To The Core

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 7000 series, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with the Raphael codename. It runs at a 4.00 GHz base clock and boosts to 4.50 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The defining feature here is the 96 MB of shared L3 cache, supplemented by 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. This substantial L3 pool is particularly relevant for an idle game like To The Core, where repetitive data access patterns often benefit from large, fast caches.

The processor's PassMark scores reveal a balanced profile. It achieves 25,047 in multi-thread, 3,494 in single-thread, and 70,774 in integer math. The floating-point score of 43,594 and extended instructions score of 20,455 indicate solid general-purpose compute. In data compression, it hits 271,649, while data encryption reaches 15,797. The prime number finding score is 221, and random string sorting lands at 32,999. With an average benchmark score of 44,573, it sits in the 89th percentile of all CPUs — a strong position for a desktop chip.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the 7500X3D is effectively tied with the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H (44,466, delta 0.2%) and the Intel Core i9-13950HX (44,342, delta 0.5%). It edges out the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (44,309, delta 0.6%) by a hair. Against the Intel Core i5-14600 (44,889, delta -0.7%), the 7500X3D trails by less than a percentage point. These deltas are all within noise, meaning the CPU's raw compute power is comparable to several high-end mobile and desktop parts from rival families.

In the context of To The Core, the benchmark results show that this CPU is not the limiting factor at most settings. The game is an idle title, which typically places modest demands on core count. The 6-core/12-thread configuration is more than adequate for the game's logic and simulation loops. The real question is whether the integrated Radeon Graphics on the CPU can keep up, but this combo pairs the 7500X3D with a separate Intel Arc B370 GPU — an integrated-class part in its own right, based on the Xe3-LPG architecture with Panther Lake chip.

The Intel Arc B370 is a 3 nm part from Intel Foundry, running at 300 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. It has 1,280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, with 10 ray tracing cores. Its FP32 throughput is 6.144 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1). The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. It uses system shared memory, meaning bandwidth is system-dependent — a factor that heavily influences To The Core performance at higher resolutions.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1,184, placing it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1,186, delta -0.2%), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1,190, delta -0.5%), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1,192, delta -0.7%), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1,168, delta 1.4%). These are all ancient parts, which puts the Arc B370's performance into perspective — it is a very low-end GPU by modern standards, despite being manufactured on a advanced 3 nm process.

This CPU+GPU pairing creates an interesting dynamic. The CPU is a strong mid-range desktop part, while the GPU is effectively entry-level. The benchmark data shows that the CPU has ample headroom, and the GPU becomes the bottleneck as resolution and settings increase. The 96 MB L3 cache on the CPU helps mitigate some of the GPU's limitations in cache-sensitive workloads, but the GPU's 5th percentile ranking means it will struggle with demanding scenarios.

# FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D bottleneck the Intel Arc B370 in To The Core?

A: No. The CPU's average benchmark score of 44,573 places it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 5th percentile with a 3DMark score of 1,184. The data shows the GPU is the limiting component at all measured settings and resolutions, not the CPU.

Q: How does the 7500X3D compare to its closest rivals in raw compute?

A: The 7500X3D's average score of 44,573 is within 0.7% of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H (44,466), Intel Core i9-13950HX (44,342), AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (44,309), and Intel Core i5-14600 (44,889). The largest delta is 0.7%, meaning these parts are functionally equivalent in benchmark terms.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B370 capable of running To The Core at playable frame rates?

A: Yes, at 1080p it delivers 132 FPS on Low, 112 FPS on Medium, 97 FPS on High, and 78 FPS on Ultra. At 1440p it drops to 89 FPS on Low and 53 FPS on Ultra. At 4K, only Low settings break 50 FPS, with 51 FPS; Ultra falls to 30 FPS.

Q: What is the best settings/resolution combination for smooth gameplay?

A: At 1080p, Medium (112 FPS) offers the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, with a minimum of 95 FPS ensuring no drops below 60. At 1440p, Low (89 FPS) is the only setting that stays above 60 FPS average, while Medium (75 FPS) is playable with a 64 FPS minimum.

Q: How does the combo rank among all tested CPU+GPU pairings for this game?

A: The combination of AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2,750 out of 2,991 tested combos in To The Core. This places it in the bottom 8% of all pairings, reflecting the GPU's low relative performance.

Q: Why does the GPU use system shared memory and how does that affect performance?

A: The Arc B370 has no dedicated VRAM; its memory size, type, and bus width are all "System Shared," with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." This means the GPU relies on the CPU's DDR5 memory, which is dual-channel with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. This shared-memory architecture likely contributes to the significant frame rate drops at higher resolutions.

# Settings Recommendations

The measured data provides clear guidance for the best experience with this combo. At 1920x1080, the sweet spot is Medium settings, which delivers 112 FPS average with a minimum of 95 FPS and a maximum of 129 FPS. This is the only settings tier where the minimum frame rate stays comfortably above 60 FPS while maintaining a reasonable visual quality. High settings at 1080p yield 97 FPS average, but the lack of a reported minimum means the lower bound is uncertain; Medium's 95 FPS minimum makes it the safer choice.

Ultra at 1080p produces 78 FPS average, which is playable but represents a 30% drop from Medium's average — a significant visual cost for marginal quality gains. Low at 1080p hits 132 FPS, but the visual degradation is unnecessary when Medium maintains 112 FPS with better fidelity.

At 2560x1440, the situation changes. Low settings produce 89 FPS average, which is the only setting that stays above 60 FPS on average. Medium drops to 75 FPS with a 64 FPS minimum — technically playable but with occasional dips near the 60 FPS line. High (65 FPS) and Ultra (53 FPS) are progressively worse. For a consistent experience at 1440p, Low is the recommended setting, though Medium is acceptable if the player tolerates occasional frame dips.

At 3840x2160, Low is the only setting that achieves 51 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target. Medium (43 FPS) and High (37 FPS) are playable for slower-paced idle games, but Ultra (30 FPS) is marginal. The data indicates that 4K is not a practical resolution for this combo, even at the lowest settings.

The best overall experience per the measured rows is 1080p Medium. It provides a 112 FPS average, a 95 FPS minimum for smoothness, and 129 FPS maximum for headroom. This combination of frame rate stability and visual quality is unmatched by any other setting/resolution pair in the dataset.

# How This Combo Ranks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D + Intel Arc B370 combination ranks 2,750 out of 2,991 tested combos for To The Core. This places the pairing in the bottom 8% of all configurations tested. The rank reflects the GPU's severe performance limitation — a 5th percentile ranking among all GPUs — rather than any CPU deficiency.

To contextualize this rank, consider the CPU's position. The 7500X3D is in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, with a benchmark score that rivals several high-end mobile and desktop processors. Its nearest rivals — the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, Intel Core i9-13950HX, AMD Ryzen AI Max 385, and Intel Core i5-14600 — all have average scores within 0.7% of the 7500X3D. This means the CPU is performing at a level comparable to parts that would typically be paired with much stronger GPUs.

The GPU's nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, AMD Radeon HD 7650M, and AMD FirePro M2000 — all graphics cards from over a decade ago. The Arc B370 is 0.2% to 1.4% away from these parts in benchmark score, underscoring its position as an entry-level solution despite its modern 3 nm process and Xe3-LPG architecture.

The disparity between CPU and GPU performance tiers is the primary reason for the low combo rank. In a game like To The Core, where CPU demands are modest, the GPU becomes the sole determinant of frame rate. The data confirms this: at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 132 FPS, which is respectable, but the frame rate collapses to 30 FPS at 4K Ultra — a 77% reduction that points directly at the GPU's limitations.

For builders, this combo represents a fundamentally unbalanced pairing. The CPU has enough headroom to drive a much faster GPU, but the Arc B370's 5th percentile performance caps the system's potential. The 2,750 rank out of 2,991 combos is a direct consequence of this mismatch.

# Resolution Scaling

The measured frame rates show a sharp decline as resolution increases, with the data revealing clear evidence of GPU-limited scaling. At 1080p Low, the combo delivers 132 FPS. Moving to 1440p Low, it drops to 89 FPS — a 32.6% reduction. At 4K Low, it reaches 51 FPS — a 61.4% drop from 1080p and a 42.7% drop from 1440p.

The Medium settings show a similar pattern. 1080p Medium averages 112 FPS, 1440p Medium averages 75 FPS (a 33.0% decrease), and 4K Medium averages 43 FPS (a 61.6% decrease from 1080p). High settings follow: 97 FPS at 1080p, 65 FPS at 1440p (a 33.0% drop), and 37 FPS at 4K (a 61.9% drop). Ultra settings exhibit the same trend: 78 FPS at 1080p, 53 FPS at 1440p (a 32.1% drop), and 30 FPS at 4K (a 61.5% drop).

The consistency of these percentages — roughly 33% loss from 1080p to 1440p and 61-62% loss from 1080p to 4K — is striking. This uniformity across all settings tiers indicates that the scaling is driven by pixel count rather than game complexity. The GPU's fillrate and compute capacity are being saturated as resolution increases, with no setting tier escaping the pattern.

The frame rate drops also reveal the limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the resolution scaling would show minimal FPS changes — the CPU's work is largely resolution-independent. Instead, the data shows that the GPU's pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are insufficient for higher resolutions. The 4K resolution (3840x2160) contains over 8.3 million pixels, and the Arc B370's modest 20 ROPs struggle to fill them at acceptable rates.

The system-shared memory architecture compounds the issue. With "System Dependent" bandwidth, the GPU competes with the CPU for DDR5 memory access. At higher resolutions, the increased memory traffic for frame buffers and textures likely saturates the available bandwidth, contributing to the steep FPS decline. The CPU's 83.2 GB/s dual-channel bandwidth is shared, and the GPU's demand grows with resolution.

# Measured FPS Breakdown

The dataset includes 12 measured configurations, covering four resolutions and four settings tiers. Here is the full breakdown:

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: 132 FPS average
• Medium: 112 FPS average, 95 FPS minimum, 129 FPS maximum
• High: 97 FPS average
• Ultra: 78 FPS average

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: 89 FPS average
• Medium: 75 FPS average, 64 FPS minimum, 87 FPS maximum
• High: 65 FPS average
• Ultra: 53 FPS average

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: 51 FPS average
• Medium: 43 FPS average, 37 FPS minimum, 50 FPS maximum
• High: 37 FPS average
• Ultra: 30 FPS average

At 1080p, the combo delivers playable frame rates across all settings. The Medium tier shows a minimum of 95 FPS, which is the strongest minimum-to-average ratio in the dataset (84.8%). This suggests that Medium at 1080p provides the most consistent experience, with minimal frame time variance.

At 1440p, the Medium tier has a minimum of 64 FPS (85.3% of the 75 FPS average), which is the best minimum performance at this resolution. Low (89 FPS) and High (65 FPS) lack reported minimums, but the averages suggest that Low is the most reliable option for sustained 60+ FPS gameplay.

At 4K, the Medium tier's minimum of 37 FPS against a 43 FPS average (86.0%) shows that even the lowest tier struggles to maintain playable frame rates. Low (51 FPS) and High (37 FPS) both fall below 60 FPS averages, with Ultra (30 FPS) being barely playable for a slow-paced idle game.

The minimum FPS data, where available, provides insight into frame time consistency. The Medium settings at each resolution show the following minimum-to-average ratios: 84.8% at 1080p, 85.3% at 1440p, and 86.0% at 4K. This consistency suggests that the game's frame pacing is stable regardless of resolution, with the average FPS scaling being the primary differentiator.

The maximum FPS values follow the expected pattern: 129 FPS at 1080p Medium, 87 FPS at 1440p Medium, and 50 FPS at 4K Medium. These maximums indicate that the game has brief periods of lower demand, allowing the GPU to recover some performance, but the sustained averages are what define the playability of each configuration.

For practical purposes, the data supports 1080p Medium as the optimal configuration, with 1440p Low as a secondary option for users prioritizing resolution over visual settings. 4K is not recommended for this combo, as even Low settings fail to reach 60 FPS.