The Medium

The Medium is a demanding survival-horror title, and the measured figures for this combination of an Intel Core i5-13400F and an Intel Arc B370 GPU paint a clear picture of a system that struggles to stay playable even at the lowest settings. The CPU carries a strong profile — 10 cores, 16 threads, up to 4.60 GHz boost, and a 77th percentile standing among all CPUs — but the Intel Arc B370 sits at only the 5th percentile of GPUs. That mismatch dominates every result: across all twelve measured configurations, the highest average framerate is a 46 FPS at 1080p Low, and the rankings place this setup at position 3439 out of 3724 tested combos, meaning only about 7.7% of tested systems perform worse. The following break-down examines why the GPU is the sole determinant of playability, how the resolution scaling confirms this, and what settings users should choose if any are to be considered viable.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average framerate measured for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 46, found at 1920x1080 with Low settings. Every other setting aggregates to a lower average.

Q: How does the CPU compare to other CPUs in the database?

A: The Core i5-13400F sits at the 77th percentile of all CPUs, and its closest rivals (AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, Intel Core 5 120, AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D) all score within 0.4% of the same average.

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile rank?

A: The Arc B370’s percentile versus all GPUs is only 5th percentile. Its 3DSteel Nomad score of 1184, and the nearest rival is the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 with a grape4% difference.

Q: How many cores and threads does the CPU have?

A: 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost to 4.60 GHz.

Q: What is the combo’s performance rank?

A: It holds rank 3439 out of 3724 combos. This places the system in the bottom quarter of the entire benchmark suite.

Q: At which setting and resolution does the framerate reach 30 FPS?

A: Only three configurations—3840x2160 Low (30), 2560x1440 Low (39), and 1920x1080 Low (46)—are at or above the 30 FPS mark.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 draws on the Xe3 architecture with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. It houses 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 raster operations, and 10 ray-tracing cores, but its memory is designated “System Shared,” meaning there is no dedicated VRAM. The interconnect bus (IGP) and system-dependent bandwidth set a severe boundary for any texture-heavy rendering—which The Medium obviously stresses. The GPU’s measured 3DMark Steel Nomad score is 1184, placing it at the 5th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals (ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, etc.) are based on a 1.4 delta, i.e., within 1.4% of that score. In effect, this GPU is at the lowest tier of tested hardware. The bench data from The Medium confirms that the GPU is the primary limiting component: even at the lowest resolution and lowest settings, the system fails to deliver a framerate that a strong CPU could support if the GPU were more powerful. The fact that the GPU, with its limited raw compute, must also handle the game’s visuals is the core reason for the lack of fluidity.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS across three resolutions—1080p, 1440p, and 4K—reveals a curve that is strictly dependent on pixel count. At Low settings, the averages are 46, 39, and 30 FPS for 1080p, 1280x1600, and 3840x2160, each step a significant drop. Medium settings yield 29, 24, and 19; High gives 21, 17, and 14; Ultra returns 16, 14, and 11. The pattern is almost linear with respect to pixel density, which is a classic symptom of GPU‐bound performance. If the CPU were the limiting element, such a dramatic decline would not scale monotonically with each resolution bump; instead, the framerate would be relatively flat across 1080p to 4K. Here, the constant decline shows that the Intel Arc 3.0’s rendering capacity is the active bottleneck, and this is further evidenced by the GPU’s near-zero percentile standing. The drop between ascent from 1080p to 4K is about 1.3x, but the absolute change is consistent; all settings lose roughly a third of their FPS by the time they reach 4K. The data also shows that the resolution’s X factor remains the same regardless of quality preset, indicating that the GPU is simply not able to keep up with the rising pixel load.

How This Combo Ranks

In the overall database of tested combinations, the Intel Core i5-13400F + Arc 3, accomplishes a rank of 3439 out of 3724 combinations. That ranks it in the bottom ‐~228 combos are worse. To put it differently, the system is only better than about 285 tested rigs, which is a decisive bottom percentile performance. At the CPU side, the i5-13400F is actually a capable part—it achieves the 77th percentile among all processors, scoring 22604 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3195 in single-thread. The GPU, however, pulls the entire system down. Its 5th percentile is the dominant variable, and the resulting insertion ranking reflects that GPU deficiency rather than any CPU weakness. When comparing to other combos, the delta points to the GPU being the complete limiting factor. The CPU’s nearest competitors all have average scores within 0.4% of the i5-13400F, so its performance doesn’t set this combo apart. But the Arc B370 is placed at the very bottom of the GPU hierarchy. The gameplay metric fails to register at any playable threshold, and that is the root cause of the low overall rank.

Settings Recommendations

Given the measured values, the only viable setting for this combo is the lowest one. The Low preset at 1920x1080 yields an average 46 FPS, which is the single highest value in the entire dataset. That is the recommended configuration because it is the only one that offers a frame rate close to half of a typical 60 FPS experience (though the game still don't hit 60). The next step down in performance is 2560x1440 Low, which still gives 39 FPS, and 4K Low drops to 30 FPS. For visual fidelity, the “Medium” preset at 1080p achieves 29 FPS, but that is below the frame rate of Low at 1440p and close to the lower Low at 4K. All High or Ultra settings (21, 17, 14, 16, 14, 11) are below 22 FPS, which cannot be considered playable in any scenario. Therefore, a user should use 1080p Low for the best fluidity, and save the higher presets for screenshot purposes; they sacrifice any playability.

Measured FPS Breakdown

Section: The raw measured framerates from the data set are listed below, with values that originate exactly from the FACT PACK.

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

|------------|-------------|---------|--------|--------|

| 3840x2160 | High | 14 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 30 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 19 | 16 | 22 |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 11 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | High | 17 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 39 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 24 | 21 | 28 |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 14 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | High | 21 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 46 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 29 | 24 | 33 |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 16 | - | - |

These numbers are noteworthy because they are the only measurements available for this combination. The medium setting provides also the frame (minimum and maximum) showing a stable range: at 1080p Medium, the 29 average sits between 24 and 33 FPS, and at 1440p the range is 21–28 FPS. The data essentially state that the system cannot produce a fluid experience even in the lowest of settings, and the frame ranges only confirm the performance ceiling.

CPU Role

The CPU is the strong half of this pairing. With 10 cores and 16 threads, a 2.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost clock, a 20 MB L3 cache, and a 22000+ score in Cinebench R23 multi-thread, the i5-13400F is a capable general-purpose and gaming processor. The CPU sits in the top 28% of processors, and its nearest rivals all lie within 0.2–0.4% of the same average score. This demonstrates that the processor offers ample logic compute capacity for the graphics card. However, the crucial insight from the measured game data is that the CPU is never the limiting factor. The maximum FPS observed at 1080p Low (46) is a paltry number for a machine with such a CPU. This is not a CPU-limited scenario because – if it were – the framerate would not sink below the 50’s at 1080p, and the resolution scaling would be less severe. Instead, the system is strictly GPU bound. The CPU’s role in The Medium is to prepare frames for the GPU, and its 8‑core performance is not challenged here. The results show that the i5-13400F can handle the game’s logic and rendering pipeline without limit, but the Arc B370 cannot both rasterize and process the output. Therefore, the CPU’s high scores (in terms of the benchmarks) are essentially wasted in this combination, as the GPU becomes the sole determinant of the final FPS. It is important to note that the CPU’s TDP is 65 W and it uses a Socket LGA1700, but those do not factor into the gameplay in any way—they only describe the hardware.

The core structure—10 Cores, 16 threads, memory support for DDR4/DDR5—makes the CPU effective for many tasks, but in this specific game/frames it is forced to slow down. The disparity between the CPU’s 77th percentile and the GPU’s 5th percentile is the take-away: the GPU is not powerful to reach a playable level, and the CPU remains underutilized. The single-thread performance in Cinebench is 3191, respectable, but it does not offset the GPU’s obvious floor. All of this implies that if a user were to upgrade the GPU, this CPU would be able to concentrate on feeding it, but for now it is permanently a limiting companion.

This is not a demanding as far as CPU heavy O faces—the data indicates that the 10-core i5-13400F would remain comfortable even if the GPU were several times stronger, but with the Arc B310, the role in gameplay is nothing more than to hand off framerate to a small, under-resourced graphics pipeline.