Rust

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-14400F compare to its closest CPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-14400F sits within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, Intel Core i9-11900, AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS, and Intel Core i7-12800H. Its average benchmark score of 32,279 is nearly identical to the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U’s 32,233 (0.1% delta), while it trails the Ryzen 7 6800HS by only 0.2% (32,354).

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 4060's average score of 17,639 puts it 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (17,666) and 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon 780M (17,588). It also edges out the Radeon Pro 560 (17,551) by 0.5% and the Radeon Pro 460 (17,509) by 0.7%.

Q: Does this combo deliver playable frame rates at 4K in Rust?

A: At 3840x2160, only Low settings produce a playable average of 66 FPS. Medium averages 44 FPS with a min of 38 FPS, while High (38 FPS) and Ultra (29 FPS) fall below smooth gameplay thresholds. For 4K gaming, Low is the only viable preset.

Q: How does the frame rate scale from 1080p to 1440p on High settings?

A: Dropping from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 reduces the High preset average from 92 FPS to 64 FPS, a 30% decrease. This indicates the GPU becomes increasingly stressed as pixel count rises, though the CPU still provides headroom at lower resolutions.

Q: What is the best preset for 1440p gaming with this combo?

A: Medium at 2560x1440 delivers 75 FPS average with a min of 64 FPS, offering the best balance of visual quality and smoothness. Low reaches 112 FPS but sacrifices fidelity, while High (64 FPS) and Ultra (48 FPS) show diminishing returns.

Q: Where does this combo rank among all tested configurations for Rust?

A: The i5-14400F + RTX 4060 ranks 2,008 out of 3,723 tested combos, placing it in the 54th percentile. This means slightly more than half of all tested systems outperform it in Rust, reflecting a mid-pack position rather than a top-tier or bottom-tier result.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process at TSMC, featuring 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory runs at 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective) across a 128-bit bus, yielding 272.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's base clock of 1830 MHz boosts to 2460 MHz, with 3,072 shading units, 96 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 24 RT cores, and 96 tensor cores. Its 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 236.2 GTexel/s texture rate define its raw compute capability, while 118.1 GPixel/s pixel rate handles rasterization.

In Rust, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM capacity becomes a limiting factor at higher resolutions and presets. The data shows that at 3840x2160, average FPS drops from 66 on Low to 38 on High and 29 on Ultra—a clear sign that the memory bus width and bandwidth constrain texture-heavy scenes. The 128-bit interface, paired with 272 GB/s bandwidth, struggles to feed the GPU at 4K when settings demand larger texture pools and higher draw distances. At 1080p, the same GPU produces 163 FPS on Low and 70 FPS on Ultra, indicating that VRAM pressure is far less acute at lower pixel counts.

The RTX 4060's 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores are present but not directly measured in Rust's rasterized workload. What matters more is the clock behavior: the boost clock of 2460 MHz helps maintain frame rates when the GPU is not memory-bound. The 115 W TDP and dual-slot design are consistent with a mainstream card, and the 1x 12-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested PSU reflects its efficiency-oriented positioning. The GPU's percentileVsAllGpus of 61 means it outperforms 61% of all GPUs in the database, yet its nearest rivals—including integrated graphics like the Radeon 780M—are within 0.7%, showing how competitive the mid-range segment is.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep performance cliff as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 163 FPS; at 1440p Low, it drops to 112 FPS (31% lower); at 4K Low, it falls to 66 FPS (41% lower than 1440p). This scaling pattern indicates that the RTX 4060 is the primary bottleneck at higher resolutions, as the CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads provide ample compute headroom at lower pixel counts.

On Medium settings, the drop from 110 FPS at 1080p to 75 FPS at 1440p (32% reduction) and then to 44 FPS at 4K (41% reduction) follows a similar trajectory. The min FPS figures tell a more nuanced story: at 1080p Medium, the min is 93 FPS, while at 1440p Medium it's 64 FPS, and at 4K Medium it's 38 FPS. These minimums suggest that frame time consistency degrades with resolution, likely due to VRAM pressure exceeding the 8 GB capacity at 4K.

The High preset shows the most dramatic resolution sensitivity: 92 FPS at 1080p, 64 FPS at 1440p (30% drop), and 38 FPS at 4K (41% drop from 1440p). Ultra settings are the most punishing, with 70 FPS at 1080p falling to 48 FPS at 1440p (31% drop) and 29 FPS at 4K (40% drop). Across all presets, the 1080p-to-1440p transition costs roughly 30% performance, while the 1440p-to-4K transition costs about 40%, indicating a nonlinear scaling penalty.

This scaling behavior strongly suggests a GPU-limited scenario at 4K, where the 128-bit memory bus and 272 GB/s bandwidth cannot sustain the bandwidth demands of Rust's large open-world environments. At 1080p, the CPU's strong single-thread performance—evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,055 and Geekbench single-core of 2,058—keeps the GPU fed, but at 4K the GPU's raw throughput becomes the ceiling. The lack of min/max FPS data for Low, High, and Ultra presets at most resolutions means only Medium provides a complete picture of frame variability, but the available data points consistently show the GPU's role as the scaling bottleneck.

Settings Recommendations

For 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 163 FPS, which is far beyond what most displays can show, making it wasteful if visual fidelity matters. Medium at 110 FPS (min 93 FPS) is the sweet spot: it provides a 33% FPS reduction from Low but with substantially better image quality, and the minimum frame rate remains well above 60 FPS. High at 92 FPS is also viable, but Ultra at 70 FPS begins to approach the comfort zone's lower edge for competitive play. Given the data, Medium offers the best experience at 1080p—smooth, consistent, and visually acceptable.

At 2560x1440, the choice narrows. Low reaches 112 FPS, which is excellent for fast-paced gameplay, but Medium at 75 FPS (min 64 FPS) provides a better visual experience while staying above the 60 FPS threshold. High at 64 FPS is borderline, and Ultra at 48 FPS falls below smoothness standards. The Medium preset at 1440p is the recommended choice: it maintains a playable minimum of 64 FPS while delivering higher detail than Low. Players prioritizing competitive advantage might choose Low for the extra 37 FPS, but for most users, Medium strikes the right balance.

At 3840x2160, the options are severely limited. Ultra at 29 FPS is unplayable, High at 38 FPS is marginal at best, and Medium at 44 FPS (min 38 FPS) remains below the 60 FPS ideal. Only Low at 66 FPS provides a smooth experience, and even then, the visual quality is significantly reduced. For 4K, Low is the only recommended preset; any other setting sacrifices playability. The data indicates that this combo is not suited for 4K gaming at higher presets, and users with 4K displays should consider dropping to 1440p for a better overall experience.

The measured rows show a clear pattern: Medium offers the best FPS-per-quality tradeoff at 1080p and 1440p, while Low is the sole viable option at 4K. The min FPS data for Medium (93 at 1080p, 64 at 1440p, 38 at 4K) confirms that frame consistency follows the same ranking, making Medium the most reliable choice below 4K.

How This Combo Ranks

The i5-14400F + RTX 4060 combo ranks 2,008 out of 3,723 tested configurations in Rust, placing it in the 54th percentile of all tested systems. This means 1,715 combos perform worse and 1,715 perform better, putting this pairing almost exactly at the median. The rank reflects a balanced mid-range system: the CPU's 83rd percentile standing among all CPUs (average benchmark score 32,279) is offset by the GPU's 61st percentile (average score 17,639), resulting in a combined position that is slightly above average but not exceptional.

The CPU's nearest rivals—the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, Core i9-11900, Ryzen 7 6800HS, and Core i7-12800H—all have nearly identical average scores (within 0.5%), meaning any of these CPUs paired with the RTX 4060 would likely produce similar Rust performance. The GPU's nearest rivals, including the Radeon HD 7790 and Radeon 780M, are within 0.7% of its average score, but these are older or integrated parts, suggesting the RTX 4060's synthetic benchmark position does not fully capture its gaming strengths in Rust.

The combo's rank of 2,008 is not a top-tier result, but it is not a bottom-tier one either. For Rust specifically, the game's CPU-heavy nature (due to its complex simulation and large player counts) means the i5-14400F's 10 cores and 16 threads are an asset, but the GPU's mid-range position limits high-resolution performance. The 54th percentile ranking indicates that a significant portion of tested systems—likely with higher-end GPUs—outperform this combo at 4K, while at 1080p, the CPU's strength helps it punch above its weight. Overall, this is a competent mid-range pairing that delivers solid 1080p and acceptable 1440p performance, with 4K reserved for low settings only.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers its strongest results. Low settings produce an average of 163 FPS, the highest figure in the entire dataset. Medium averages 110 FPS with a minimum of 93 FPS and a maximum of 126 FPS, showing a tight frame time distribution. High averages 92 FPS, while Ultra drops to 70 FPS. The 93 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p highlights the GPU's headroom at this resolution, where the CPU can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them at higher settings.

Moving to 2560x1440, performance scales down predictably. Low averages 112 FPS, a 31% reduction from 1080p Low. Medium averages 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS, representing a 32% drop from 1080p Medium. High averages 64 FPS, and Ultra falls to 48 FPS. The minimum FPS at Medium (64) exactly matches the average at High, indicating that the High preset's frame pacing is equivalent to the worst-case scenario for Medium. This suggests that Medium provides a more stable experience than High, despite the similar average.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear limiting factor. Low averages 66 FPS, which is playable but 59% slower than 1080p Low. Medium averages 44 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 51 FPS, showing significant frame variability. High averages 38 FPS, and Ultra drops to 29 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. The 37 FPS gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is smaller than at 1080p (93 FPS) or 1440p (64 FPS), confirming that the GPU's memory bandwidth and pixel throughput are saturated regardless of settings at this resolution.

Across all resolutions, the Medium preset is the only one with complete min/max FPS data, allowing for frame time analysis. At 1080p, the 33 FPS spread (93 to 126) indicates moderate variability; at 1440p, the 23 FPS spread (64 to 87) is tighter; at 4K, the 13 FPS spread (38 to 51) is narrowest but still results in sub-60 FPS averages. This shows that as resolution increases, frame variability decreases in absolute terms but becomes more noticeable relative to the lower average FPS. The data overall presents a clear picture: this combo excels at 1080p, performs adequately at 1440p, and struggles at 4K except on the lowest settings.