Rust

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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake-S architecture, using a 3 nm process node from TSMC. It runs at a base clock of 2.40 GHz and boosts up to 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP and a 30 MB shared L3 cache. The processor's memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Its benchmark profile places it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64,640.

In Rust, a game known for heavy server-side simulation and physics calculations, the CPU's multi-threaded throughput is critical. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216 and the PassMark multi-thread score of 49,682 indicate strong parallel processing capability. The single-core performance, measured at 5,960 in Cinebench R23 and 4,689 in PassMark single-thread, matters for game logic that is often single-threaded. The data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the combo reaches 225 FPS average, which is the highest measured result across all settings and resolutions. This suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU is not the primary bottleneck, as the frame rate scales well with the GPU's capability.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the CPU benchmark database, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 sits within a tight cluster. The AMD EPYC 4464P scores 64,823, which is 0.3% higher, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64,438, 0.3% lower. The AMD EPYC 7343 is 0.7% behind at 64,202, and the AMD EPYC 9124 is 0.7% ahead at 65,104. These deltas are negligible in real-world gaming terms, indicating that the 265's performance is essentially on par with these server-class parts in synthetic workloads. For Rust, the 20 threads and high boost clock provide ample headroom for both the game's simulation and background tasks.

The processor's 30 MB L3 cache is shared across all cores, which helps in scenarios where multiple cores access the same game data. The 192 KB L1 cache per core and 3 MB L2 per core further reduce latency for frequently accessed data. The integrated graphics, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU, are not leveraged in this test, as the discrete GPU handles all rendering. The CPU's socket is Intel Socket 1851, and it was released on January 6, 2025, with a launch MSRP of $394.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using a 5 nm process from TSMC, with a chip designated AD104. It has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s. The memory clock is 1313 MHz, with an effective speed of 21 Gbps. The GPU's base clock is 1920 MHz, boosting to 2475 MHz. It contains 5,888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation processors, along with 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 158.4 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 455.4 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance at 29.15 TFLOPS. The GPU has a 200 W TDP and requires a 550 W suggested PSU.

In the benchmark database, the RTX 4070 ranks in the 81st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 37,648. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla P4, which scores 37,628 (0.1% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 at 37,507 (0.4% lower). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile is 1.3% higher at 38,135, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 is 1.3% lower at 37,157. These small deltas suggest the RTX 4070's raw compute is well-positioned among these alternatives, though the RTX 4080 Mobile holds a slight edge.

For Rust, the GPU's role becomes more pronounced at higher resolutions and settings. The 12 GB VRAM is sufficient for the game's textures, which can be demanding at 4K Ultra. The measured FPS data shows a clear pattern: at 1080p Low, the average is 225 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 39 FPS. This drop indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor when both resolution and graphical fidelity are maximized. The memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s supports high-resolution texture streaming, which is critical in Rust's open-world environment where assets load dynamically. The GPU's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 API compatibility align with Rust's rendering requirements, ensuring efficient draw calls and resource management.

The FP32 performance of 29.15 TFLOPS provides ample compute for the game's lighting and shadow calculations, which are more intensive at higher settings. The 64 ROPs handle pixel throughput, and at 4K Ultra, the 39 FPS average suggests the GPU is saturated. At 1440p Medium, the combo achieves 104 FPS, showing a balance between CPU and GPU load. The GPU's end-of-life production status does not affect its current performance, but it indicates that newer generations have superseded it.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo in Rust?

A: The highest average FPS is 225, recorded at 1920x1080 with Low settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average score of 64,640, which is 0.3% lower than the AMD EPYC 4464P's 64,823, and 0.3% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F's 64,438.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded for this combo, and at what settings?

A: The lowest average FPS is 39, recorded at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings.

Q: Does the GPU outperform its nearest rival in average benchmark score?

A: No, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 scores 37,648, which is 0.1% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla P4's 37,628, but 1.3% lower than the RTX 4080 Mobile's 38,135.

Q: What is the GPU's VRAM capacity and memory bus width?

A: The GPU has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s.

Q: How many cores and threads does the CPU have?

A: The CPU has 20 cores and 20 threads, with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz.

How This Combo Ranks

This specific combination of Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 ranks 591st out of 2,953 tested combos in Rust. This places it in the top 20% of all tested configurations, indicating a strong pairing for this game. The rank reflects the balance between the CPU's strong multi-core performance and the GPU's capable 1080p and 1440p throughput. The 591st rank out of 2,953 suggests that while many combos outperform it, the majority of tested systems are slower.

The data shows that the combo's performance is competitive, but not top-tier, likely due to the GPU's mid-range positioning in the 40-series lineup. The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs is higher than the GPU's 81st percentile among all GPUs, suggesting that the CPU has more headroom than the GPU in this pairing. In Rust, where both CPU and GPU loads are significant, the rank reflects the GPU becoming the limiting factor at higher resolutions. At 1080p, where the CPU's single-thread performance and the GPU's raw speed combine, the combo achieves high frame rates, but at 4K, the GPU's limitations drag the overall rank down.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a comprehensive view of performance across resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 97 at Ultra to 225 at Low. Specifically, High settings yield 127 FPS, Medium yields 151 FPS with a minimum of 128 and maximum of 174, Low yields 225 FPS, and Ultra yields 97 FPS. This shows a clear scaling where lower settings significantly boost frame rates, with Low being 132% faster than Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the averages are: High at 88 FPS, Low at 155 FPS, Medium at 104 FPS (with min 88 and max 120), and Ultra at 67 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent across settings, with Low losing 70 FPS and Ultra losing 30 FPS. At 3840x2160, the averages are: High at 52 FPS, Low at 91 FPS, Medium at 61 FPS (with min 52 and max 71), and Ultra at 39 FPS. The 4K results show a significant reduction, with Ultra falling below 40 FPS, which is playable but not smooth for fast-paced action.

The data reveals that the combo is most comfortable at 1080p, where even Ultra exceeds 90 FPS. At 1440p, Medium and High are viable, but Ultra drops to 67 FPS. At 4K, only Low settings achieve above 90 FPS, while High and Medium are marginal. The minimum FPS values, where available, show that the combo maintains decent frame pacing at Medium settings, with the 1440p Medium minimum at 88 FPS and the 4K Medium minimum at 52 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1080p, High settings at 127 FPS provide a smooth experience with good visual quality, while Medium at 151 FPS offers a better balance for competitive play. Ultra at 97 FPS is still playable but may not be worth the visual gain over High. Low at 225 FPS is ideal for maximum responsiveness, but the visual compromise is significant.

At 1440p, Medium settings at 104 FPS (with a minimum of 88) are the best choice for a smooth experience, as they provide a high average without dipping below 60 FPS. High at 88 FPS is also viable, but the minimum is not recorded. Ultra at 67 FPS is borderline, and Low at 155 FPS is excellent for fast-paced gameplay. For 4K, the data suggests that only Low settings at 91 FPS are truly smooth. Medium at 61 FPS (min 52) is playable but may experience noticeable stutters. High at 52 FPS and Ultra at 39 FPS are not recommended for consistent gameplay.

The best overall experience, per the measured rows, is 1440p Medium, which provides a high average FPS (104) with a minimum that stays above 85 FPS, ensuring minimal drops. This setting balances visual fidelity and performance, making it the sweet spot for this combo. At 1080p, High settings offer a similar balance, but 1440p Medium provides more screen real estate without a significant FPS penalty.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data shows a clear trend as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 225 at 1080p to 155 at 1440p and 91 at 4K. This represents a 31% decrease from 1080p to 1440p and a 41% decrease from 1440p to 4K. At Medium settings, the averages are 151, 104, and 61, respectively, with decreases of 31% and 41%. At High settings, the averages are 127, 88, and 52, with decreases of 31% and 41%. At Ultra settings, the averages are 97, 67, and 39, with decreases of 31% and 42%.

The consistent percentage drops across all settings indicate that the scaling is primarily resolution-driven, rather than setting-driven. This suggests that the GPU is the limiting component, as the frame rate decreases proportionally with the number of pixels rendered. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS would not scale as predictably with resolution, especially at lower settings where the GPU load is lighter. The data shows that at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 225 FPS, which is likely near the CPU's limit for Rust's simulation. As resolution increases, the GPU becomes the bottleneck, and the FPS drops accordingly.

The 4K Ultra result of 39 FPS is particularly telling, as it demonstrates that the GPU's 12 GB VRAM and 504.2 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient to maintain high frame rates at maximum settings. The 1080p to 1440p drop is consistent across all settings, with a 31% reduction, while the 1440p to 4K drop is 41%, indicating that the GPU's pixel throughput is the limiting factor at higher resolutions. This analysis confirms that the CPU has more headroom than the GPU in this pairing, and users seeking higher frame rates at 4K would need to lower settings or consider a more powerful GPU.