The Medium

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc B390 combination produces a severely constrained gaming experience in The Medium, with benchmark results placing this pairing at rank 2581 out of 2911 tested combos. The measured frame rates across all resolutions and settings indicate that the Intel Arc B390, which relies on system shared memory and posts an average benchmark score of only 1482, is the dominant bottleneck, while the Ryzen 5 8400F’s six-core, twelve-thread Zen 4 architecture provides ample processing headroom that the integrated graphics cannot fully utilize.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F brings six cores and twelve threads to this pairing, operating at a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. This 8000-series processor is built on the Zen 4 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC, and features a 16 MB shared L3 cache alongside 1 MB of L2 cache per core. The CPU’s benchmark profile shows strong multi-threaded capability, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20851 and a Passmark multithread score of 24389, placing it in the 77th percentile against all CPUs.

In the context of The Medium, the CPU’s role is largely preparatory. The game’s measured frame rates, which never exceed 51 FPS even at 1080p Low, are far below what the Ryzen 5 8400F’s compute capabilities would allow in a balanced system. The processor’s single-thread performance, evidenced by a 3DMark single-thread score of 951 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2943, is sufficient for the game’s logical and physics calculations, but the data indicates that the CPU is rarely the limiting factor. When comparing to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 8400F sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, Intel Core i7-11850H, and Intel Core i7-13620H in average benchmark score, showing that this CPU performs at a level consistent with its peer group.

The 65 W TDP and 4 nm process node suggest efficient operation, but the benchmark results for The Medium show that the CPU’s potential is untapped. For instance, at 4K Ultra, the average frame rate drops to 12 FPS, a performance level that cannot be attributed to processor limitations. The CPU’s 3DMark 16-thread score of 6091 and Passmark physics score of 1332 indicate adequate computational strength for handling the game’s rendering threads, but the graphics subsystem is incapable of converting that strength into playable output. The data supports a conclusion that the Ryzen 5 8400F is not the performance ceiling here; rather, it is the Intel Arc B390 that dictates the experience.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the only preset that approaches a minimally acceptable frame rate is 1080p Low, which achieves an average of 51 FPS. This is the sole configuration in the entire dataset that breaks the 50 FPS barrier, and it does so by a narrow margin. The next closest options are 1440p Low at 43 FPS and 4K Low at 34 FPS, both of which fall short of smooth gameplay thresholds. For any resolution, the Low preset provides a substantial improvement over Medium, High, or Ultra, with the delta between Low and the next tier being significant: at 1080p, Low is 59% faster than Medium (51 vs 32 FPS), and at 1440p, Low is 59% faster than Medium (43 vs 27 FPS).

The Medium preset, which is the namesake setting for this game, yields average frame rates of 32 FPS at 1080p, 27 FPS at 1440p, and 21 FPS at 4K. These figures are playable only in the most tolerant sense, and the minimum FPS values recorded for Medium at 1080p (27 FPS) and 1440p (23 FPS) suggest occasional dips below 30 FPS, which will be noticeable in a horror game that relies on atmospheric tension. The High preset degrades performance further, with averages of 23 FPS at 1080p, 19 FPS at 1440p, and 15 FPS at 4K, making it unsuitable for consistent play. Ultra is effectively unplayable, with average frame rates of 18 FPS at 1080p, 15 FPS at 1440p, and 12 FPS at 4K.

Benchmark results indicate that the best experience per the measured rows is unequivocally 1080p Low. This configuration provides the highest average frame rate and avoids the sub-30 FPS territory that dominates all other settings. Users seeking higher resolutions must accept the Low preset, but the data shows diminishing returns: moving from 1080p Low to 1440p Low reduces average FPS by 16% (51 to 43), and moving to 4K Low reduces it by 33% (51 to 34). The recommendation is to prioritize the Low preset at the lowest resolution to maximize smoothness, as no other setting combination achieves even 40 FPS.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this hardware?

A: The measured data shows that 1920x1080 with Low settings produces the highest average frame rate at 51 FPS. No other combination exceeds 43 FPS, making 1080p Low the only configuration that approaches standard playability.

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

A: The Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482, which places it 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463), 1.5% ahead of the GeForce 800M (score 1460), 2.5% ahead of the GT 625 OEM (score 1446), and 2.7% ahead of the GT 710 (score 1443). Its percentile rank against all GPUs is 9, indicating it sits in the bottom decile of graphics hardware.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F the bottleneck in this system?

A: No. The CPU’s benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20851 and a Passmark multithread score of 24389, are far in excess of what is needed for the measured frame rates. The GPU’s low performance, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482, is the limiting component.

Q: What frame rates can I expect at 4K with this combo?

A: At 4K, the average frame rates range from 12 FPS on Ultra to 34 FPS on Low. Medium settings produce an average of 21 FPS with a minimum of 18 FPS, while High yields 15 FPS. None of these are suitable for smooth gameplay.

*Q: How does the CPU’s multi-threaded performance affect The Medium?*

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F scores 6091 in 3DMark 16-thread and 6165 in 3DMark max-thread tests, providing ample parallel processing capability. However, the game’s frame rates are capped by the GPU, so the CPU’s multi-threading advantage does not translate into higher FPS in this configuration.

Q: Is there any setting where this combo achieves 60 FPS?

A: No. The highest measured average frame rate is 51 FPS at 1080p Low. All other settings, including 1440p Low at 43 FPS and 4K Low at 34 FPS, fall short of 60 FPS.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc B390 ranks 2581 out of 2911 tested combos in The Medium, placing it in the bottom 11% of all system pairings. This rank reflects the severe mismatch between the CPU’s high percentile standing (77th among all CPUs) and the GPU’s low standing (9th among all GPUs). The combo’s position is driven almost entirely by the graphics component, as the CPU’s nearest rivals—the Ryzen 5 7500F, Core i7-11850H, and Core i7-13620H—all exhibit similar average scores within 0.4%, yet a system with any of these CPUs and a stronger GPU would rank significantly higher.

The data shows that this pairing is not competitive even against the weakest of the tested combos. With 2911 total combinations, ranking 2581 means that 330 combinations perform worse, but the vast majority of systems—over 88%—deliver better results in The Medium. The Arc B390’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1482 places it alongside integrated graphics from over a decade ago, with rivals like the GT 520MX and GT 710 being within 2.7% of its performance. This suggests that the combo rank is not a reflection of the CPU’s capabilities but rather a direct consequence of the GPU’s limitations, which cap the system at low-end performance levels regardless of the processor’s strength.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the decisive factor in this system’s The Medium performance, and the data indicates that it is fundamentally inadequate for this game. Based on the Xe3-LPG architecture with a Panther Lake chip, this GPU operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, but its memory configuration is system shared, meaning it draws from the same DDR5 pool as the CPU with bandwidth that is system dependent. The GPU features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation units, along with 12 ray tracing cores, yet its raw compute output is a mere 7.680 TFLOPS for FP32 operations.

The benchmark results are stark: the Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463), GeForce 800M (score 1460), GT 625 OEM (score 1446), and GT 710 (score 1443), all of which are within 2.7% of its performance. This places the Arc B390 in the same performance class as entry-level GPUs from the early 2010s, which explains why The Medium—a horror game released in 2021 with demanding visual effects—runs at such low frame rates.

In the context of the measured FPS, the GPU’s role is to render the game’s dual-reality scenes, which require substantial fill rates. The Arc B390’s pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s are theoretically sufficient for 1080p at modest settings, but the game’s engine and effects push beyond what this hardware can handle. The GPU’s 80 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate it is designed for portable or low-power devices, not for gaming workloads. The data shows that the GPU is the primary limiter, as frame rates scale almost linearly with resolution and settings, and even at the lowest settings, the GPU cannot exceed 51 FPS at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates for this combo reveal a consistent pattern of underperformance across all resolutions and settings. At 1920x1080, the average FPS ranges from 51 on Low to 18 on Ultra. The Medium preset produces an average of 32 FPS with a minimum of 27 and a maximum of 37, while High delivers 23 FPS. The jump from Low to Medium represents a 37% reduction in performance (51 to 32 FPS), and the jump from Medium to High is a 28% reduction (32 to 23 FPS). Ultra further reduces performance to 18 FPS, which is 65% lower than Low.

At 2560x1440, the average FPS drops across the board. Low settings yield 43 FPS, Medium produces 27 FPS with a minimum of 23 and maximum of 31, High delivers 19 FPS, and Ultra falls to 15 FPS. The delta between 1080p and 1440p at the same settings is consistent: Low drops by 16% (51 to 43), Medium by 16% (32 to 27), High by 17% (23 to 19), and Ultra by 17% (18 to 15). This indicates that the GPU’s fill rate is being taxed by the increased pixel count, but the relative performance between settings remains stable.

At 3840x2160, the average FPS figures are 34 on Low, 21 on Medium (with a minimum of 18 and maximum of 24), 15 on High, and 12 on Ultra. The drop from 1440p to 4K is more pronounced: Low drops by 21% (43 to 34), Medium by 22% (27 to 21), High by 21% (19 to 15), and Ultra by 20% (15 to 12). This steeper decline at 4K suggests that the GPU’s memory bandwidth, which is system dependent and shared, becomes a more significant constraint at higher resolutions. The minimum FPS values for Medium settings—27 at 1080p, 23 at 1440p, and 18 at 4K—show that the game will frequently dip below 30 FPS even on the mid-range preset, making any setting above Low a poor choice for consistent frame pacing.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K provides clear evidence of where the bottleneck lies in this system. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at Low settings reduces the average FPS from 51 to 43, a 16% drop. The same resolution jump at Medium reduces FPS from 32 to 27, also a 16% drop. This proportional scaling is characteristic of a GPU-limited scenario, where the CPU is capable of feeding frames at a rate faster than the GPU can render them. If the CPU were the limiting factor, the frame rates would remain relatively flat across resolutions, but the data shows a consistent decline.

The transition from 1440p to 4K shows a steeper decline, with Low settings dropping from 43 to 34 FPS (a 21% reduction) and Medium dropping from 27 to 21 FPS (a 22% reduction). This accelerated falloff at 4K is attributable to the Arc B390’s reliance on system shared memory, where bandwidth is not dedicated but rather dependent on the CPU’s DDR5 memory subsystem. At 4K, the GPU must access larger textures and buffers, and the shared memory interface becomes a bottleneck that compounds the already low compute performance. The data shows that the GPU is the limiting component at all resolutions, but the memory sharing exacerbates the issue as pixel count increases.

The overall scaling pattern—from 51 FPS at 1080p Low to 34 FPS at 4K Low—represents a 33% reduction in performance when quadrupling the pixel count from 2.07 million to 8.29 million pixels. In a perfectly scalable scenario, a GPU with sufficient memory bandwidth might see a 50-60% reduction, but the Arc B390’s system shared memory architecture causes a more pronounced degradation at higher resolutions. This confirms that the limiting component is the GPU, specifically its memory subsystem and raw rasterization throughput, rather than the CPU or any system-level configuration issue.