Rust

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 generation, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its L3 cache is 18 MB shared, while L1 is 80 KB per core and L2 is 1.25 MB per core. The chip uses a 10 nm process node from Intel and fits the Intel Socket 1700. In the broader benchmark database, this CPU sits at the 77th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 19,221.

The nearest rivals in aggregate CPU performance are tightly clustered. The Intel Core i7-8700K scores 19,210, which is just 0.1% behind, while the Intel Core i5-1335U scores 19,167, 0.3% behind. The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS scores 19,364, putting the i5-12400F 0.7% behind that part, and the AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18,979, meaning the i5-12400F is 1.3% ahead. These deltas are negligible — essentially all four processors deliver equivalent aggregate throughput for database purposes.

In Rust, the CPU's role becomes clear when examining the measured FPS data. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo reaches 205.6 FPS, which is the highest measured result in the entire set. This indicates the CPU can feed frames at a very high rate when the GPU is not the bottleneck. Single-thread performance, measured by 3dmark_single_thread at 909 and passmark_single_thread at 3,481, matters for a game like Rust, which is known for its simulation and physics load. The boost clock of 4.40 GHz helps keep that single-thread work moving.

The 12 threads matter for background tasks and the game's server-side simulation baked into the client. Multi-threaded scores like cinebench_r23_multicore at 16,518 and passmark_multithread at 19,433 show reasonable scaling from the 6 physical cores. Yet in Rust, the data shows that as settings rise from Low to Ultra at any resolution, the FPS drops — but the magnitude of that drop is far larger at 4K, which points to the GPU taking over as the limiting factor. At 1080p, the CPU is capable enough to push well above 200 FPS on Low, so the processor is not a severe constraint in this pairing.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti uses the AD104 chip on a 5 nm process from TSMC, with 35,800 million transistors. It has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s. The base clock is 2,310 MHz and the boost clock is 2,610 MHz, with memory clocked at 1,313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). The GPU has 7,680 shading units, 240 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 60 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores. Its FP32 performance is 40.09 TFLOPS. The card sits at the 85th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 44,900.

The nearest GPU rivals are close in aggregate score. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile scores 45,152, which is 0.6% ahead of the RTX 4070 Ti. The Intel Arc A730M scores 45,592, 1.5% ahead. The AMD Radeon Pro 580 scores 44,195, meaning the RTX 4070 Ti is 1.6% ahead, and the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT scores 45,642, putting the RTX 4070 Ti 1.6% behind. These deltaPct values are small, indicating that the RTX 4070 Ti's aggregate performance is comparable to those parts, though none of those are direct gaming rivals for Rust at this level.

In Rust, the GPU's 12 GB VRAM is sufficient for the measured settings. The data shows that at 4K Ultra, the combo drops to 46.3 FPS, while at 1080p Ultra it sustains 116.7 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is stark: 105.1 FPS versus 46.3 FPS, a drop of more than half. This is a GPU-bound scenario, where the RTX 4070 Ti's raw compute — 40.09 TFLOPS FP32 and 626.4 GTexel/s texture rate — is being taxed heavily. The memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s also becomes a factor at higher resolutions, as the game's large world assets and textures are streamed in.

The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) is relevant because Rust's rendering paths can leverage modern features. The pixel rate of 208.8 GPixel/s helps fill frames at 4K, but the data shows it is not enough for a smooth 60 FPS at Ultra. The boost clock of 2,610 MHz provides headroom, but the measured results indicate that the RTX 4070 Ti is the primary limiter at 4K High and Ultra, while at 1080p the CPU can keep up and the GPU delivers high frame rates.

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

The measured FPS data reveals a clear pattern of resolution scaling. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 205.6 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 182.6 FPS, and at 4K Low, it falls to 105.1 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 23 FPS (about 11%), while the drop from 1440p to 4K is 77.5 FPS (about 42%). This accelerating decline indicates that the GPU is becoming the bottleneck as pixel count rises.

Looking at High settings, the trend is similar but steeper in percentage terms. At 1080p High, the combo hits 147.8 FPS. At 1440p High, it is 103.8 FPS, a drop of 44 FPS (about 30%). At 4K High, it falls to 64 FPS, another drop of 39.8 FPS (about 38%). The 4K High result is just above the 60 FPS threshold, but not by much.

Ultra settings show the most dramatic scaling. At 1080p Ultra, the combo manages 116.7 FPS. At 1440p Ultra, it drops to 78.6 FPS, a fall of 38.1 FPS (about 33%). At 4K Ultra, it is 46.3 FPS, down 32.3 FPS (about 41%). The 4K Ultra result is below 60 FPS, indicating that this combo cannot sustain a smooth experience at the highest settings and resolution.

The limiting component analysis is straightforward. At 1080p, the CPU is more capable, as evidenced by the high frame rates across settings — even Ultra holds above 116 FPS. As resolution increases, the GPU's workload grows non-linearly, and the RTX 4070 Ti's 12 GB VRAM and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are pushed harder. The data shows that at 4K, the GPU is the primary limiter, especially on Medium, High, and Ultra settings, where the FPS drops below or near 60. The medium settings at 4K (70.2 FPS) and High at 4K (64 FPS) are playable, but Ultra is not.

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

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of this combo's performance in Rust. At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low settings yield 205.6 FPS, Medium yields 178.1 FPS, High yields 147.8 FPS, and Ultra yields 116.7 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 88.9 FPS, showing that the GPU has plenty of headroom at this resolution even on the highest preset.

At 2560x1440, the numbers are: Low at 182.6 FPS, Medium at 120.9 FPS, High at 103.8 FPS, and Ultra at 78.6 FPS. The drop from Low to Medium is significant at 61.7 FPS, while the drop from Medium to High is 17.1 FPS, and High to Ultra is 25.2 FPS. This non-linear scaling suggests that Medium and High presets introduce substantial rendering costs, likely from shadows, textures, and draw distances.

At 3840x2160, the results are: Low at 105.1 FPS, Medium at 70.2 FPS, High at 64 FPS, and Ultra at 46.3 FPS. The Low setting is the only one that stays comfortably above 100 FPS at 4K. Medium and High are both above 60 FPS but not by a wide margin, while Ultra drops below 50 FPS. The difference between 1080p Low and 4K Low is 100.5 FPS, which is nearly half the 1080p value, highlighting the GPU cost of 4K.

Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: Low is always the fastest, Ultra is always the slowest, and the gap between them widens with resolution. At 1080p, the gap is 88.9 FPS; at 1440p, it is 104 FPS; at 4K, it is 58.8 FPS. The absolute gap narrows at 4K because the GPU is already saturated, but the percentage drop from Low to Ultra is steepest at 4K (55.9% slower). The combo rank in game is 198 out of 1,717 combos, placing it in the top 12% of tested configurations.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Rust?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 205.6, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: Can this combo run Rust at 4K with playable frame rates?

A: At 4K, the combo achieves 105.1 FPS on Low, 70.2 FPS on Medium, and 64 FPS on High — all above 60 FPS. However, at 4K Ultra, it drops to 46.3 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the RTX 4070 Ti compare to its nearest GPU rivals in aggregate benchmark score?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti has an average benchmark score of 44,900. The RTX 5090 Mobile scores 45,152 (0.6% higher), the Intel Arc A730M scores 45,592 (1.5% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro 580 scores 44,195 (1.6% lower), and the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT scores 45,642 (1.6% higher).

Q: What is the FPS difference between 1080p and 4K at High settings?

A: At 1080p High, the combo achieves 147.8 FPS. At 4K High, it drops to 64 FPS, a difference of 83.8 FPS.

Q: Which component limits performance at 4K Ultra in Rust?

A: The data shows that at 4K Ultra (46.3 FPS), the GPU is the limiting component, as the CPU is capable of much higher frame rates at lower resolutions and settings.

Q: How does the i5-12400F compare to the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS in aggregate CPU score?

A: The i5-12400F has an average benchmark score of 19,221, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS scores 19,364, making the i5-12400F 0.7% slower.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, all settings are playable — even Ultra sustains 116.7 FPS, which is above the 100 FPS mark. For high-refresh monitors, Low at 205.6 FPS or Medium at 178.1 FPS offer the smoothest experience, while High at 147.8 FPS balances visual quality with speed. Ultra at 116.7 FPS is still viable for those who prioritize visuals.

At 2560x1440, the recommendation shifts. Ultra at 78.6 FPS is playable but not ideal for competitive play. High at 103.8 FPS and Medium at 120.9 FPS provide better headroom. Low at 182.6 FPS is the best choice for maximum responsiveness. The sweet spot for most players is High, as it stays above 100 FPS while offering significantly better visuals than Low.

At 3840x2160, the choices are more constrained. Low at 105.1 FPS is the only preset that clears 100 FPS. Medium at 70.2 FPS and High at 64 FPS are both above 60 FPS, making them suitable for slower-paced gameplay. Ultra at 46.3 FPS is not recommended for a smooth experience. The data indicates that for 4K, the best experience is High at 64 FPS if visual fidelity matters, or Medium at 70.2 FPS for a slightly higher frame rate with modest visual trade-offs.

The overall recommendation for this combo is to run Rust at 1440p with High settings, achieving 103.8 FPS, which balances visual quality and smoothness. If a higher frame rate is needed, dropping to Medium at 120.9 FPS provides a 17.1 FPS improvement. At 1080p, Medium or High are ideal, while at 4K, players should stick to High or Medium to stay above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset is only viable at 1080p for this processor and graphics card combination.