imbalance where the system’s gaming capability is defined almost entirely by the GPU’s limitations.

In Rust specifically, the combo rank reflects the game’s demanding rendering requirements. The measured frame rates at 1080p High (39 FPS) and 1440p High (27 FPS) are below what most gamers would accept for a survival game that requires quick reactions to environmental threats. The rank of 2710 out of 2953 suggests that even entry-level discrete GPUs would likely outperform this integrated solution. The data shows that this combo is only usable at the lowest resolution and settings, which is a poor outcome for a game released in 2018.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 69 FPS, which is the highest measured across all configurations. Medium settings average 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 and maximum of 53. High settings average 39 FPS, and Ultra settings average 30 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 39 FPS drop, indicating that settings have a substantial impact at this resolution.

At 2560x1440, performance drops noticeably. Low settings average 48 FPS, Medium averages 32 FPS (minimum 27, maximum 37), High averages 27 FPS, and Ultra averages 20 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra narrows to 28 FPS compared to 39 FPS at 1080p, suggesting that resolution overhead is starting to dominate settings-based differences.

At 3840x2160, the combo struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low settings average 28 FPS, Medium averages 19 FPS (minimum 16, maximum 22), High averages 16 FPS, and Ultra averages 12 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is only 16 FPS, showing that at 4K, even the lowest settings cannot overcome the GPU’s rendering limitations. The highest average at 4K is 28 FPS, which is below the 30 FPS threshold often considered minimal for playability.

The data shows that the only configuration exceeding 60 FPS is 1080p Low at 69 FPS. All other configurations fall below 60 FPS, with most falling below 50 FPS. The Medium settings at 1080p (46 FPS) and 1440p (32 FPS) provide the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, but still represent a compromised experience.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured data, the recommended settings for this combo depend heavily on the user’s resolution priority. At 1080p, Low settings provide the only frame rate above 60 FPS, with an average of 69 FPS. This is the only configuration that offers a smooth experience by most standards. Medium settings at 1080p provide 46 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced survival gameplay.

For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, 1080p High at 39 FPS is the highest quality setting that maintains an average above 30 FPS. Ultra settings at any resolution should be avoided, as the highest average for Ultra is 30 FPS at 1080p, which is borderline at best and drops to 12 FPS at 4K.

At 1440p, the data suggests that only Low settings (48 FPS) offer a somewhat playable experience, while Medium (32 FPS) and High (27 FPS) are marginal. At 4K, no settings preset delivers acceptable performance, with even Low settings averaging only 28 FPS. Given the severe frame rate penalties at higher resolutions, the data supports using 1080p with Medium settings as the best compromise between visual fidelity and playability, delivering 46 FPS with a minimum of 39 FPS.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400 provides 6 cores and 12 threads based on the Alder Lake architecture, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The CPU has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Its synthetic benchmark scores are respectable, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15989 and a single-core score of 2257, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs.

In Rust, the CPU’s role appears secondary to the GPU’s limitations. The measured frame rates are so low that the CPU is unlikely to be the bottleneck. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 5873 and max-thread score of 5890 indicate the CPU can handle multi-threaded workloads effectively. Even the 2-thread score of 1692 shows solid single-core performance, which is relevant for games like Rust that have significant single-threaded components.

The CPU’s 65 W TDP and 10 nm process node are normal for a desktop part, and its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory gives system builders flexibility. However, in this combo, the CPU’s capabilities are largely underutilized because the GPU cannot deliver frame rates high enough to stress the processor. The nearest CPU rivals show the i5-12400 is competitive: it is 0.1% behind the AMD EPYC 7643, 0.3% behind the Intel Core i7-1355U, and 0.7% behind the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330, while being 0.9% ahead of the Intel Core i3-14100F.

Given that the GPU is the clear bottleneck in this combination, the CPU has significant headroom. If paired with a more capable GPU, the i5-12400 would likely deliver much higher frame rates in Rust. However, as configured, the CPU’s performance is wasted on a GPU that cannot keep up with even the lowest resolution and settings demands. The data shows that upgrading the GPU would yield far greater performance gains than upgrading the CPU in this system.