The Medium

The Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces a decidedly limited experience in The Medium, a horror title that clearly demands far more graphics processing power than this integrated-class GPU can deliver. Benchmark data across three resolutions and four settings presets shows a system that is almost universally GPU-bound, with frame rates that struggle to reach playable thresholds except at the lowest settings. The combo ranks 2681st out of 2911 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom tier of systems, a position consistent with the GPU’s own 5th percentile standing among all graphics cards. While the CPU offers respectable multi-threaded performance for its generation, the measured results indicate that no amount of processor headroom can compensate for the Arc B370’s fundamental throughput limitations in this particular title.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate progression from 1080p to 4K reveals a stark, predictable pattern of degradation that points squarely at the GPU as the limiting component. At 1920x1080 with High settings, the combo averages 21 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 at the same settings drops the average to 17 FPS, and at 3840x2160 it falls further to 14 FPS. This represents a 33% reduction from 1080p to 1440p and a further 18% decline from 1440p to 4K, though the absolute numbers are so low that the relative percentages understate the severity of the situation.

The Low settings preset shows a somewhat more encouraging scaling pattern, though the absolute values remain modest. At 1080p Low, the system achieves 46 FPS, which is the only measured configuration that approaches a smooth experience. Dropping to 1440p Low yields 39 FPS, a 15% decrease, while 4K Low produces 30 FPS, another 23% reduction. The fact that even at the lowest possible settings, 4K resolution cuts the 1080p figure by roughly one-third suggests that the Arc B370’s pixel throughput is being saturated well before the CPU becomes a factor.

Medium settings follow the same trajectory with more granular data available. At 1080p Medium, the average is 29 FPS with minimums of 24 and maximums of 33. At 1440p Medium, the average drops to 24 FPS with a range of 21 to 28. At 4K Medium, the average falls to 19 FPS with minimums of 16 and maximums of 22. The consistent presence of minimum frame rates that are substantially lower than the averages indicates that even these already-low figures are subject to noticeable dips, which in a horror title with slow-paced exploration could be particularly jarring during scene transitions or when the camera pans across dense environments.

Ultra settings are essentially unplayable across all resolutions. The 1080p Ultra average is 16 FPS, 1440p Ultra drops to 14 FPS, and 4K Ultra bottoms out at 11 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p at Ultra is only a 12% reduction, and from 1440p to 4K another 21%, but these percentages are meaningless when every configuration is below 20 FPS. The data shows that resolution scaling has a nearly linear effect on performance within each preset, which is the hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario. If the CPU were the constraint, we would expect to see frame rates that cluster more tightly across resolutions, since the processor workload does not scale proportionally with pixel count.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the clear bottleneck in this configuration, and its specifications explain why. This is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process with a chip codename of Panther Lake. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, which sounds reasonable on paper, but the real limitation lies in its memory configuration: the GPU uses system shared memory, with a bus width of system shared and bandwidth described as system dependent. This means the Arc B370 has no dedicated VRAM of its own, instead borrowing from the main system memory, which in this case is DDR4 running over a dual-channel interface with a peak bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s for the CPU. The practical effect is that texture streaming and frame buffer operations are constrained by whatever memory bandwidth the system can provide, and in a game like The Medium with its fixed-camera angles and detailed environments, this becomes a serious liability.

The GPU’s raw compute resources are similarly modest. It has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS. In the context of a 2021 horror title, these figures are simply insufficient for high-fidelity rendering at modern resolutions. The GPU’s benchmark results confirm this: its only listed 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1184, which places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 with a score of 1186 and a deltaPct of -0.2, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 at 1190 with -0.5 deltaPct, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M at 1192 with -0.7 deltaPct. These are all legacy mobile or entry-level desktop parts from well over a decade ago, which puts the Arc B370’s performance in stark perspective. The GPU also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is not the issue; raw throughput is.

The fact that the GPU’s boost clock reaches 2400 MHz yet still produces these low frame rates suggests that the architecture is not able to translate clock speed into effective game performance, likely due to the memory bottleneck and the relatively low number of execution units. The TDP of 25 W confirms this is a low-power part designed for integrated use, not for demanding gaming workloads. In The Medium, the GPU’s limitations are exposed immediately: even at 1080p Low, the 46 FPS average is barely above the threshold for acceptable playability, and every increase in settings or resolution pushes the frame rate into single-digit or low-teen territory.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F is, by contrast, a capable mid-range desktop processor from the Core 10th Gen series, and in this pairing it has significant headroom that goes unused. This CPU features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. It is built on Intel’s 14 nm process with the Comet Lake architecture and has a 65 W TDP. Its cache configuration includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR4 over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The CPU uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, and it is a socketed desktop part for Intel Socket 1200.

Its benchmark results show a processor that is competitive for its era. In Cinebench R23, it scores 10283 in multi-core and 1451 in single-core. Geekbench results are 6257 multi-core and 1420 single-core. The 3DMark tests show 4748 for 16 threads, 3929 for 8 threads, 2560 for 4 threads, 1350 for 2 threads, and 688 for single thread. Passmark results include 12115 for multithread and 2541 for single thread. The CPU’s percentile versus all CPUs is 68, meaning it outperforms two-thirds of all processors in the database. Its average benchmark score is 14185, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6756E at 14163 with a deltaPct of 0.2, the Intel Core 7 160UL at 14232 with -0.3 deltaPct, the AMD EPYC 7552 at 14115 with 0.5 deltaPct, and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C at 14277 with -0.6 deltaPct. These are all within 0.6% of the i5-10400F’s average score, indicating that the CPU sits in a well-populated performance band.

In The Medium, however, this CPU’s capabilities are largely irrelevant. The measured frame rates do not vary in a way that would indicate CPU limitation. For example, the difference between 1080p High and 4K High is only 7 FPS (21 vs 14), which is a much smaller relative change than what would be expected if the CPU were the primary constraint. If the processor were the bottleneck, frame rates would remain roughly constant regardless of resolution, since the CPU workload (draw calls, physics, AI) does not scale with pixel count. Instead, the data shows frame rates dropping consistently as resolution increases, which is the signature of GPU limitation. The CPU’s 12 threads are more than sufficient for a game like The Medium, which was released in 2021 and is not known for unusually heavy CPU demands. The processor also does not have integrated graphics, so all display output comes from the Arc B370, reinforcing the GPU’s role as the sole graphics pipeline.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core i5-10400F and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2681st out of 2911 tested combos in The Medium, placing it in the 8th percentile of all configurations. This is a poor result that aligns with the GPU’s own 5th percentile ranking among all graphics cards, while the CPU’s 68th percentile ranking is much higher. The disparity between the two components’ individual standings is telling: the CPU is a mid-pack performer, but the GPU drags the entire system down to the bottom tier. The combo rank of 2681 out of 2911 means that roughly 92% of tested systems perform better in this game, which is a sobering statistic for anyone considering this pairing.

The measured frame rates support this ranking. The best result for this combo is 46 FPS at 1080p Low, which is the only configuration that reaches even a playable frame rate for most users. Every other settings and resolution combination falls below 30 FPS, with the worst being 11 FPS at 4K Ultra. These numbers are consistently in the bottom range of what the database records for this game. The combo’s ranking also reflects the fact that the Arc B370 is an integrated GPU, and its nearest rivals in the GPU database are all legacy parts from over a decade ago. None of those rivals are likely to be paired with a modern 6-core CPU, which means this combo’s performance is essentially what one would expect from a low-end integrated solution paired with a competent processor. The CPU is not helping the situation, but it is not hurting it either; the GPU is the sole constraint.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates provide a complete picture of this combo’s capabilities across all tested configurations. At 1920x1080, the system achieves 46 FPS on Low settings, 29 FPS on Medium (with a range of 24 to 33), 21 FPS on High, and 16 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset is the only one at 1080p with recorded minimum and maximum values, showing a 9 FPS spread between the lowest and highest frames. This spread indicates some variability, but it is not catastrophic; the minimum of 24 FPS is still above the average of the High preset.

At 2560x1440, the numbers drop across the board. Low settings produce 39 FPS, Medium produces 24 FPS (with a range of 21 to 28), High produces 17 FPS, and Ultra produces 14 FPS. The Medium preset’s range at 1440p is narrower than at 1080p, with a 7 FPS spread, suggesting that the GPU is becoming more consistently maxed out as resolution increases. The step from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is a 7 FPS drop, and from 1440p Low to 4K Low is a 9 FPS drop, showing that the GPU’s performance degrades roughly linearly with pixel count.

At 3840x2160, the results are mostly unplayable. Low settings yield 30 FPS, which is the only 4K configuration above 20 FPS. Medium settings produce 19 FPS (with a range of 16 to 22), High produces 14 FPS, and Ultra produces 11 FPS. The Medium preset at 4K has the widest relative range of any configuration, with a 6 FPS spread between minimum and maximum, indicating significant frame pacing issues. Across all resolutions, the Low preset shows the smallest resolution penalty, with only a 35% drop from 1080p to 4K (46 to 30 FPS), while the High preset shows a 33% drop (21 to 14 FPS), and Ultra shows a 31% drop (16 to 11 FPS). These consistent percentages reinforce the GPU-bound nature of the workload.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured data, the only practical recommendation for this combo is the Low settings preset at 1920x1080, which produces an average of 46 FPS. This is the sole configuration that approaches a smooth experience, and even here, the frame rate is not ideal for a horror title that benefits from consistent pacing. The 1080p Medium preset at 29 FPS is borderline, but the minimum of 24 FPS could result in noticeable stutter during intense moments. The 1440p Low preset at 39 FPS is a viable alternative if the user prioritizes resolution over smoothness, but the 7 FPS drop from 1080p may not be worth the visual upgrade given the game’s fixed camera angles and dark environments.

For users who insist on higher settings, the data suggests that High and Ultra presets are not viable at any resolution. The best High result is 21 FPS at 1080p, which is well below the 30 FPS threshold generally considered the minimum for playable action. The best Ultra result is 16 FPS at 1080p, which is essentially a slideshow. The Medium preset at 1080p is the only middle-ground option that might be tolerable for players who are willing to accept occasional frame drops, but the 29 FPS average is still below ideal. The 4K resolution should be avoided entirely; even Low settings at 4K only reach 30 FPS, and the Medium preset drops to 19 FPS. In summary, this combo is best suited to 1080p Low, with 1440p Low as a secondary option for users who prioritize resolution over frame rate. Any other configuration will result in a sub-30 FPS experience that is likely to detract from the game’s atmospheric tension.