Rust

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate for this combo at 1080p with High settings in Rust?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7800M delivers an average of 79 FPS at 1920x1080 on High settings, with Medium producing 94 FPS and Low reaching 140 FPS.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H scores 40,518 in average benchmark score, which is essentially tied with the Intel Core 7 253PE (40,557, deltaPct -0.1%) and the Intel Core 5 223PE (40,585, deltaPct -0.2%). It sits slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H and Intel Xeon 6507P, both with a deltaPct of 0.2%.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking among all tested graphics cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800M falls in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27,883. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20, which scores 27,839 (deltaPct 0.2%).

Q: What kind of performance difference exists between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 96 FPS while Ultra drops to 42 FPS. This represents a 54 FPS gap, with Medium (65 FPS) and High (55 FPS) falling between those extremes.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested system configurations for Rust?

A: This combination ranks 1,958 out of 2,953 tested combos in Rust, placing it in the lower-middle portion of the field for this specific game.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the GPU, and how does it relate to the game's performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800M has 432.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth across a 192-bit bus with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory. The benchmark data shows the 4K Ultra preset produces only 25 FPS, indicating the memory subsystem is heavily taxed at extreme resolutions.

GPU Role

The AMD Radeon RX 7800M is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture using the Navi 32 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2M per mm². The GPU operates with a base clock of 1295 MHz, a game clock of 2145 MHz, and a boost clock of 2335 MHz. Its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed across a 192-bit bus, producing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The GPU's compute resources are substantial. It has 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units, along with 60 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate reaches 224.2 GPixel/s, while the texture rate hits 560.4 GTexel/s. Raw compute throughput is rated at 35.87 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The card connects via PCIe 4.0 x16 and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

In Rust, the GPU's role is clearly visible in the measured frame rates. At 1080p Low, the combination produces 140 FPS, but cranking settings to Ultra drops the average to 60 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra widens dramatically at higher resolutions. At 1440p, Low yields 96 FPS while Ultra produces 42 FPS. At 4K, the spread is from 57 FPS on Low down to 25 FPS on Ultra. The 12 GB frame buffer and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth appear sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at most settings, but the 4K Ultra result of 25 FPS suggests the GPU's memory interface becomes a limiting factor at extreme resolutions.

The GPU's benchmark scores place it in the 73rd percentile of all graphics cards. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2994, while Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 120,778 and 126,668 respectively. Passmark scores include 17,613 for G3D, 9,342 for GPU compute, and 892 for G2D. The nearest rival by average score is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 at 27,839 (deltaPct 0.2%), followed by the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X at 27,973 (deltaPct -0.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti at 28,020 (deltaPct -0.5%), and the AMD FirePro S7150 at 28,117 (deltaPct -0.8%).

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of which preset offers the best balance for Rust on this hardware. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset delivers 94 FPS average, with a minimum of 80 FPS and maximum of 108 FPS. This is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold that most players consider playable, while still maintaining visual quality improvements over Low. The High preset at 1080p produces 79 FPS, which is also playable but represents a 15 FPS sacrifice compared to Medium. Ultra at 1080p drops to 60 FPS, which is borderline for competitive play.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset averages 65 FPS with a minimum of 55 FPS and maximum of 74 FPS. This is the only 1440p preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS. High at 1440p drops to 55 FPS, while Low produces 96 FPS but with significantly reduced visual fidelity. Ultra at 1440p falls to 42 FPS, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay in a survival title where quick reactions matter.

The 4K results are less encouraging. At 3840x2160, Low averages 57 FPS, Medium averages 38 FPS (with a minimum of 32 FPS and maximum of 44 FPS), High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra averages 25 FPS. Only the Low preset approaches acceptable playability at 4K, and even then, the average is below 60 FPS.

The data indicates that Medium is the sweet spot for this combination. At both 1080p and 1440p, Medium offers the highest average FPS that remains above 60, while providing better visual quality than Low. Players seeking maximum smoothness should consider Low at 1440p (96 FPS) or 1080p (140 FPS), but those wanting a balance of visual fidelity and responsiveness should select Medium. For 4K, the Low preset is the only viable option, and even then, players may need to accept frame rates in the 50s.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions and four quality presets, providing a comprehensive view of performance scaling.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset produces the highest average at 140 FPS. Medium follows at 94 FPS, with a minimum of 80 FPS and maximum of 108 FPS. High averages 79 FPS, and Ultra drops to 60 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a steady degradation: Low to Medium loses 46 FPS, Medium to High loses 15 FPS, and High to Ultra loses 19 FPS.

At 2560x1440, Low averages 96 FPS. Medium produces 65 FPS average, with a minimum of 55 FPS and maximum of 74 FPS. High averages 55 FPS, and Ultra drops to 42 FPS. The resolution increase from 1080p to 1440p costs 44 FPS on Low (from 140 to 96), 29 FPS on Medium (from 94 to 65), 24 FPS on High (from 79 to 55), and 18 FPS on Ultra (from 60 to 42).

At 3840x2160, Low averages 57 FPS. Medium produces 38 FPS average, with a minimum of 32 FPS and maximum of 44 FPS. High averages 32 FPS, and Ultra drops to 25 FPS. Moving from 1440p to 4K costs 39 FPS on Low (from 96 to 57), 27 FPS on Medium (from 65 to 38), 23 FPS on High (from 55 to 32), and 17 FPS on Ultra (from 42 to 25).

The frame rate deltas between presets are not uniform. At 1080p, the gap between Low and Medium is 46 FPS, while at 1440p it narrows to 31 FPS, and at 4K it shrinks to 19 FPS. Similarly, the gap between Medium and High is 15 FPS at 1080p, 10 FPS at 1440p, and 6 FPS at 4K. These shrinking gaps suggest that the GPU becomes progressively more limiting as resolution increases, reducing the relative impact of quality settings.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals important characteristics about the limiting component in this system. At Low settings, the transition from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 reduces average FPS from 140 to 57, a 59.3% decrease. At Medium settings, the drop is from 94 to 38 FPS, a 59.6% decrease. High settings fall from 79 to 32 FPS, a 59.5% decrease. Ultra settings drop from 60 to 25 FPS, a 58.3% decrease.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all four presets is notable. Regardless of quality level, the 4x pixel count increase at 4K relative to 1080p exacts nearly the same proportional toll on performance. This uniformity indicates that the AMD Radeon RX 7800M's rendering pipeline is the primary bottleneck across all settings, rather than the CPU or memory subsystem. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the percentage drop would be smaller at higher resolutions, where the GPU takes longer to render each frame and the CPU has more time to prepare work.

The absolute FPS losses also tell a story. From 1080p to 1440p, Low loses 44 FPS, Medium loses 29 FPS, High loses 24 FPS, and Ultra loses 18 FPS. From 1440p to 4K, Low loses 39 FPS, Medium loses 27 FPS, High loses 23 FPS, and Ultra loses 17 FPS. The losses are slightly larger from 1080p to 1440p than from 1440p to 4K, which is interesting given that both steps represent roughly a 2.25x increase in pixel count. This suggests that the GPU's memory bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s becomes less of a constraint as the resolution increases, possibly due to better cache utilization at larger render targets.

The 4K Ultra result of 25 FPS is particularly telling. With a 12 GB frame buffer and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, the GPU has sufficient memory capacity, but the compute throughput of 35.87 TFLOPS is not enough to sustain high frame rates at maximum quality. The pixel rate of 224.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 560.4 GTexel/s are also stressed at 4K Ultra, as evidenced by the 25 FPS average.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 3, built on the Panther Lake architecture using Intel's 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a TDP of 25 W. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, providing 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes and includes integrated Arc B390 graphics.

In Rust, the CPU's role is less prominent than the GPU's, but still measurable. The benchmark data shows that at 1080p Low, where the GPU has less work per frame, the system achieves 140 FPS. This indicates the CPU can feed the GPU at this level. At 4K Low, the system still manages 57 FPS, which suggests the CPU is not severely limiting even at higher resolutions when settings are lowered.

Cinebench scores provide context for the CPU's gaming performance. The R23 multicore score is 28,221, while the single-core score is 3,984. R20 scores are 11,852 multicore and 1,673 single-core. R15 scores are 2,844 multicore and 401 single-core. Passmark scores include 32,956 for multithread and 4,005 for single thread. The single-thread performance of 4,005 in Passmark is competitive and helps explain why the system can maintain 140 FPS at 1080p Low, where single-threaded game logic often matters.

The CPU's Passmark physics score is 2,857, and integer math scores 88,083. Floating point math reaches 105,681, while data compression scores 312,927 and encryption scores 25,228. Extended instructions score 25,669, find prime numbers scores 321, and random string sorting scores 38,093. These scores indicate strong general-purpose compute that benefits Rust's simulation and physics systems.

The CPU ranks in the 87th percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 40,518. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core 7 253PE (40,557, deltaPct -0.1%), Intel Core 5 223PE (40,585, deltaPct -0.2%), AMD Ryzen 9 7940H (40,431, deltaPct 0.2%), and Intel Xeon 6507P (40,426, deltaPct 0.2%). The essentially tied scores among these processors suggest that CPU performance is not a differentiator in this tier.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of Intel Core Ultra X7 368H and AMD Radeon RX 7800M ranks 1,958 out of 2,953 tested combos in Rust. This places the system in the 66.3rd percentile of all tested configurations, meaning roughly one-third of the tested combos perform worse. However, it also means about two-thirds perform better, which is consistent with the GPU's 73rd percentile ranking and the CPU's 87th percentile ranking.

The discrepancy between the component-level rankings and the in-game ranking is noteworthy. The CPU ranks in the 87th percentile of all processors, and the GPU ranks in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, yet the combo ranks in the 66th percentile of all tested combos in Rust. This suggests that Rust's performance characteristics do not perfectly align with the synthetic benchmark scores used for component ranking. The game's heavy reliance on server-side simulation, network code, and certain CPU features may not be fully captured by Cinebench or Passmark scores.

The GPU's nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks include the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (deltaPct 0.2%), AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (deltaPct -0.3%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (deltaPct -0.5%), and AMD FirePro S7150 (deltaPct -0.8%). These are all older or workstation-oriented cards, which suggests the RX 7800M's synthetic scores may not fully reflect its gaming performance in modern titles like Rust.

The CPU's nearest rivals are similarly close in synthetic performance, with all four rivals within 0.2% of the Core Ultra X7 368H's average score. This clustering indicates that the CPU tier is highly competitive, and real-world gaming differences would likely come from architectural features not captured by average benchmark scores.

The measured FPS data shows that the combo can achieve 140 FPS at 1080p Low and 60 FPS at 1080p Ultra. At 1440p, the range is from 96 FPS on Low to 42 FPS on Ultra. At 4K, the range narrows to 57 FPS on Low down to 25 FPS on Ultra. These results, combined with the rank of 1,958 out of 2,953, suggest that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming at Medium to High settings, or 1440p gaming at Medium settings. The 4K experience is limited, with only the Low preset approaching playable frame rates.