Rust

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 compare to its closest rival in overall CPU benchmark scores?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265 posts an average benchmark score of 64,640. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, scores 64,823, putting the Intel chip 0.3% behind. Against the AMD EPYC 9124, the Intel part is 0.7% ahead, and it leads the AMD EPYC 7343 by 0.7% as well.

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to other graphics cards in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT holds a percentile rank of 71 among all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 26,011. Its closest rival, the AMD Radeon R9 M395X, scores 25,891, meaning the RX 6750 XT is 0.5% faster; it is also 1.1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile.

Q: What is the best performance this combo achieves in Rust at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the setup reaches an average of 173 FPS. This is the highest average FPS recorded across all tested resolutions and settings for this game.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested CPU-GPU combinations in Rust?

A: The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT ranks 1282nd out of 2953 total tested combos in Rust. This places it in the upper half of all configurations tested.

Q: Does the CPU's performance in synthetic benchmarks show a strength in single-threaded or multi-threaded workloads?

A: The CPU scores 5,960 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 42,216 in multi-core. The multi-core score is substantially higher in absolute terms, but the single-core score of 4,689 in Passmark also indicates strong per-core performance, typical for a desktop part.

Q: What are the GPU's core clock speeds and memory specifications?

A: The GPU has a base clock of 2150 MHz and a boost clock of 2600 MHz, with a game clock of 2495 MHz. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is a RDNA 2.0 architecture part with 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. It also includes 40 ray tracing cores. The GPU’s memory configuration—12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus—delivers 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a critical factor for Rust’s texture streaming and large world data. The 18 Gbps effective memory clock and 2495 MHz game clock indicate a card designed to sustain high throughput in demanding scenes.

In Rust specifically, the GPU’s role becomes more pronounced as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the CPU can push the frame rate to 173 FPS, but the GPU’s compute capabilities—13.31 TFLOPS FP32—are the limiting factor at higher settings. The gap between Low and Ultra settings at 4K (70 FPS vs 30 FPS) shows that the GPU’s pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s is stretched when rendering at 3840x2160 with advanced effects enabled.

The card’s 40 RT cores are present for ray tracing workloads, but Rust’s measured data does not indicate that ray tracing is a significant factor in the results. Instead, the traditional rasterization pipeline, driven by the 2,560 shaders, is what determines performance. The 64 ROPs handle the final pixel output, and at 4K Ultra, the 30 FPS average suggests the ROPs and memory bandwidth are saturated.

The GPU’s 71st percentile ranking among all GPUs shows it is a mid-to-upper tier part, but not a flagship. Its nearest rivals—the R9 M395X and FirePro W7100—are older or workstation-oriented parts, indicating the RX 6750 XT sits in a performance class that is adequate for 1440p gaming but struggles with 4K Ultra presets in Rust. The 250 W TDP and dual-slot design are consistent with a performance segment card, and the PCIe 4.0 x16 interface ensures it can communicate with the CPU without bottlenecking.

The memory bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s is a key specification for Rust because the game is known for loading large procedural maps. The 12 GB frame buffer is ample for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K with Ultra textures, the capacity and bandwidth may be insufficient to maintain smooth frame rates, as evidenced by the 30 FPS average.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern of performance degradation as resolution increases. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 173 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 119 FPS, a 31% reduction. At 4K Low, the average falls to 70 FPS, which is a 41% drop from 1440p and a 60% drop from 1080p. This scaling indicates that the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at lower resolutions, but the GPU becomes the bottleneck as pixel count rises.

For High settings, the progression is: 98 FPS at 1080p, 68 FPS at 1440p, and 40 FPS at 4K. The percentage drop from 1080p to 1440p is 31%, and from 1440p to 4K is 41%. This consistent pattern across settings suggests a GPU-bound scenario at all but the lowest resolution and settings combination.

The Medium settings rows provide min and max FPS values, offering insight into frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the average is 116 FPS with a min of 99 and max of 134, showing a relatively tight range. At 1440p Medium, the average is 80 FPS with a min of 68 and max of 92. At 4K Medium, the average is 47 FPS with a min of 40 and max of 54. The min FPS values suggest that even at lower resolutions, there are occasional dips, but the frame pacing remains acceptable.

Ultra settings show the steepest decline: 75 FPS at 1080p, 51 FPS at 1440p, and 30 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1440p to 4K is 41%, which is consistent with the other settings. This consistency across all four settings presets indicates that the limiting component is the GPU’s raw rendering throughput, not CPU or memory subsystem constraints.

The fact that Low settings at 4K (70 FPS) outperform High settings at 1440p (68 FPS) is noteworthy. This suggests that the GPU’s pixel throughput is the primary constraint at higher resolutions, and reducing settings has a more significant impact on frame rate than lowering resolution. The CPU’s 20 cores and 30 MB of L3 cache are sufficient to handle Rust’s simulation logic, as evidenced by the high frame rates at 1080p Low, where the CPU is not the bottleneck.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT combination ranks 1282nd out of 2953 tested combos in Rust. This puts it in the 43rd percentile of all tested configurations, meaning roughly 57% of combos perform better. Given that the CPU alone ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, the combo’s lower ranking is attributable to the GPU’s more modest 71st percentile standing.

The CPU’s synthetic benchmark average of 64,640 is close to its nearest rivals, with a maximum delta of only 0.7% from the AMD EPYC 7343. This indicates that the CPU is not the weak link in this pairing. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 26,011 is 0.5% higher than the R9 M395X and 1.1% higher than the RTX 3080 Ti Mobile, showing that the GPU is competitive with its direct peers.

In the context of Rust, the combo’s rank of 1282 suggests that while the CPU is top-tier, the GPU holds the combo back from reaching the upper echelons of performance. The 4K Ultra result of 30 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold that many players consider playable, and even 1440p Ultra at 51 FPS is marginal. The combo performs best at 1080p, where it can achieve 173 FPS on Low settings, which is well above the refresh rate of most monitors.

The rank of 1282 out of 2953 is a mid-pack result, but it is important to note that this is a game-specific ranking. Rust is a CPU-intensive survival game, and the data shows that the CPU’s strong single-threaded performance (5,960 in R23) helps at lower resolutions. However, the GPU’s 12 GB VRAM and 432 GB/s bandwidth are not sufficient to maintain high frame rates at 4K, which is where the combo loses ground to configurations with more powerful GPUs.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the combo delivers an average of 173 FPS on Low settings. This is the highest score in the entire dataset. Medium settings produce 116 FPS average, with a minimum of 99 and maximum of 134. High settings drop to 98 FPS, and Ultra settings yield 75 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 98 FPS, indicating that the GPU has significant headroom at 1080p when settings are reduced.

At 2560x1440, the performance scales down proportionally. Low settings average 119 FPS, which is a 31% reduction from 1080p Low. Medium settings average 80 FPS (min 68, max 92), High settings average 68 FPS, and Ultra settings average 51 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 68 FPS, narrower than at 1080p, suggesting that the GPU is becoming more constrained.

At 3840x2160, the results show a significant drop. Low settings average 70 FPS, Medium settings average 47 FPS (min 40, max 54), High settings average 40 FPS, and Ultra settings average 30 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is only 40 FPS, which is the smallest spread of all resolutions. This indicates that at 4K, the GPU is the primary bottleneck, and even reducing settings to Low cannot push the frame rate above 70 FPS.

The Medium settings rows are the only ones with min and max FPS data. At 1080p Medium, the min of 99 FPS shows that the combo rarely drops below 100 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the min of 68 FPS is still above the 60 FPS threshold. At 4K Medium, the min of 40 FPS is below 60, indicating that frame pacing becomes less consistent at higher resolutions.

The data shows that the combo is best suited for 1080p gaming, where it can maintain high frame rates even on Ultra settings. At 1440p, it is playable on Medium and High settings, but Ultra settings drop to 51 FPS. At 4K, the combo is only playable on Low settings, and even then, the 70 FPS average is not ideal for fast-paced gameplay.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this combo depends on the target resolution and frame rate preference.

For 1080p gaming, the High preset at 98 FPS average is the best balance of visual quality and performance. The Ultra preset at 75 FPS is also playable, but the 23 FPS drop from High to Ultra may not be worth the visual gains. The Medium preset at 116 FPS is the best choice for players with 144 Hz monitors, as it provides a comfortable margin above the refresh rate. The Low preset at 173 FPS is excessive for most displays and sacrifices too much visual fidelity.

For 1440p gaming, the Medium preset at 80 FPS average is the recommended choice. It provides a smooth experience with a min FPS of 68, which is above the 60 FPS threshold. The High preset at 68 FPS is also viable, but the min FPS data is not available, so the Medium preset’s confirmed minimum of 68 FPS makes it the safer option. The Ultra preset at 51 FPS is borderline, and the Low preset at 119 FPS is playable but does not take advantage of the GPU’s capabilities.

For 4K gaming, the Low preset at 70 FPS average is the only viable option for smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at 47 FPS is below the 60 FPS threshold, and the High preset at 40 FPS and Ultra preset at 30 FPS are not recommended for action-oriented gameplay. The data shows that the combo is not well-suited for 4K gaming, and players with 4K displays should consider lowering the resolution to 1440p for a better experience.

The Medium settings preset at 1440p offers the best overall experience, with an 80 FPS average and a confirmed minimum of 68 FPS. This provides a smooth frame rate while maintaining reasonable visual quality. For players with high-refresh-rate 1080p monitors, the Medium preset at 116 FPS is the best choice, as it provides a significant frame rate boost over High settings without the visual degradation of Low settings.

The data indicates that the combo’s sweet spot is 1080p Medium to High, or 1440p Medium. Pushing to 4K requires dropping to Low settings, which defeats the purpose of the higher resolution. The 12 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p, but the GPU’s compute throughput is not enough to handle 4K Ultra in Rust.