Rust

The Intel Core i7-14700F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER pairing produces a highly playable Rust experience at mainstream resolutions, though the data reveals a significant bottleneck shift as resolution increases. This combination ranks 2640th out of 3723 tested combos in this game, placing it in the lower third of the database. At 1080p, the system delivers smooth frame rates, but the performance curve suggests the GPU becomes the primary constraint as pixel count rises. The measured results are based on actual testing, not theoretical estimates, providing a reliable picture of what this hardware can achieve in the survival title.

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

The Intel Core i7-14700F is a 20-core, 28-thread processor built on the Raptor Lake architecture with a 10 nm process node. Its base clock sits at 2.10 GHz, boosting up to 5.40 GHz, which gives it substantial headroom for both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. The processor includes 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 33 MB L3 cache, all of which contribute to its ability to handle complex game logic and physics calculations. Benchmark data shows a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35122 and a single-core score of 4958, indicating strong performance across the board.

Rust is known for its demanding server-side simulation and large persistent world, which relies heavily on CPU throughput. The i7-14700F’s multi-core capabilities are evident in its PassMark multi-thread score of 41317, while its single-thread performance is solid at 4257. These scores suggest the CPU is more than capable of feeding the GPU with draw calls and handling the game’s entity update loops. However, the measured FPS data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as frame rates drop consistently with increased pixel counts, pointing to GPU-bound scenarios.

The processor’s percentile ranking of 91st against all CPUs places it among the upper echelon of processors available. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6505P with an average score of 53701, which is only 0.2% slower, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X at 53288, which is 0.6% slower. This close grouping indicates the i7-14700F delivers competitive performance within a tight performance band. For Rust specifically, the CPU’s ability to maintain high minimum frame rates is crucial, and the data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 138 FPS average, suggesting the CPU has ample headroom to avoid stutters in less demanding scenes.

The 65W TDP and dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support provide flexibility for system builders, though the integrated graphics being listed as N/A means a discrete GPU is mandatory. The processor’s PCIe Gen 5 support with 16 lanes offers modern connectivity. In the context of this combo, the CPU’s role is to ensure that the GPU receives a steady stream of data, and the benchmark results indicate it does so effectively, as the frame rate scaling from 1080p to 1440p closely tracks GPU load changes rather than CPU limitations.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture with a 12 nm process node, featuring 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus. Its memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s is delivered through a 1750 MHz memory clock, effectively 14 Gbps. The GPU’s base clock of 1470 MHz boosts to 1650 MHz, and it contains 2176 shading units, 136 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. These specifications place it in the mid-range tier, with a percentile ranking of 62nd against all GPUs, indicating it outperforms a slight majority of the field.

In Rust, the GPU’s role becomes increasingly dominant as resolution rises. At 1080p, the RTX 2060 SUPER provides excellent frame rates, with the Low preset hitting 138 FPS average. However, the data shows a clear pattern: each step up in resolution reduces performance proportionally, which is classic GPU-bound behavior. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is adequate for Rust’s textures and draw distances at 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 24, suggesting the GPU is struggling to maintain playable performance under extreme load.

The GPU’s compute capabilities are reflected in its PassMark G3D score of 16462 and DirectX 12 score of 61, which demonstrate its ability to handle modern rendering pipelines. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile at 18159, which is 0.4% faster, and the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 at 18189, which is 0.5% faster. These small deltas indicate the RTX 2060 SUPER remains competitive with newer mobile parts, though desktop variants of similar cards may outperform it. The GPU’s 7.181 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 105.6 GPixel/s pixel rate provide sufficient raw throughput for Rust’s voxel-based terrain and dynamic lighting.

The 175W TDP and dual-slot design require a 450W suggested PSU, which is reasonable for a mid-range system. The GPU’s end-of-life production status and 2019 release date mean it is now a legacy part, but its performance in this test shows it still has relevance for 1080p gaming. The data suggests that the RTX 2060 SUPER is the primary bottleneck at 4K, as the CPU’s high benchmark scores indicate it could push more frames if the GPU were faster. This is evident when comparing the 1080p Low result of 138 FPS to the 4K Low result of 56 FPS, a drop that far exceeds what would be expected from CPU limitations alone.

FAQ

Q: What frame rate can I expect at 1080p with Medium settings in Rust?

A: The measured data shows an average of 92 FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings, with minimum and maximum frame rates of 79 and 106 FPS respectively, indicating smooth gameplay with minor fluctuations.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 SUPER handle 4K gaming in Rust?

A: At 3840x2160, the average frame rates range from 24 FPS on Ultra to 56 FPS on Low, with Medium achieving 38 FPS. These results indicate 4K is only viable at Low settings for playable performance.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more limiting in this combination?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the limiting factor at higher resolutions, as frame rates scale consistently with pixel count. At 1080p, the CPU has headroom, evidenced by the 138 FPS average on Low settings, but at 4K, the GPU’s performance drops significantly.

Q: What is the best preset for a balanced experience at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset provides 64 FPS average with a minimum of 54 FPS, while High delivers 54 FPS. For a balance between visual quality and smoothness, Medium offers the best compromise.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations?

A: This pairing ranks 2640th out of 3723 tested combos in Rust, placing it in the 71st percentile of tested systems, indicating it outperforms the majority of configurations.

Q: What is the maximum FPS achievable with this hardware?

A: The highest measured average is 138 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which represents the ceiling for this combination in Rust.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo rank of 2640 out of 3723 tested combinations places this system in the 29th percentile, meaning it outperforms roughly 71% of all tested configurations in Rust. This positioning is notably lower than the individual component percentile rankings, which suggests that the GPU’s mid-range standing drags down the overall performance. The CPU’s 91st percentile ranking is excellent, but the GPU’s 62nd percentile means the pair is limited by the graphics card in this game.

When analyzing the rank, it is important to consider that Rust’s performance is heavily influenced by both CPU and GPU, but the data shows a clear GPU bottleneck at higher resolutions. The combination’s rank relative to others implies that many systems with newer GPUs but similar CPUs would outperform it, while those with weaker CPUs but similar GPUs might score lower. The 3723 total combos provide a broad comparison base, and this system’s position indicates it is a mid-tier performer for this specific title.

The rank can be contextualized by examining the FPS data: at 1080p, the system achieves 138 FPS on Low, which is above the average for many systems, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 24 FPS, which is below playable thresholds. This wide performance spread suggests the combo is well-suited for competitive play at lower settings but struggles with high-fidelity gaming. The rank also reflects the GPU’s age, as newer cards with similar price points in the database likely achieve better results.

For users with this hardware, the rank suggests that upgrading the GPU would yield the most significant performance gains, given the CPU’s strong benchmark scores. However, without changing the CPU, the current combination still provides an enjoyable experience at 1080p, which is where most players likely operate. The rank serves as a benchmark for what is achievable with this specific pairing, and the data indicates it is a capable, if not exceptional, performer in Rust.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of which settings offer the best experience for this hardware. At 1080p, the Medium preset delivers 92 FPS average, which is a strong balance between visual quality and responsiveness. The High preset at 78 FPS is also playable, but the drop from Medium suggests that the extra graphical features cost performance without proportional visual gains. For competitive play, the Low preset at 138 FPS is ideal, offering the highest frame rates for fast-paced gameplay.

At 1440p, the Medium preset becomes the recommended choice, providing 64 FPS average with a minimum of 54 FPS, which maintains smoothness during intense scenes. The High preset at 54 FPS is borderline, as the minimum frame rate could dip below 60 FPS during heavy load, leading to noticeable stutters. The Low preset at 95 FPS offers a significant performance boost, but the visual trade-off may not be worth it for most users. The Ultra preset at 41 FPS is not recommended due to the low average frame rate.

For 4K gaming, the Low preset at 56 FPS is the only playable option, as Medium drops to 38 FPS and High falls to 32 FPS, both below the standard 60 FPS threshold. The Ultra preset at 24 FPS is not viable for smooth gameplay. Based on this data, the best overall experience is achieved with Medium settings at 1440p, which offers a good balance of visual fidelity and performance. If prioritizing frame rate, Low settings at 1080p provide the smoothest experience, but for most users, the 1440p Medium preset is the sweet spot.

The data also shows that the gap between Low and Medium is relatively small at each resolution, suggesting that Medium is a worthwhile upgrade for the increased visual quality. Conversely, the jump from Medium to High is more substantial, indicating diminishing returns. Therefore, the recommendation is to use Medium settings as the default, with adjustments based on personal preference for frame rate versus visual quality.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data reveals a consistent pattern across resolutions and settings. At 3840x2160, the average frame rates are 24 FPS on Ultra, 32 FPS on High, 38 FPS on Medium, and 56 FPS on Low. The Medium preset at 4K has a minimum of 32 FPS and a maximum of 43 FPS, showing a narrow range of performance. At 2560x1440, the averages are 41 FPS on Ultra, 54 FPS on High, 64 FPS on Medium, and 95 FPS on Low. The 1440p Medium preset has a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 73 FPS.

At 1920x1080, the averages are 59 FPS on Ultra, 78 FPS on High, 92 FPS on Medium, and 138 FPS on Low. The 1080p Medium preset has a minimum of 79 FPS and a maximum of 106 FPS. These numbers show that the CPU and GPU combination scales predictably with resolution and settings, with the Low preset at 1080p achieving the highest performance at 138 FPS. The data also shows that the Ultra preset is consistently the lowest performer, dropping to 24 FPS at 4K, which is unplayable.

The difference between Low and Medium settings is relatively consistent across resolutions, with an average increase of about 30-35% in frame rate when dropping from Medium to Low. This suggests that the game’s visual settings have a significant impact on GPU load, and the RTX 2060 SUPER benefits from reduced graphical demands. The High preset offers a middle ground, but the frame rate drops are more pronounced at higher resolutions, indicating that the GPU’s memory bandwidth and compute capacity are being taxed.

The measured data includes minimum and maximum frame rates for Medium settings at all three resolutions, providing insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p, the 79-106 FPS range indicates good stability, while at 1440p, the 54-73 FPS range shows more variance, and at 4K, the 32-43 FPS range demonstrates significant frame pacing issues. This variability suggests that the GPU is struggling to maintain consistent performance as resolution increases, which could lead to stuttering in fast-paced gameplay.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is dramatic, and the data reveals important insights about the limiting component. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 138 FPS at 1080p to 95 FPS at 1440p, a 31% decrease, and then to 56 FPS at 4K, a further 41% decrease from 1440p. This steep decline indicates that the GPU is heavily taxed by the increased pixel count, as the CPU’s performance does not scale with resolution. At Medium settings, the drop is from 92 FPS at 1080p to 64 FPS at 1440p (30% decrease) and then to 38 FPS at 4K (41% decrease), showing a similar pattern.

This scaling behavior is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where the graphics card’s fill rate and memory bandwidth become the primary constraints. The RTX 2060 SUPER’s 448.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p but becomes a limiting factor at higher resolutions, particularly with more demanding settings. The CPU’s high benchmark scores, such as the 35122 Cinebench R23 multi-core result, indicate it is not the bottleneck, as its performance remains constant regardless of resolution.

The data suggests that the GPU is the limiting component in this combination, as the frame rate drops are proportional to the increase in pixels. At 1080p, the GPU has enough headroom to push high frame rates, but at 4K, it is overwhelmed. This is further supported by the fact that the CPU’s percentile ranking (91st) is significantly higher than the GPU’s (62nd), indicating that the processor is capable of supporting a more powerful graphics card.

For users seeking higher resolutions, this data implies that upgrading the GPU would yield significant performance gains, while keeping the CPU the same. The i7-14700F’s strong single-thread and multi-thread performance would allow a faster GPU to reach its full potential. However, for current users, the sweet spot is clearly 1080p, where the system delivers excellent frame rates across all settings, and 1440p, where it remains playable with Medium settings. The 4K experience is limited to Low settings, which is not ideal for a game with detailed environments.