Rust

Resolution Scaling

Rust's performance scaling across resolutions reveals a system that transitions from CPU-bound at 1080p to increasingly GPU-bound at 4K. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo produces 226 FPS average. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 156 FPS, a reduction of approximately 31%. The jump to 4K Low further reduces the average to 92 FPS, another 41% decline. This steep scaling curve at Low settings suggests the CPU is the primary limiter at lower resolutions, with the GPU becoming more dominant as pixel count rises.

The scaling pattern becomes more moderate when examining higher settings presets. At Medium settings, the average FPS moves from 152 at 1080p, down to 105 at 1440p, and finally to 62 at 4K. The percentage drops between each step are roughly 31% and 41% respectively, closely mirroring the Low settings scaling. This consistency indicates that the game's engine applies similar workload scaling regardless of quality preset, though the absolute frame rates differ substantially.

High settings show a slightly different scaling profile. The 1080p High average of 128 FPS drops to 88 FPS at 1440p, a 31% reduction. Moving from 1440p to 4K High brings the average down to 52 FPS, a 41% decline from the 1440p figure. The Ultra preset follows the same pattern: 98 FPS at 1080p, 67 FPS at 1440p, and 40 FPS at 4K. These consistent percentage drops across all presets suggest that Rust's rendering pipeline scales resolution in a fairly linear fashion when paired with this hardware.

The 4K Ultra figure of 40 FPS sits at the edge of playability, while 4K Medium at 62 FPS offers a more comfortable margin. The data indicates that at 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting component, as the frame rate differences between presets expand considerably. At 1080p, the gap between Low (226 FPS) and Ultra (98 FPS) is 128 FPS, while at 4K the same preset gap narrows to 52 FPS. This compression at higher resolutions is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck where the graphics card's rendering capacity caps performance regardless of CPU headroom.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the benchmark database, this specific combination of Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile achieves a rank of 775 out of 3,723 tested combos in Rust. This places the pairing in the top 21% of all tested configurations, a strong showing for a mobile platform in a game known for its demanding procedural world generation and large-scale multiplayer environments.

The combo's percentile positioning reflects the balanced nature of the components. The CPU sits at the 91st percentile among all tested processors, while the GPU ranks at the 84th percentile among all graphics cards. In Rust, where both hardware components contribute significantly to overall performance, this combination leverages strong CPU throughput for game logic and world simulation, paired with capable GPU resources for rendering.

The rank of 775 out of 3,722 implies that roughly 2,948 tested combos deliver lower performance in Rust. The data shows this is not a top-tier configuration, but it is clearly positioned above the median. Given the game's release in 2018 and its continued optimization cycles, the performance ceiling for any single combination is constrained by both the game's engine efficiency and the hardware's architectural strengths.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile brings 16 GB of GDDR6 memory across a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. This memory subsystem is substantial for a mobile GPU, and in Rust's large open-world environments with frequently streamed textures, the bandwidth capacity directly influences how quickly new areas can be rendered without stutter. The 16 GB capacity also provides ample room for high-resolution texture packs that Rust's community servers often employ.

Clock speeds for this mobile implementation are set at a 1335 MHz base and 1695 MHz boost. The boost behavior in sustained gaming workloads determines how close the card operates to its theoretical peak. With 9,728 shading units and 112 ROPs, the GPU's pixel throughput is rated at 189.8 GPixel/s, while texture rate reaches 515.3 GTexel/s. These figures translate to the card's capacity to fill frames at the resolutions tested in this dataset.

The GPU's FP32 performance of 32.98 TFLOPS places it among the more powerful mobile graphics solutions available. In Rust, the rendering workload includes deferred shading, dynamic shadows, and particle effects that all benefit from raw compute throughput. The 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores provide additional capabilities for ray-traced effects and DLSS-based upscaling, though the measured data here does not specify whether these features were enabled during testing.

The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 27,212 places it at the 84th percentile among all tested GPUs. Its closest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A6000 with a delta of -0.9% and the Quadro M6000 at +0.8%. This positioning indicates the mobile 4090 performs comparably to professional desktop-class workstation cards, an impressive feat for a mobile IGP form factor with a 120 W TDP.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 4K resolution, the data shows a clear progression across presets. Low settings produce an average of 92 FPS, Medium drops to 62 FPS with a minimum of 52 and maximum of 71, High further reduces to 52 FPS, and Ultra bottoms out at 40 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 52 FPS, representing a 57% performance penalty for maximum visual quality.

Moving to 1440p, the averages increase substantially. Low delivers 156 FPS, Medium reaches 105 FPS with a range of 89 to 120, High hits 88 FPS, and Ultra manages 67 FPS. The Low-to-Ultra spread at 1440p is 89 FPS, a 57% penalty, consistent with the 4K scaling pattern. The 1440p Medium frame range of 89 to 120 FPS indicates that this setting provides a playable experience with acceptable variance.

At 1080p, the performance is robust across all presets. Low averages 226 FPS, Medium averages 152 FPS with a range of 129 to 175, High averages 128 FPS, and Ultra averages 98 FPS. The 226 FPS Low figure demonstrates that this combination has significant headroom for high-refresh-rate displays at 1080p, while even Ultra maintains nearly 100 FPS.

Comparing resolution scaling for the same preset, the data shows consistent ratios. Medium settings scale from 152 FPS at 1080p to 105 FPS at 1440p (69% retention) and then to 62 FPS at 4K (41% retention). High settings retain 69% moving from 1080p to 1440p, and 59% moving from 1440p to 4K. These figures indicate that the GPU's rendering load scales predictably with pixel count, with diminishing returns at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX features 14 cores and 14 threads, operating at a 2.90 GHz base clock with a 5.10 GHz boost. This configuration lacks Hyper-Threading, meaning each core handles a single thread. In Rust, which can utilize multiple cores for server-side simulation and client-side game logic, the 14 physical cores provide solid parallel throughput without the overhead of thread scheduling.

The CPU's cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Rust's procedural world generation and item crafting systems benefit from larger caches, as frequently accessed data structures can reside closer to the cores. The 24 MB L3 is substantial for a mobile processor and helps maintain consistent frame times in complex scenes.

Cinebench R23 scores of 34,731 multi-core and 4,903 single-core place this CPU in a strong position. The PassMark multi-thread score of 40,849 and single-thread score of 4,683 corroborate this performance level. The CPU's 91st percentile ranking among all processors indicates it outperforms the vast majority of tested CPUs, including many desktop parts.

The nearest rivals in aggregate benchmark score include the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X with a delta of 0.2% and the Intel Core i9-13900F at 0.7%. The AMD EPYC 8124P trails by -0.1% and the Core i7-14700 by -0.4%. This clustering shows the Ultra 5 235HX performs within 1% of several flagship desktop processors from previous generations, an impressive result for a mobile chip with a 55 W TDP.

In Rust specifically, the CPU's role is particularly pronounced at lower resolutions. The 1080p Low average of 226 FPS versus the 4K Low average of 92 FPS demonstrates that at lower pixel counts, the CPU can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them. The 14-core configuration ensures that background tasks, server communication, and game logic do not starve the rendering pipeline.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution for high refresh rate gaming in Rust with this combo?

A: At 1080p Low settings, the average FPS is 226, which comfortably exceeds 144 Hz and approaches 240 Hz thresholds. Even 1080p High averages 128 FPS, making 1080p the preferred resolution for high-refresh-rate displays.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K Ultra settings?

A: The 4K Ultra preset yields an average of 40 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target for smooth gameplay. For a better 4K experience, Medium settings at 62 FPS or High settings at 52 FPS provide more playable frame rates.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in Rust?

A: The data indicates the CPU limits performance at 1080p, where Low settings produce 226 FPS. As resolution increases to 4K, the GPU becomes the bottleneck, as evidenced by the reduced frame rates and the compression of performance differences between presets.

Q: What settings preset offers the best balance of quality and performance?

A: Medium settings provide the most balanced experience across resolutions: 152 FPS at 1080p, 105 FPS at 1440p, and 62 FPS at 4K. The minimum and maximum frame rates for Medium (129-175 at 1080p, 89-120 at 1440p, 52-71 at 4K) show consistent performance.

Q: How does this CPU compare to its nearest rivals in aggregate benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX scores within 1% of several high-end desktop CPUs. It trails the AMD EPYC 8124P by -0.1%, exceeds the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X by 0.2%, trails the Core i7-14700 by -0.4%, and exceeds the Core i9-13900F by 0.7% in average benchmark scores.

Q: Is the 16 GB VRAM sufficient for Rust's large worlds?

A: The 16 GB GDDR6 memory provides ample capacity for Rust's textures and world data. The measured performance at 4K Ultra (40 FPS) is constrained more by compute throughput than memory capacity, as the 576.0 GB/s bandwidth supports high-resolution texture streaming.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured frame rates, the Medium preset delivers the most consistent experience across all three resolutions. At 1080p, Medium provides 152 FPS average with a minimum of 129 FPS, ensuring smooth gameplay even in demanding scenes. The 1440p Medium figure of 105 FPS with a range of 89 to 120 FPS maintains playability above 60 FPS at all times. The 4K Medium average of 62 FPS with a minimum of 52 FPS represents the lowest acceptable performance for this preset.

For users prioritizing competitive play with maximum frame rates, the Low preset at 1080p offers 226 FPS average, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. The 1440p Low setting at 156 FPS also provides excellent responsiveness. At 4K, Low at 92 FPS is the only preset that comfortably exceeds 60 FPS, making it the recommended choice for 4K users who prioritize smoothness over visual fidelity.

The High preset serves as a middle ground for users who want enhanced visual quality without sacrificing too much performance. At 1080p, High yields 128 FPS, while 1440p High provides 88 FPS. The 4K High figure of 52 FPS is borderline, but acceptable for slower-paced gameplay. The Ultra preset is only recommended for 1080p displays, where it maintains 98 FPS; at 1440p and 4K, the 67 FPS and 40 FPS averages respectively make Ultra less suitable for general play.

The data suggests that Rust's performance with this hardware combination is best optimized by selecting Medium settings for balanced play, Low for maximum frame rates, and reserving High or Ultra for scenarios where visual quality takes precedence. The measured frame ranges for Medium settings (129-175 at 1080p, 89-120 at 1440p, 52-71 at 4K) indicate consistent performance without severe frame-time spikes, making Medium the most reliable choice across all tested resolutions.