Rust

The Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER pairing produces a highly playable Rust experience, though the data reveals a system that shifts between CPU and GPU limits depending on the resolution and quality preset. This combination ranks 1014th out of 1717 tested combos, placing it in the upper-middle tier of the database. The measured frame rates show a clear hierarchy of performance, with the Low preset delivering the highest averages and the Ultra preset delivering the lowest.

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

The Intel Core i5-12400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the Alder Lake-S family, running on the Intel Socket 1700 platform. Its base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz are standard for the mid-range Core i5 stack, and the 18 MB of shared L3 cache helps feed the six cores during gameplay. The processor sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 19221. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-8700K, scores 19210, a delta of just 0.1%, meaning the two chips are effectively tied in raw compute performance.

In Rust, the CPU’s role becomes more apparent when the GPU is not the bottleneck. At 1080p with the Low preset, the system achieves 151.4 FPS, a figure that suggests the 12400F is capable of feeding the RTX 2070 SUPER with enough data to reach triple-digit frame rates. The single-threaded performance, measured at 909 in 3dmark_single_thread and 2332 in cinebench_r23_singlecore, is likely the more critical metric for Rust’s game logic and physics simulation. A 6-core/12-thread configuration provides room for background tasks and the game’s server-side simulation, which can be demanding in a survival game with many entities. The processor’s 65 W TDP indicates efficient operation, and its 10 nm process node contributes to that efficiency.

Comparing to rivals, the 12400F is 0.1% ahead of the i7-8700K and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-1335U, but it trails the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS by 0.7% and the AMD EPYC 7773X by 1.3%. These deltas are small, suggesting that the 12400F is positioned in a densely populated performance tier. In the context of the measured FPS data, the CPU does not appear to be the limiting factor at lower resolutions, as the frame rates scale predictably with GPU load. However, at 4K Ultra, where the average drops to 26.9 FPS, the CPU is clearly not the bottleneck; the GPU is overwhelmed.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER is a Turing-architecture GPU with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock of 1605 MHz and boost clock of 1770 MHz are paired with 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The GPU’s 9.062 TFLOPS of FP32 performance places it at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 22206. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A400, scores 22307, a delta of -0.5%, meaning the 2070 SUPER is slightly behind.

The 8 GB VRAM is a significant factor for Rust at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 26.9, which is likely a direct consequence of the GPU struggling to handle the texture and draw-call load at that resolution. The memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s is sufficient for 1440p, but at 4K, the GPU’s compute capacity becomes the limiting factor. The data shows a steep drop from 4K Low (62.2 FPS) to 4K Medium (41.3 FPS), a decrease of over 33%, indicating that the GPU’s shading units are saturated by the increased quality settings.

The RTX 2070 SUPER’s performance relative to rivals is tight: it is 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z, 2.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5700, but 2.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile. The 2070 SUPER is an end-of-life product, but its 12 nm process node and 13,600 million transistors still deliver competitive results in this game. The GPU’s 215 W TDP and dual-slot design suggest it is a power-hungry component, but the measured FPS data shows it can handle Rust at 1080p and 1440p with ease, provided the settings are not maxed out.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of which preset offers the best experience at each resolution, based on the balance between visual quality and frame rate. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 151.4 FPS, which is more than enough for a smooth experience on a high-refresh-rate monitor. The Medium preset drops to 103.6 FPS, which is still excellent for competitive play, while High yields 87.4 FPS and Ultra drops to 66.8 FPS. For 1080p, the Medium preset appears to be the sweet spot: it offers a significant visual upgrade over Low while maintaining a frame rate above 100 FPS.

At 1440p, the Low preset delivers 106.8 FPS, which is playable but drops below the 1080p Medium figure. The Medium preset yields 71.7 FPS, which is borderline for a 144 Hz display but acceptable for a 60 Hz panel. High produces 58.8 FPS, and Ultra falls to 42.9 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay on most monitors. The data suggests that for 1440p, the Low preset is the best choice for maintaining high frame rates, while Medium is viable for those who prioritize visual fidelity over raw speed.

At 4K, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset delivers 62.2 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced action. Medium drops to 41.3 FPS, High falls to 38 FPS, and Ultra drops to 26.9 FPS, which is not recommended for a smooth experience. For 4K, the Low preset is the only option that provides a consistently playable frame rate, and even that is close to the edge of acceptability. The data indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K reserved for those who are willing to compromise on settings.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This combination of the Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER ranks 1014th out of 1717 tested combos in Rust. This places it in the 59th percentile of all tested systems, indicating that it is above average but not in the top tier. The rank reflects the overall performance across all resolutions and settings, and the data shows that the combo is capable of delivering playable frame rates at 1080p and 1440p, but struggles at 4K.

The rank is likely influenced by the GPU’s age and the CPU’s mid-range positioning. The 12400F is a solid performer, as evidenced by its 77th percentile rank among CPUs, but it is not a top-tier chip. The RTX 2070 SUPER, at the 65th percentile among GPUs, is similarly positioned in the upper-middle tier. When combined, the two components produce a system that is well-suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming but lacks the headroom for 4K. The combo’s rank of 1014 out of 1717 suggests that there are many systems in the database that outperform it, particularly those with newer GPUs and higher-core-count CPUs.

The data shows that the combo’s performance is competitive with systems that feature similar hardware, but it is not exceptional. The 12400F’s close rivalry with the i7-8700K, and the 2070 SUPER’s tight race with the RTX 4060 Mobile, indicate that this system is within a few percentage points of many other configurations. The rank of 1014 reflects this positioning, with the combo landing in the middle of the pack.

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

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to achieve over 100 FPS in Rust?

A: At 1920x1080 with the Low preset, the combo achieves 151.4 FPS, and at 1080p Medium it achieves 103.6 FPS. No other resolution or setting combination exceeds 100 FPS.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-12400F compare to its closest rival in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The 12400F has an average benchmark score of 19221, which is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i7-8700K’s score of 19210. It is also 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-1335U, but 0.7% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS and 1.3% behind the AMD EPYC 7773X.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 2560x1440?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset delivers 106.8 FPS, while the Ultra preset delivers 42.9 FPS. This represents a drop of 63.9 FPS, or approximately 60%, when switching from Low to Ultra.

Q: Is the GPU or CPU more likely to be the bottleneck at 4K Ultra settings?

A: At 3840x2160 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 26.9. Given that the CPU is capable of much higher frame rates at lower resolutions, the data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at 4K Ultra.

Q: What is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER’s percentile rank among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 2070 SUPER is at the 65th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 22206. Its closest rival is the NVIDIA RTX A400, which scores 22307, a delta of -0.5%.

Q: How many FPS does the combo achieve at 1080p High, and how does that compare to 1440p High?

A: At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo achieves 87.4 FPS. At 2560x1440 with High settings, it achieves 58.8 FPS, a drop of 28.6 FPS when moving up in resolution.

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

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS values are as follows: Low preset delivers 151.4 FPS, Medium delivers 103.6 FPS, High delivers 87.4 FPS, and Ultra delivers 66.8 FPS. The progression from Low to Medium is a drop of 47.8 FPS, from Medium to High is a drop of 16.2 FPS, and from High to Ultra is a drop of 20.6 FPS. The largest relative drop occurs between Low and Medium, at approximately 32%.

At 2560x1440, the measured average FPS values are: Low preset delivers 106.8 FPS, Medium delivers 71.7 FPS, High delivers 58.8 FPS, and Ultra delivers 42.9 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 35.1 FPS, from Medium to High is 12.9 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 15.9 FPS. The relative drop from Low to Medium is approximately 33%, similar to the 1080p data.

At 3840x2160, the measured average FPS values are: Low preset delivers 62.2 FPS, Medium delivers 41.3 FPS, High delivers 38 FPS, and Ultra delivers 26.9 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is 20.9 FPS, from Medium to High is 3.3 FPS, and from High to Ultra is 11.1 FPS. The relative drop from Low to Medium is approximately 34%, and the drop from High to Ultra is approximately 29%.

The data shows a consistent pattern across all resolutions: the Low preset provides the highest frame rates, and each subsequent preset tier reduces performance. The magnitude of the drops varies, with the Low-to-Medium transition being the most significant at every resolution. This suggests that the Medium preset introduces a substantial increase in GPU load, likely due to higher texture quality and shading effects.

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

The scaling of FPS across resolutions reveals the nature of the bottleneck in this system. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 151.4 FPS at 1080p to 106.8 FPS at 1440p, and then to 62.2 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 44.6 FPS, or approximately 29%, while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 44.6 FPS, or approximately 42%. The percentage drop increases as resolution increases, indicating that the GPU is becoming more of a limiting factor.

At Medium settings, the frame rate drops from 103.6 FPS at 1080p to 71.7 FPS at 1440p, and then to 41.3 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 31.9 FPS, or approximately 31%, and the drop from 1440p to 4K is 30.4 FPS, or approximately 42%. At High settings, the frame rate drops from 87.4 FPS at 1080p to 58.8 FPS at 1440p, and then to 38 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 28.6 FPS, or approximately 33%, and the drop from 1440p to 4K is 20.8 FPS, or approximately 35%.

At Ultra settings, the frame rate drops from 66.8 FPS at 1080p to 42.9 FPS at 1440p, and then to 26.9 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 23.9 FPS, or approximately 36%, and the drop from 1440p to 4K is 16 FPS, or approximately 37%. The consistent pattern of larger percentage drops at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU is the primary limiting factor, especially at 4K. The CPU’s performance headroom is evident at 1080p, where the GPU is more capable of keeping up, but as the pixel count increases, the GPU’s shading units and memory bandwidth are overwhelmed. The data suggests that this combo is best utilized at 1080p or 1440p, where the CPU can keep the GPU fed and the frame rates remain playable.