Rust

Rust is a survival game with a release date of 2018-02-07. This database entry covers the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile, with measured game data at Low, Medium, High, and Ultra presets across 1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160. The overall Rust combo rank is 914 out of 3723 tested combinations.

FAQ

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

A: The highest measured average is 222 fps at 1920x1080 with the Low preset. The same Low preset reaches 153 fps at 2560x1440 and 90 fps at 3840x2160.

Q: Can this combo run Rust at 3840x2160 at 60 fps?

A: Yes. The Medium preset at 3840x2160 averages 60 fps, with a 51 fps minimum and 70 fps maximum. Low averages 90 fps, while High averages 51 fps and Ultra averages 39 fps.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H compare with its closest CPU rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score is 44466. The nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D at 44573 with a deltaPct of -0.2, the Intel Core i9-13950HX at 44342 with a deltaPct of 0.3, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 at 44309 with a deltaPct of 0.4, and the Intel Core i5-13600 at 44240 with a deltaPct of 0.5.

Q: How does the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile compare with its closest GPU rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score is 38349. The nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 at 38299 with a deltaPct of 0.1, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile at 38135 with a deltaPct of 0.6, the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A at 38691 with a deltaPct of -0.9, and the AMD Radeon Pro 580X at 38706 with a deltaPct of -0.9.

Q: Where does this combo rank in Rust overall?

A: The combination is ranked 914 out of 3723 tested combos. For context, the CPU sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs and the GPU sits at the 81st percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Which preset appears to be the best balance across all measured rows?

A: Medium is the most consistent preset across every resolution. It averages 149 fps at 1920x1080, 102 fps at 2560x1440, and 60 fps at 3840x2160, with measured minimums of 126, 87, and 51 respectively.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile is a 16 GB GDDR7 GPU based on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 5 nm process using 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. The memory interface is 256 bit wide, with a listed bandwidth of 896.0 GB/s and a memory clock of 1750 MHz, shown in the fact pack as 28 Gbps effective. The GPU’s base clock is 975 MHz and its boost clock is 1500 MHz. It has 7680 shading units, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 60 RT cores, and 240 Tensor cores, with a pixel rate of 144.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s. The listed FP32 throughput is 23.04 TFLOPS. Its slot width is listed as IGP, meaning this is an integrated-style mobile implementation.

In Rust, the GPU’s effect is visible in resolution and preset scaling. At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 90 fps, Medium averages 60 fps, High averages 51 fps, and Ultra averages 39 fps. At 1920x1080, the same preset order moves from 222 fps down to 149, then 126, then 95. That is a large drop from Low to Ultra, and the 896.0 GB/s memory bandwidth plus 23.04 TFLOPS FP32 compute are the figures that explain why the card can still deliver strong results at high settings rather than falling below playable levels.

The GPU’s synthetic standing is also strong. Its average benchmark score is 38349, placing it at the 81st percentile of all GPUs. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 4952. Geekbench OpenCL is 166986, Geekbench Vulkan is 169754, PassMark G3D is 27711, and PassMark GPU compute is 12134. Compared to its nearest rivals, the RTX 5080 Mobile is 0.1 deltaPct ahead of the GeForce MX570 and 0.6 deltaPct ahead of the RTX 4080 Mobile, while sitting 0.9 deltaPct behind both the GeForce MX570 A and the Radeon Pro 580X in average synthetic score.

The 16 GB frame buffer is a notable part of the package, but the measured Rust rows do not include a VRAM usage metric. What the data does show is that FPS scales down steadily as resolution increases, which ties the GPU’s behavior in this game more directly to bandwidth and shading throughput than to any reported VRAM limit.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor from the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, with a 25 W TDP. Cache is listed as 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Memory support is LPDDR5X over dual-channel at 153.6 GB/s, and the CPU exposes 4 PCIe Gen5 lanes. The integrated graphics are listed as Arc B390.

Synthetic CPU results are strong. Cinebench R15 multicore is 2955 and single-core is 309.5. Cinebench R20 multicore is 13101 and single-core is 1849. Cinebench R23 multicore is 18911 and single-core is 2200.5. PassMark multithread is 36811, PassMark single-thread is 4280, PassMark integer math is 90882, floating point math is 112550, physics is 3226, data compression is 361763, data encryption is 28490, extended instructions is 29943, random string sorting is 44010, and find prime numbers is 358. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 44466, placing it at the 88th percentile of all CPUs.

In the Rust measured rows, the CPU matters most at lower resolutions where frame rates are high enough to expose CPU overhead. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo reaches 222 fps, more than double the 95 fps at 1920x1080 Ultra. The 1440p Low result is 153 fps, and the 4K Low result is 90 fps. Those high frame-rate figures align with the CPU’s 5.10 GHz boost clock and its strong single-thread results: 2200.5 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 4280 in PassMark single-thread.

The nearest CPU rivals show how tightly this processor is grouped. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D averages 44573 with a deltaPct of -0.2, the Intel Core i9-13950HX averages 44342 with a deltaPct of 0.3, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 averages 44309 with a deltaPct of 0.4, and the Intel Core i5-13600 averages 44240 with a deltaPct of 0.5. All four sit within a very narrow band of the Core Ultra X9 388H, which means the synthetic CPU performance of this chip is competitive with those alternatives without relying on any one area to separate itself.

How This Combo Ranks

In the Rust database, this specific pairing is ranked 914 out of 3723 tested combos. That places it in the upper portion of the field, though not at the very top. The CPU’s 88th percentile ranking and GPU’s 81st percentile ranking are consistent with a combo that performs well in general benchmarks but is not the absolute fastest pairing available for Rust.

The measured FPS rows define the practical meaning of that rank. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 222 fps on Low, 149 on Medium, 126 on High, and 95 on Ultra. At 2560x1440, it delivers 153 on Low, 102 on Medium, 86 on High, and 66 on Ultra. At 3840x2160, it delivers 90 on Low, 60 on Medium, 51 on High, and 39 on Ultra. The 4K results are still usable, but the 1440p results are the sweet spot where the average remains far above 60 fps even on Ultra.

The rank should be read as a combined result. The CPU and GPU each have strong individual placements in their own all-hardware percentile lists, and the Rust rank of 914 out of 3723 reflects how those two pieces work together under this particular game’s settings and resolutions. The data is marked as measured, so the rank is not a projection or estimate.

Settings Recommendations

If a single preset has to work across all measured resolutions, Medium is the strongest choice. It is the highest preset that keeps a 60 fps average at 3840x2160, and it still produces 102 fps at 2560x1440 and 149 fps at 1920x1080. Medium is also the only preset with measured minimum and maximum data, and those values show solid minimums: 126 at 1080p, 87 at 1440p, and 51 at 4K.

At 1920x1080, Low is the fastest measured option at 222 fps, but Medium still gives 149 fps while adding visual quality over Low. High drops to 126 fps, and Ultra averages 95 fps. For a high-refresh experience, the data favors Low or Medium; for visual quality, Ultra is still above the 60 fps line.

At 2560x1440, Medium stands out with a 102 fps average and an 87 fps minimum. High is close at 86 fps, and Ultra averages 66 fps. All three are playable, but Medium provides the best headroom between smoothness and preset quality. Low is faster at 153 fps if maximum frame rate matters more than visuals.

At 3840x2160, the choice is more constrained. Low averages 90 fps, Medium averages 60 fps, High averages 51 fps, and Ultra averages 39 fps. Medium is the recommended preset at 4K because it is the highest setting that still reports a 60 fps average. Anyone who wants more margin can drop to Low, but High and Ultra sacrifice enough average frame rate that they are harder to justify from the measured data.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured rows cover four presets at three resolutions. The data set includes minimum and maximum FPS for Medium only; the other presets list average FPS without min or max values.

| Resolution | Settings | Avg FPS | Min FPS | Max FPS |

|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|

| 3840x2160 | High | 51 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 90 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 60 | 51 | 70 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 39 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 86 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 153 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 102 | 87 | 118 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 66 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 126 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 222 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 149 | 126 | 171 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 95 | - | - |

The strongest measured result in the entire set is 1920x1080 Low at 222 fps. At the opposite end, 3840x2160 Ultra averages 39 fps. Across each resolution, the pattern is consistent: Low is fastest, Medium cuts a large amount from Low, High cuts further, and Ultra is the slowest preset.

At 1920x1080, the difference between Low and Medium is particularly large: 222 to 149. Medium to High is smaller at 149 to 126, and High to Ultra drops from 126 to 95. At 2560x1440, Low to Medium goes from 153 to 102, Medium to High from 102 to 86, and High to Ultra from 86 to 66. At 3840x2160, Low starts at 90, Medium drops to 60, High drops to 51, and Ultra ends at 39.

The min and max values for Medium provide extra context. At 1080p, Medium stays within 126 to 171 fps, meaning it holds a high floor even during heavier scenes. At 1440p, Medium spans 87 to 118 fps, so it stays above a typical 60 fps threshold. At 4K, Medium spans 51 to 70 fps, which means dips below 60 are possible even though the average is exactly 60.