The Long Drive

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X paired with the Intel Arc B390 ranks 2594th out of 2934 tested combinations in The Long Drive. This places the combo in the bottom 12% of all tested system pairings, which is a notably weak position for a CPU that otherwise performs at the 86th percentile against all processors. The discrepancy between the CPU's strong synthetic standing and the combo's poor game ranking points directly to the GPU as the limiting factor.

Benchmark results indicate the Arc B390 sits at just the 9th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1482. Its nearest rivals in synthetic testing are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% slower). These are all entry-level or legacy mobile/desktop parts, which contextualizes why this combo lands so far down the ranking table despite having a current-generation 8-core CPU at its disposal.

The data shows a system that is profoundly unbalanced for this driving simulation. The CPU contributes negligible bottlenecking potential, while the GPU's integrated-class performance holds the entire combo back. In practical terms, this ranking means the vast majority of tested combinations will deliver higher frame rates in The Long Drive, regardless of their CPU strength.

# Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a steep and consistent performance cliff as resolution increases. At 1080p with Low settings, the combo produces 95 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low drops this to 63 FPS, a reduction of roughly one-third. At 4K Low, the average falls to 35 FPS, which is less than 40% of the 1080p Low result. This scaling pattern is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario, where pixel throughput becomes the dominant constraint.

The Medium preset tells a similar story: 78 FPS at 1080p, 51 FPS at 1440p, and 29 FPS at 4K. The High preset shows 49 FPS at 1080p, 32 FPS at 1440p, and 18 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings produce 34 FPS at 1080p, 22 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K. In every preset tier, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is substantial, and the drop from 1440p to 4K is even more punishing.

This resolution scaling behavior strongly indicates that the Intel Arc B390 is the limiting component. The CPU has ample headroom at all resolutions, but the GPU's shading units (1536), texture mapping units (48), and render output units (24) simply cannot sustain higher pixel counts. The integrated nature of the GPU, with system-shared memory and system-dependent bandwidth, further compounds the issue at higher resolutions where memory traffic increases. For anyone targeting 1440p or 4K gameplay, the data suggests this combo will struggle to maintain playable frame rates outside of Low settings.

# Settings Recommendations

Based strictly on the measured rows, the Low preset provides the only consistently playable experience across all three resolutions. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 95 FPS, which is smooth by any standard. At 1440p Low, 63 FPS remains acceptable for most driving simulations. At 4K Low, 35 FPS is borderline but technically above the 30 FPS threshold often cited as a minimum for playability.

The Medium preset offers a meaningful visual upgrade but at a significant frame rate cost. At 1080p Medium, 78 FPS is still comfortable, and the minimum of 66 FPS recorded in that config suggests reasonable frame pacing. At 1440p Medium, 51 FPS with a 44 FPS minimum is workable for a driving title. However, at 4K Medium, the 29 FPS average with a 24 FPS minimum will likely feel stuttery and unresponsive.

High and Ultra presets are not recommended for any resolution. At 1080p High, 49 FPS is marginal for a driving game, and at 1440p High, 32 FPS falls below playable thresholds. Ultra settings produce 34 FPS at 1080p, 22 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K — all of which are too low for a genre that benefits from smooth frame delivery.

The optimal experience per the measured data is 1080p Medium, which balances the 78 FPS average against the visual improvements over Low. If 1440p is required, Low is the only sensible choice. At 4K, only Low is viable, and even then, the 35 FPS average leaves little margin.

# FAQ

Q: Is this combo better suited for 1080p or higher resolutions?

A: The data clearly favors 1080p. At Low settings, 1080p delivers 95 FPS versus 63 FPS at 1440p and 35 FPS at 4K. At Medium settings, 1080p delivers 78 FPS versus 51 FPS at 1440p and 29 FPS at 4K. The performance degradation at higher resolutions is steep across every preset.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482. Its closest competitors are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463, 1.3% slower), NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460, 1.5% slower), NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446, 2.5% slower), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443, 2.7% slower). All of these are within a small margin, indicating the Arc B390 sits at the very bottom of the GPU performance spectrum.

Q: What is the best frame rate this combo can achieve?

A: The highest recorded average is 95 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next best results are 78 FPS at 1080p Medium and 63 FPS at 1440p Low. No configuration exceeds 100 FPS in the measured data.

Q: Does the CPU's strong benchmark performance translate to gaming?

A: Not in this pairing. The Ryzen 7 9700X scores at the 86th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 37943, but the combo ranks 2594th out of 2934 in this game. The GPU's 9th percentile standing negates the CPU's advantages.

Q: Is the Ultra preset ever playable with this combo?

A: The measured data shows Ultra producing 34 FPS at 1080p, 22 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K. None of these are playable for a driving simulation. Ultra should be avoided entirely.

Q: What do the minimum FPS values tell us about frame consistency?

A: The only rows with minimum FPS data are Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 66 FPS against an average of 78 FPS. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 44 FPS against an average of 51 FPS. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 24 FPS against an average of 29 FPS. These gaps suggest reasonably stable frame delivery at Medium, though the absolute values remain low at higher resolutions.

# GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. Its role in this combo is decisive, and not in a positive way. The GPU operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, but these clocks are largely irrelevant when the underlying hardware is so limited.

The Arc B390 has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units. It supports 12 ray tracing cores but lacks dedicated tensor cores. The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s. Floating point performance is rated at 7.680 TFLOPS for FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS for FP16 (2:1 ratio). These numbers place it in the entry-level segment, and the measured gaming performance reflects that positioning.

Crucially, the memory configuration is system-shared. There is no dedicated VRAM; the GPU uses system memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. This is a significant disadvantage in a driving simulation like The Long Drive, where texture streaming and world geometry can stress memory bandwidth. The 4K results — 35 FPS on Low, 29 FPS on Medium, 18 FPS on High, and 12 FPS on Ultra — illustrate how quickly the GPU's limited resources are exhausted as resolution and detail increase.

The GPU's synthetic benchmark score of 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 places it at the 9th percentile, with nearest rivals being legacy NVIDIA parts like the GT 520MX and GT 710. This is not a GPU designed for modern gaming at high settings. In this combo, it acts as the primary bottleneck across all measured configurations. Even at 1080p, the GPU limits performance far below what the CPU could theoretically support.

# CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X is a desktop processor from the 9000 series, built on Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The CPU has a 65 W TDP and uses the AMD Socket AM5 platform. It is manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm process with 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die.

Cache configuration includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes and includes integrated Radeon Graphics. It launched with a $359 MSRP and has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

Synthetic benchmarks show a strong processor. Cinebench R23 multicore scores 20485, while single-core scores 2211. Geekbench multicore reaches 17906 and single-core 3023. 3DMark results include 9824 for 16 threads, 8184 for 8 threads, 4869 for 4 threads, 2525 for 2 threads, and 1280 for single-thread. PassMark multithread scores 37161, with single-thread at 4654. The average benchmark score is 37943, placing the CPU at the 86th percentile.

Nearest rivals in synthetic CPU benchmarks are all within a fraction of a percent: the Intel Core i9-14901E (37911, 0.1% slower), AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (37904, 0.1% slower), Intel Core 5 211E (37829, 0.3% slower), and AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 (37804, 0.4% slower). This indicates the Ryzen 7 9700X is competitive with a range of high-end desktop and mobile parts.

In The Long Drive, however, the CPU's role is almost entirely passive. The measured FPS data shows no evidence of CPU limitation at any resolution or settings level. The performance ceiling is set entirely by the GPU. The CPU has more than enough headroom to feed the Arc B390, but the GPU cannot translate that headroom into higher frame rates. This is a classic case of a high-end CPU being paired with an entry-level integrated GPU, resulting in a system where the CPU's capabilities are effectively wasted for gaming purposes.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rate data covers three resolutions and four settings presets, providing a complete picture of the combo's performance envelope.

At 1920x1080, the results are as follows: Low settings produce an average of 95 FPS. Medium settings produce an average of 78 FPS, with a minimum of 66 FPS and a maximum of 90 FPS. High settings drop to 49 FPS. Ultra settings fall to 34 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 61 FPS spread, with each settings tier costing a significant portion of frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern continues but at lower absolute values. Low settings average 63 FPS. Medium settings average 51 FPS, with a minimum of 44 FPS and a maximum of 59 FPS. High settings average 32 FPS. Ultra settings average 22 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 41 FPS, and even the best 1440p result (63 FPS) is below the 1080p Low figure.

At 3840x2160, performance becomes marginal across the board. Low settings average 35 FPS. Medium settings average 29 FPS, with a minimum of 24 FPS and a maximum of 33 FPS. High settings average 18 FPS. Ultra settings average 12 FPS. The 4K results are uniformly low, and even the best 4K config (35 FPS on Low) would be considered borderline for a driving simulation.

The data also reveals the resolution penalty at each settings level. Moving from 1080p to 1440p, Low drops from 95 to 63 FPS, Medium from 78 to 51 FPS, High from 49 to 32 FPS, and Ultra from 34 to 22 FPS. Moving from 1440p to 4K, Low drops from 63 to 35 FPS, Medium from 51 to 29 FPS, High from 32 to 18 FPS, and Ultra from 22 to 12 FPS. The proportional losses are consistent, suggesting a uniform GPU bottleneck rather than any configuration-specific anomaly.

The minimum FPS values, available only for Medium settings, indicate that frame pacing is relatively stable at that preset. The 1080p Medium minimum of 66 FPS against an average of 78 FPS, the 1440p Medium minimum of 44 FPS against 51 FPS, and the 4K Medium minimum of 24 FPS against 29 FPS all show a similar ratio of minimum to average, suggesting no sudden frame drops or stuttering issues at Medium. The absence of minimum data for other presets means no such assessment is possible for Low, High, or Ultra.