Rust

The pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 delivers an exceptionally strong performance profile in Rust, ranking in the top 3% of all tested combinations. The data indicates that this system is highly capable of running the game at maximum settings with high frame rates, though the CPU shows signs of becoming the limiting factor at lower resolutions. This analysis breaks down the measured performance, component roles, and scaling characteristics based solely on the provided benchmark data.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 serves as the primary graphics engine in this configuration. It is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC, featuring a massive 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2235 MHz and boosts to 2520 MHz, with memory running at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective). The card is equipped with 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is particularly relevant for Rust, as the game's large open-world environments and extensive base-building mechanics can consume significant VRAM at higher resolutions.

The RTX 4090's compute capabilities are substantial: it delivers 82.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 82.58 TFLOPS of FP16 (1:1 ratio). With 16,384 shading units, 512 texture mapping units, and 176 raster output pipelines, the card is well-equipped to handle the draw calls and texture streaming demands of Rust. The 128 ray tracing cores and 512 tensor cores provide additional headroom for any future graphical enhancements. The GPU's pixel rate of 443.5 GPixel/s and texture rate of 1,290.2 GTexel/s are critical for maintaining smooth frame rates in Rust's dense forest and monument areas, where vegetation and complex geometry are common.

The benchmark data shows that the RTX 4090's performance scales predictably with settings. At 4K Ultra, the card achieves 56 FPS average, while at 4K High it reaches 73 FPS. Moving to 4K Medium shows 87 FPS, and 4K Low delivers 129 FPS. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is the dominant factor at 4K, with each settings tier providing a meaningful FPS increase. The RTX 4090's 24 GB frame buffer ensures that even at Ultra settings with high-resolution textures, memory capacity is not a bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This specific combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 achieves a rank of 62 out of 2,953 tested combos in Rust. This places the system in the top 2.1% of all configurations, demonstrating that it is among the most powerful setups available for this title. The rank reflects the aggregate performance across all tested settings and resolutions, indicating that the combination consistently delivers high frame rates.

The ranking is particularly impressive given that the CPU, while strong, is not the absolute fastest processor in the database. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 holds the 89th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 46,062. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (average score 46,030, delta 0.1%), the Intel Core i9-13900HX (average score 46,098, delta -0.1%), the AMD EPYC 4364P (average score 45,970, delta 0.2%), and the AMD EPYC 7303 (average score 45,960, delta 0.2%). The CPU's performance is within 0.2% of these competitors, showing it is well-matched with the high-end GPU.

The RTX 4090 itself ranks in the 88th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 60,347. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Arc Pro A60 (average score 60,326, delta 0%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (average score 60,140, delta 0.3%), the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (average score 61,896, delta -2.5%), and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (average score 58,657, delta 2.9%). The top-tier ranking of both components combined to place this system in the 62nd position overall, indicating that the pairing is well-balanced for Rust's specific workload requirements.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 provides the processing foundation for this system. It is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake-S architecture using a 3 nm process at TSMC. The CPU features 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. This configuration is notable for Rust, which relies heavily on single-threaded performance for its game logic and physics calculations, while also benefiting from multi-threaded performance for world generation and entity updates.

The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. This amounts to a total of 24 MB of L3 cache, which is used for frequently accessed data. The memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 interface ensures that the CPU can feed data to the GPU without becoming a bottleneck. The CPU supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, providing high-bandwidth connectivity to the GPU and other peripherals.

Benchmark results show the CPU's capabilities: it scores 14,769 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,085 in single-core. In PassMark tests, it achieves 37,816 in multithread, 4,516 in single-thread, and 117,951 in floating-point math. The data compression score of 390,711 and encryption score of 29,293 indicate strong general-purpose performance. These results translate to Rust's performance, where the CPU's single-thread speed is crucial for maintaining high frame rates at lower resolutions.

At 1080p, the CPU becomes more influential. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the system achieves 265 FPS, while at 1080p Ultra it drops to 137 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium settings (265 vs. 214 FPS) is larger than the gap between Medium and High (214 vs. 180 FPS), suggesting that the CPU is handling the increased draw calls and game logic at lower settings. The 14-core configuration with a 5.00 GHz boost clock provides ample headroom for Rust's multi-threaded systems, such as the server-side simulation and client-side entity management.

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

The measured FPS data across resolutions reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound performance at higher resolutions and CPU-bound performance at lower resolutions. Starting at 1080p, the system achieves 265 FPS on Low settings, 214 FPS on Medium, 180 FPS on High, and 137 FPS on Ultra. Moving to 1440p, the frame rates drop to 219 FPS on Low, 147 FPS on Medium, 124 FPS on High, and 94 FPS on Ultra. At 4K, the performance further decreases to 129 FPS on Low, 87 FPS on Medium, 73 FPS on High, and 56 FPS on Ultra.

The scaling from 1080p to 4K at Low settings shows a drop from 265 FPS to 129 FPS, a reduction of approximately 51%. At High settings, the drop is from 180 FPS to 73 FPS, a reduction of about 59%. At Ultra settings, the drop is from 137 FPS to 56 FPS, a reduction of roughly 59%. This consistent scaling pattern across settings indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting factor at higher resolutions, as the pixel count increases from 2.07 million (1080p) to 8.29 million (4K), quadrupling the GPU workload.

However, the data also reveals the CPU's influence at lower resolutions. The difference between 1080p Low and 1440p Low is 46 FPS (265 to 219), while the difference between 1440p Low and 4K Low is 90 FPS (219 to 129). This larger drop at the higher-resolution step suggests that the GPU becomes more dominant as resolution increases. Conversely, at 1080p, the relatively smaller differences between settings (e.g., 265 FPS on Low vs. 180 FPS on High) indicate that the CPU is starting to limit performance, as the GPU has spare capacity at this resolution.

The Medium settings provide the most complete data, with minimum and maximum FPS recorded. At 1080p Medium, the system shows 182 min FPS and 246 max FPS, with an average of 214. At 1440p Medium, the range is 125 min to 169 max FPS, averaging 147. At 4K Medium, the range narrows to 74 min to 100 max FPS, averaging 87. The narrowing of the FPS range at higher resolutions further confirms the GPU-bound nature at 4K, while the wider range at 1080p suggests CPU-driven frame time variability.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system in Rust?

A: Based on the measured data, the system achieves the highest frame rates at 1080p Low with 265 FPS average. For a balance of visual quality and performance, 1440p High at 124 FPS average or 4K Medium at 87 FPS average are strong choices. At 4K Ultra, the system still maintains a playable 56 FPS average.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The CPU has an average benchmark score of 46,062, which is within 0.2% of its nearest rivals. It is 0.1% faster than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46,030), 0.1% slower than the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46,098), 0.2% faster than the AMD EPYC 4364P (45,970), and 0.2% faster than the AMD EPYC 7303 (45,960).

Q: Is the RTX 4090's 24 GB of VRAM sufficient for Rust at 4K?

A: Yes, the 24 GB of GDDR6X memory with 1.01 TB/s bandwidth is more than adequate. The measured performance at 4K Ultra shows 56 FPS average, indicating that memory capacity is not limiting the frame rate. The GPU's memory bandwidth of 1.01 TB/s supports the high-resolution textures and large world streaming that Rust requires.

Q: What causes the FPS drop from 1080p to 4K?

A: The frame rate drops from 265 FPS at 1080p Low to 129 FPS at 4K Low, a reduction of 136 FPS. This is primarily due to the GPU having to process four times as many pixels at 4K (8.29 million) compared to 1080p (2.07 million). The consistent scaling across settings indicates GPU-bound behavior at higher resolutions.

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

A: This combination of Intel Core Ultra 5 235 and RTX 4090 ranks 62nd out of 2,953 tested combos. This places it in the top 2.1% of all configurations, making it one of the most powerful systems tested for this game.

Q: At what settings does the CPU become the limiting factor?

A: The data suggests the CPU becomes more influential at 1080p, where the GPU has spare capacity. For example, at 1080p Low the system achieves 265 FPS, but increasing to High drops to 180 FPS. This 85 FPS difference is larger than the proportional GPU workload increase, indicating CPU limitations at lower resolutions.

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

The following table presents the exact measured FPS values for each tested configuration. The data includes average FPS for all settings, with minimum and maximum FPS recorded for Medium settings only.

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 265 FPS average
• Medium: 214 FPS average (minimum 182, maximum 246)
• High: 180 FPS average
• Ultra: 137 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 219 FPS average
• Medium: 147 FPS average (minimum 125, maximum 169)
• High: 124 FPS average
• Ultra: 94 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 129 FPS average
• Medium: 87 FPS average (minimum 74, maximum 100)
• High: 73 FPS average
• Ultra: 56 FPS average

The data reveals that at 1080p, the system provides a very high frame rate even at Ultra settings (137 FPS), making it suitable for high-refresh-rate monitors. At 1440p, the performance remains strong, with Ultra settings still delivering nearly 100 FPS. At 4K, the system drops below 60 FPS only at Ultra settings (56 FPS), while High settings maintain a comfortable 73 FPS average.

The Medium settings show the most consistent frame pacing across all resolutions, with the range between minimum and maximum FPS being 64 FPS at 1080p (182 to 246), 44 FPS at 1440p (125 to 169), and 26 FPS at 4K (74 to 100). This narrowing range at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU becomes the dominant bottleneck as resolution increases, with the CPU having less influence on frame time variability.