To The Core

CPU Role - cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 2000 series, built on the Zen architecture (specifically Zen+ Pinnacle Ridge). It operates with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, using a 65 W TDP. The chip features a 16 MB shared L3 cache, 512 KB L2 per core, and 96 KB L1 per core. It supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, and it connects via PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes.

In the context of To The Core, an idle genre title, the CPU's role is less about raw computational muscle and more about consistent frame pacing. The recorded data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the system achieves 343 avg FPS. That figure is far beyond display refresh rates, indicating the processor is not a limiting factor at lower resolutions. The Ryzen 5 2600's 12 threads handle the game's background simulation and UI updates without strain. Its benchmark scores place it in the 75th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 21484. That places it nearly exactly between the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V (avg score 21440, 0.2% slower) and the Intel Xeon D-1746TER (avg score 21635, 0.7% faster). The processor is also within 1.2% of the AMD EPYC 9454 (avg score 21223) and 0.5% faster than the Intel Core i9-11900H (avg score 21367).

The single-thread performance, measured by Geekbench single-core at 1154 and Cinebench R15 single-core at 157.3, is adequate for the game's logic tick rate. Multi-threaded results, such as Geekbench multicore at 5648 and Cinebench R15 multicore at 1248, show that the CPU can handle parallel tasks, but To The Core does not appear to scale heavily with thread count. The PassMark multithread score of 13160 and physics score of 673 reinforce that the processor's headroom is sufficient for this title. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS drops to 81, but that decline is attributable to GPU load, not CPU limitations. The data suggests the Ryzen 5 2600 maintains a stable frame delivery across all tested settings, with no min FPS anomalies at lower resolutions where CPU-bound behavior would typically appear.

GPU Role - VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 uses the GA104 chip on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process with 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die. It has 5888 shading units, 184 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 46 RT cores, and 184 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1725 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). It is equipped with 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The card's pixel rate is 165.6 GPixel/s, texture rate is 317.4 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 20.31 TFLOPS.

The RTX 3070 ranks in the 61st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17208. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (avg score 17083, 0.7% slower), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (avg score 17037, 1.0% slower), and the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (avg score 17019, 1.1% slower). The NVIDIA Tesla K40c is 1.5% faster with an avg score of 17468. In To The Core, the GPU's role becomes evident as resolution and settings escalate. At 1080p Low, the RTX 3070 delivers 343 avg FPS, which is likely a frame rate cap or engine limit rather than a GPU constraint. The 8 GB VRAM is not stressed by this idle title, as texture and geometry complexity are modest. The GPU's memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s and 256-bit bus provide ample throughput for the game's rendering demands.

The RTX 3070's boost clock of 1725 MHz is sufficient to maintain high fill rates at 1440p and 4K. At 1440p High, the system achieves 175 avg FPS, and at 4K High it drops to 100 avg FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 4K at High settings shows a 61.5% reduction in average FPS, from 260 to 100. That indicates the GPU is the primary scaling factor at higher resolutions. The card's PassMark G3D score of 22214 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3162 support its capability to handle the game's rendering pipeline. The 12-pin power connector and 220 W TDP are consistent with the performance observed. The GPU is marked as end-of-life in production status, but the recorded measurements confirm it still delivers high frame rates in this title.

Resolution Scaling - how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data across three resolutions and four settings reveals a clear scaling pattern. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 343 at 1080p to 239 at 1440p and then to 136 at 4K. That represents a 30.3% reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a further 43.1% reduction from 1440p to 4K. At Medium settings, the average FPS is 300 at 1080p, 202 at 1440p, and 115 at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 32.7%, and from 1440p to 4K is 43.1%. At High settings, the averages are 260 at 1080p, 175 at 1440p, and 100 at 4K, with reductions of 32.7% and 42.9% respectively. At Ultra settings, the averages are 209 at 1080p, 141 at 1440p, and 81 at 4K, with reductions of 32.5% and 42.6%.

The consistency of these percentage drops across all four settings is notable. The reduction from 1440p to 4K is almost exactly 43% in every case, which is close to the theoretical scaling expected from pixel count increase (4K has 2.25 times the pixels of 1440p, which would imply a 55% drop if purely pixel-bound, but the actual drop is less severe, suggesting some other bottleneck). The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistently around 32-33%, which is also less than the 77% pixel increase would suggest. This pattern indicates that the RTX 3070 is not fully saturated at lower resolutions, and the CPU or engine limits the frame rate at 1080p.

At 1080p Low, the 343 avg FPS is likely an engine cap or a CPU limit, since the GPU would typically handle far more. The Ryzen 5 2600's single-thread performance, with a PassMark single-thread score of 2239, may cap the frame rate at very high values. As resolution increases, the GPU load rises, and the FPS drops accordingly, but the less-than-expected drop suggests the CPU continues to play a role even at 4K. The Medium preset at 4K shows a min FPS of 98 and max of 133, with an average of 115, indicating a tight frame pacing window. This suggests the limiting component shifts from CPU at 1080p to a more balanced CPU-GPU interaction at 1440p, and then to GPU-dominant at 4K, but the CPU still prevents a full GPU saturation.

FAQ

*Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo in To The Core?*

A: The highest average FPS is 343, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the RTX 3070 compare to its nearest GPU rival in the database?

A: The RTX 3070 has an average benchmark score of 17208, which is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (avg score 17083). It is also 1.0% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (avg score 17037) and 1.1% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (avg score 17019). The NVIDIA Tesla K40c is 1.5% faster with a score of 17468.

Q: What is the average FPS at 1440p with Ultra settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 141. This is the lowest recorded at that resolution, compared to 239 at Low, 202 at Medium, and 175 at High.

Q: What is the FPS range at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 with Medium settings, the average FPS is 300, with a min FPS of 255 and a max FPS of 345.

Q: How much slower is the CPU compared to its nearest rival in the database?

A: The Ryzen 5 2600 has an average benchmark score of 21484. The Intel Xeon D-1746TER is 0.7% faster with a score of 21635. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is 0.2% slower with a score of 21440, and the Intel Core i9-11900H is 0.5% slower with a score of 21367.

Q: What is the lowest average FPS recorded across all tested configurations?

A: The lowest average FPS is 81, recorded at 3840x2160 resolution with Ultra settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data spans three resolutions and four settings levels. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 343 FPS. The Medium preset averages 300 FPS, with a recorded min of 255 and max of 345. The High preset averages 260 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 209 FPS. At this resolution, the frame rates are extremely high, and the differences between presets are relatively small in absolute terms, ranging from 209 to 343 FPS. The gap between High and Ultra is 51 FPS, while the gap between Low and Medium is 43 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 239 FPS. The Medium preset averages 202 FPS, with a min of 172 and max of 232. The High preset averages 175 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 141 FPS. The scaling from 1080p to 1440p shows a reduction of 104 FPS at Low, 98 FPS at Medium, 85 FPS at High, and 68 FPS at Ultra. The relative reduction is consistent across presets, around 30-33%. At this resolution, the Medium preset's min FPS of 172 is still above 144 Hz refresh rates, and even Ultra at 141 FPS is above 120 Hz.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 136 FPS. The Medium preset averages 115 FPS, with a min of 98 and max of 133. The High preset averages 100 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 81 FPS. The reduction from 1440p to 4K is 103 FPS at Low, 87 FPS at Medium, 75 FPS at High, and 60 FPS at Ultra. The 4K results show that the RTX 3070 can still deliver playable frame rates at all settings, with the lowest being 81 FPS at Ultra. The Medium preset at 4K shows a min FPS of 98, which is above 60 FPS and indicates a stable experience. The average FPS at 4K High is exactly 100, which aligns with a 100 Hz display target.

Settings Recommendations

The measured rows provide a clear picture of the performance envelope for this combo. At 1080p, all settings produce frame rates above 200 FPS, so the choice of preset is purely about visual quality versus the small FPS trade-off. The Ultra preset at 1080p averages 209 FPS, which is 134 FPS lower than Low but still far beyond any display's refresh rate. The data indicates that at 1080p, the Ultra preset is the best choice since the frame rate remains extremely high, and the visual fidelity gains from higher settings come at no practical cost.

At 1440p, the Medium preset averages 202 FPS with a min of 172 FPS. This provides a comfortable margin above 144 Hz displays. The High preset averages 175 FPS, also above 144 Hz. The Ultra preset averages 141 FPS, which is just below 144 Hz but still above 120 Hz. For a 144 Hz display, the High preset at 1440p is the optimal balance, as it delivers 175 FPS average, and the 34 FPS difference between High and Ultra may not justify the visual improvement in an idle game. The Low preset at 1440p averages 239 FPS, but the visual downgrade is likely unnecessary given the High preset's strong performance.

At 4K, the Medium preset averages 115 FPS with a min of 98 FPS. This is the best overall experience for 4K, as it maintains an average above 100 FPS and a min FPS above 60. The High preset averages 100 FPS exactly, which is also viable for 100 Hz displays, but the Medium preset's min FPS of 98 provides a safer margin for frame dips. The Ultra preset at 4K averages 81 FPS, which is playable but lower than the others. The Low preset at 4K averages 136 FPS, but the visual quality loss is significant, and the Medium preset offers a better balance.

Based on the recorded data, the recommended presets are Ultra at 1080p, High at 1440p, and Medium at 4K. These selections maximize visual quality while maintaining average FPS above the typical refresh rate thresholds for each resolution. The Medium preset at 4K stands out because its min FPS of 98 is closer to its average of 115 than other presets, indicating more consistent frame pacing. The data shows no configuration dips below 60 FPS average, confirming that this combo is capable of a smooth experience at any resolution and setting combination tested.