Rust

Rust is a notoriously CPU-heavy survival title, and the data for the Intel Core i5-14600KF paired with the Intel Arc B370 shows a system that is dramatically constrained by its graphics component. Across all tested resolutions, the average frame rates remain low, with the best result being a 69 FPS average at 1080p with Low settings. The Arc B370, an integrated GPU based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, demonstrates a percentile rank of just 5 among all GPUs, which aligns with the measured performance that rarely approaches playable thresholds. The Core i5-14600KF, in contrast, sits in the 90th percentile among all CPUs, indicating a massive imbalance where the processor’s capabilities are largely untapped in this configuration. This analysis examines the resolution scaling, GPU role, overall ranking, and detailed FPS breakdowns for this specific pairing.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep and consistent drop as resolution increases from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160, but the pattern is not uniform across all settings presets. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 69 FPS at 1080p to 48 FPS at 1440p, a reduction of 21 FPS, and then further to 28 FPS at 4K, another 20 FPS decline. This represents a total loss of 41 FPS, or roughly 59% of the 1080p performance, when moving to 4K. The scaling factor between 1080p and 1440p is approximately 0.70, while the jump from 1440p to 4K yields a factor of about 0.58, showing that the GPU’s workload increases disproportionately at higher pixel counts.

For Medium settings, the pattern is similar but with lower absolute numbers. The average FPS at 1080p is 46, dropping to 32 at 1440p and then to 19 at 4K. The delta between 1080p and 1440p is 14 FPS, and between 1440p and 4K is 13 FPS, indicating a near-linear decline that suggests the GPU is the primary bottleneck at every step. High settings show a slightly different curve: 39 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 16 FPS at 4K. The reduction from 1080p to 1440p is 12 FPS, and from 1440p to 4K is 11 FPS, again reflecting a consistent performance degradation tied to pixel throughput.

Ultra settings produce the lowest frame rates across the board, with 30 FPS at 1080p, 20 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p is a 10 FPS drop, and from 1440p to 4K is an 8 FPS drop, which is proportionally similar to the other presets. The fact that even 1080p Ultra cannot maintain 30 FPS average indicates that the Arc B370’s shading units, totaling 1280, and its 20 ROPs are insufficient for the game’s visual demands at higher quality settings.

The limiting component is clearly the Intel Arc B370. The CPU, with 14 cores and 20 threads based on the Raptor Lake architecture, shows no sign of bottlenecking at these frame rates. The measured FPS numbers are far below what a Core i5-14600KF could theoretically push in a balanced system, and the consistent scaling with resolution—rather than a plateau or CPU-limited ceiling—confirms that the GPU is the sole constraint. At 1080p Low, the 69 FPS average is still modest for a modern title, and the fact that raising resolution to 4K halves that figure to 28 FPS underscores the GPU’s limited pixel fill rate of 48.00 GPixel/s.

FAQ

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

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 69, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. No other configuration in the measured data reaches this level, with the next closest being 48 FPS at 2560x1440 also on Low.

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

A: The Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Its closest rival, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, scores 1186, a delta of -0.2%. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (delta -0.5%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (delta -0.7%). The AMD FirePro M2000 trails with 1168, a delta of 1.4%.

Q: Is the Core i5-14600KF the limiting factor in Rust?

A: No, the data points to the GPU. The CPU ranks in the 90th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU ranks in the 5th percentile. The measured FPS scales directly with resolution and settings, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, not a CPU-bound one.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values for Medium settings?

A: For Medium settings, the minimum FPS recorded is 16 at 3840x2160, 27 at 2560x1440, and 39 at 1920x1080. These values are provided alongside the average and maximum FPS for those specific rows.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combos in Rust?

A: It ranks 2710 out of 2953 total combos, placing it in the lower portion of the database. This ranking reflects the poor performance of the integrated GPU, which drags down what would otherwise be a strong CPU.

Q: What is the difference in FPS between Low and Ultra at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, Low settings yield an average of 28 FPS, while Ultra settings yield 12 FPS, a difference of 16 FPS. This 57% reduction in performance when moving from Low to Ultra highlights the GPU’s inability to handle higher-quality rendering at 4K.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated GPU with a 25 W TDP, operating at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. Its memory is system-shared, meaning it relies on the host system’s RAM rather than dedicated VRAM, and the bandwidth is listed as system-dependent. This design choice directly impacts Rust, a game that benefits from consistent memory bandwidth for texture streaming and world rendering. With only 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, the GPU’s compute throughput is limited to 6.144 TFLOPS FP32, which explains the low frame rates even at 1080p.

The GPU’s benchmark results are equally telling. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 1184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all older or lower-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), and AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192). These scores are nearly identical, indicating that the Arc B370’s raw performance is comparable to graphics hardware from over a decade ago. In Rust, this translates to average FPS that never exceeds 69, and that only at the lowest settings and resolution.

The clock speeds do show some capability; the boost clock of 2400 MHz is reasonably high for an integrated part, but the architecture is not designed for sustained high-load gaming. The Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process, is efficient in power draw—hence the 25 W TDP—but efficiency does not compensate for the lack of dedicated memory and the modest shading unit count. The system-shared memory means that the GPU competes with the CPU for bandwidth, and in Rust, where large procedural maps require frequent data access, this becomes a bottleneck. The measured FPS at 4K Ultra (12 FPS) versus 1080p Low (69 FPS) shows a 5.75x difference, which is a direct consequence of the GPU’s limited pixel rate and texture rate (48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s, respectively).

The GPU’s role in this combo is unequivocally the limiting factor. The Core i5-14600KF, with its 24 MB of shared L3 cache and boost clock of 5.30 GHz, is more than capable of feeding frames to a stronger GPU. But with the Arc B370, the system is effectively crippled in Rust, producing results that are more reminiscent of entry-level integrated graphics from a decade ago rather than a modern 2026 part. The 3DMark score of 1184, when juxtaposed with the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32544, illustrates the stark contrast in capabilities.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo of the Intel Core i5-14600KF and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2710 out of 2953 tested combinations in Rust. This places it in the bottom 8.2% of all combos, a poor showing that is directly attributable to the GPU. The CPU’s individual ranking is far more favorable; the Core i5-14600KF sits in the 90th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 49394. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49228, delta 0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49196, delta 0.4%), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 (48995, delta 0.8%). The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores slightly higher at 49796, a delta of -0.8%. This shows that the CPU is competitive with high-end parts, yet the combo rank is dragged down by the GPU’s 5th percentile standing.

The disparity between the CPU and GPU percentiles is the defining feature of this combo’s ranking. A 90th percentile CPU paired with a 5th percentile GPU creates an extreme imbalance, and the 2710th rank out of 2953 reflects that the GPU is holding back the entire system. In practical terms, the combo performs like a low-end laptop or entry-level desktop, despite the presence of a high-performance desktop CPU. The measured FPS data supports this: the best case scenario of 69 FPS at 1080p Low is below what many mid-range GPUs would achieve at 1440p or 4K, and the 4K Ultra result of 12 FPS is effectively unplayable.

Compared to other combos in the database, this pairing sits near the bottom, but the CPU ensures it is not the absolute worst. The rank of 2710 means there are 243 combos that perform even worse, likely those with older or weaker CPUs paired with similar or weaker GPUs. However, for a system built around a Core i5-14600KF, which has a launch MSRP of $294 and is designed for high-refresh gaming, this rank is a severe underperformance. The data suggests that any dedicated GPU, even a modest one, would improve the rank substantially, but based on the measured results, this combo remains firmly in the lower tier.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo produces its strongest results across all settings. Low settings yield an average of 69 FPS, which is the only configuration to exceed 60 FPS. Medium settings drop to 46 FPS, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS, showing a playable-but-inconsistent experience. High settings average 39 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 30 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra at 1080p is 39 FPS, a 57% reduction, which indicates that the GPU’s limited resources are heavily taxed by higher-quality effects like shadows and draw distances.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates decline significantly. 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, but the absolute numbers are too low for smooth gameplay. At this resolution, even Low settings fail to maintain a consistent 60 FPS, and the minimum FPS for Medium (27) suggests occasional stutters during intense scenes.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes marginal. Low settings average 28 FPS, Medium averages 19 FPS (minimum 16, maximum 22), High averages 16 FPS, and Ultra averages 12 FPS. There is no configuration at 4K that reaches even 30 FPS, making this resolution essentially unusable for this combo in Rust. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low settings (69 to 28 FPS) shows a 41 FPS drop, and at Ultra (30 to 12 FPS), an 18 FPS drop. The minimum FPS values for Medium at each resolution (39, 27, 16) show a clear trend: as resolution increases, the floor drops, indicating that the GPU cannot maintain consistent frame pacing at higher pixel counts.

The data also shows that the settings preset has a larger impact at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 39 FPS, while at 4K, it is only 16 FPS. This is because at 4K, the GPU is already so saturated that reducing settings has diminishing returns; the pixel throughput limit becomes the primary constraint. Conversely, at 1080p, the GPU has more headroom to handle additional graphical features, so the settings preset makes a bigger difference.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the only viable settings preset for this combo is Low at 1920x1080, which achieves an average of 69 FPS. This is the sole configuration that approaches a smooth experience, and even then, it does not reach the 90+ FPS that competitive players might prefer. For those willing to tolerate lower frame rates, Low at 2560x1440 offers 48 FPS, which is playable but may feel less responsive. All Medium, High, and Ultra presets at any resolution produce averages below 50 FPS, with Ultra at 4K dropping to 12 FPS.

The Medium settings at 1080p provide 46 FPS average, with a minimum of 39 FPS and a maximum of 53 FPS. This is a reasonable compromise for visual quality, but the frame rate variability could lead to noticeable hitches in a game like Rust, where sudden player encounters or explosions can cause frame drops. The High preset at 1080p (39 FPS) and Ultra at 1080p (30 FPS) are not recommended, as the visual improvements are not worth the significant FPS sacrifice.

At 1440p, Low settings (48 FPS) are the only option that stays above 40 FPS, but the experience will still feel choppy compared to 60 FPS. Medium at 1440p (32 FPS) and High (27 FPS) are below the threshold for comfortable play, and Ultra (20 FPS) is not viable. For 4K, all presets are effectively unplayable, with the highest being Low at 28 FPS. Users who own this combo should avoid 4K resolution entirely when playing Rust.

The recommendation is to run Rust at 1920x1080 with Low settings to maximize frame rate. This is the only configuration where the average FPS exceeds 60, and it provides the most responsive gameplay. If visual fidelity is a priority, Medium at 1080p is the next best option, but users should be prepared for occasional drops below 40 FPS. The data does not support any settings above Medium at 1080p, as the GPU’s 20 ROPs and system-shared memory cannot handle the increased load. In summary, this combo is suited for low-resolution, low-settings gaming in Rust, and any attempt to push higher quality or resolution will result in sub-30 FPS performance.