Rust

The Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the Intel Arc B390 presents a peculiar case in Rust. The data shows a configuration where the integrated graphics solution is the overwhelming bottleneck, resulting in a combo rank of 2601 out of 2953 tested configurations. This places the pairing in the bottom 12% of all tested combos, indicating that while the CPU is a modern 10-core part, the graphics subsystem severely limits the experience. The measured frames per second across all resolutions and settings remain low, and the pattern of performance degradation points directly at the GPU as the primary constraint.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic and tells a clear story about where the bottleneck lies. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 76 FPS at 1920x1080 to 53 FPS at 2560x1440, and then down to 31 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a 59% reduction in performance from 1080p to 4K. This steep decline is typical of a GPU-limited scenario, as the render resolution increases the pixel count exponentially, and the Arc B390’s fixed compute resources are overwhelmed.

At Medium settings, the scaling is similar but with lower absolute numbers. The average FPS drops from 51 at 1080p to 35 at 1440p, and finally to 21 at 4K. The minimum frame rates at Medium settings also show the strain: 44 FPS at 1080p, 30 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. The maximum FPS figures follow the same trajectory, with 59 at 1080p, 41 at 1440p, and 24 at 4K. This consistent pattern across all presets confirms that the limiting component is the GPU, not the CPU.

The scaling becomes even more punishing at High and Ultra settings. At High, the average FPS is 43 at 1080p, 30 at 1440p, and 18 at 4K. At Ultra, the numbers are 33, 23, and 13 respectively. The gap between 1080p and 4K at Ultra is a 61% drop. The data indicates that even at the lowest resolution tested, the system struggles to maintain high frame rates, which suggests that the Arc B390 is simply not powerful enough for this game at any modern resolution. The CPU, with its boost clock of 4.60 GHz and 10 cores, is far ahead of what the GPU can deliver, meaning the graphics processor is the sole factor limiting performance.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the only playable configuration is at 1080p with Low settings, which yields an average of 76 FPS. This is the only preset and resolution combination that approaches a smooth experience. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 51 FPS, which is playable but with noticeable dips to 44 FPS minimums. For players seeking a more stable frame rate, the Low preset at 1080p is the recommended choice. The data shows that moving to High at 1080p results in an average of 43 FPS, which is a significant step down from Low, and the visual fidelity gain may not be worth the performance loss.

At 1440p, the situation worsens considerably. Low settings yield 53 FPS, which is borderline playable, but Medium drops to 35 FPS, and High falls to 30 FPS. The Ultra preset at 1440p is not viable, with an average of only 23 FPS. At 4K, no settings preset is playable. Even Low settings only manage 31 FPS, and Ultra drops to a slideshow-like 13 FPS. The data suggests that users should avoid 4K entirely with this combo, and even 1440p is only suitable for the Low preset if they can tolerate occasional frame drops.

The benchmark results indicate that the best experience per the measured rows is achieved by sacrificing visual quality for frame rate. The difference between Low and Medium at 1080p is 25 FPS, which is substantial. Given the GPU’s percentile rank of 9, indicating it performs worse than 91% of all GPUs, the recommendation is to stick with the lowest settings to maximize responsiveness. The Medium preset at 1080p, with its 44 FPS minimum, could be acceptable for less demanding players, but the Low preset provides the most headroom for the unpredictable moments in Rust where the frame rate can dip.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process. Its performance is defined by its clock speeds and memory configuration. The base clock is 300 MHz, and the boost clock reaches 2500 MHz. However, the memory is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system’s main RAM, and the bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent." This is a critical limitation, as dedicated graphics memory is not available, and the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth.

The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units. It also includes 12 ray tracing cores. Its peak pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 7.680 TFLOPS. These specifications, while not negligible, are far below what is needed for a demanding title like Rust. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark score of 1482 places the GPU in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, meaning it outperforms only a small fraction of the competition.

The nearest rivals in the GPU benchmark data are all older, low-end NVIDIA parts, such as the GeForce GT 520MX and GeForce GT 710. The Arc B390 scores 1.3% higher than the GT 520MX and 2.7% higher than the GT 710. This contextualizes the GPU’s performance level: it is comparable to entry-level discrete GPUs from a decade ago. In Rust, this results in the low frame rates observed. The GPU’s boost clock of 2500 MHz is high, but the lack of dedicated memory bandwidth and the limited compute resources are the primary reasons for the poor performance. The data shows that the GPU is the clear bottleneck, as the CPU is capable of much higher frame rates in other scenarios.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the measured FPS values are as follows. With Low settings, the average is 76 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 51 FPS, with a minimum of 44 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS. High settings yield an average of 43 FPS. Ultra settings drop to an average of 33 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 43 FPS, showing a steep performance cost for higher visual fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the performance degrades further. Low settings result in an average of 53 FPS. Medium settings average 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 41 FPS. High settings average 30 FPS. Ultra settings average 23 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 30 FPS, which is less than at 1080p but still significant.

At 3840x2160, the frame rates are mostly unplayable. Low settings average 31 FPS. Medium settings average 21 FPS, with a minimum of 18 FPS and a maximum of 24 FPS. High settings average 18 FPS. Ultra settings average 13 FPS. The minimum frame rates at 4K Medium are particularly low, indicating that even the average figures may not reflect the worst-case stutters. The data shows that the Arc B390 cannot handle 4K resolution in Rust, regardless of the settings preset. The only configuration that provides a consistently smooth experience is 1080p Low, with 76 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the Intel Core i5-13400F and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2601 out of 2953 tested combinations in Rust. This places it in the bottom 12% of all combos, a poor result that reflects the GPU’s limitations. The CPU itself is a strong performer, with an average benchmark score of 25292, placing it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, the Intel Core 5 120, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D, all of which have similar average scores with a delta of less than 0.4%. This indicates that the CPU is not the issue in this pairing.

The GPU, however, is a different story. With an average benchmark score of 1482, it ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and the NVIDIA GeForce 800M, which score 1463 and 1460 respectively. The Arc B390 is only 1.3% faster than the GT 520MX. This wide disparity between the CPU’s high percentile and the GPU’s low percentile explains the combo’s poor overall ranking. The CPU is capable of feeding a much more powerful GPU, but the integrated graphics solution holds the entire system back.

In practical terms, this combo rank means that users will experience performance typical of very low-end hardware. The 2601st rank out of 2953 suggests that there are only 352 tested combos that perform worse. This is not a configuration designed for gaming at high settings or high resolutions. The data indicates that the CPU is wasted in this pairing, and the overall experience is defined by the GPU’s lack of capability.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor from the Raptor Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The cache configuration includes 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 20 MB of L3 cache. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The CPU’s benchmark scores are strong, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and a single-core score of 3191. The Geekbench multicore score is 11068, and the single-core score is 1996.

In Rust, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and entity updates. The 10 cores and 16 threads provide ample processing power for these tasks. The high boost clock of 4.60 GHz ensures good single-threaded performance, which is often critical in games. However, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor. At any resolution, the frame rates are constrained by the GPU. For example, at 1080p Low, the average FPS is 76, which is a modest figure for a CPU of this caliber. The CPU could likely push much higher frame rates if paired with a more capable GPU.

The CPU’s percentile rank of 77 indicates that it performs better than 77% of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D, has a similar average score with a delta of -0.3%, meaning the i5-13400F is slightly slower in synthetic benchmarks. The passmark multithread score of 25032 and the integer math score of 79942 further demonstrate its capability. In Rust, the CPU’s performance is sufficient, and the data suggests that upgrading the GPU would yield a significant improvement in frame rates. The bottleneck is clearly the integrated graphics, not the processor. The CPU is ready to handle the demands of the game, but the GPU cannot keep up, resulting in the low overall performance observed.