To The Core

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 and Intel Arc B370 pairing lands at a specific performance tier in To The Core that is defined more by the graphics solution than the processor. This combination delivers playable frame rates across most settings, though the data indicates that the integrated Arc B370 is the primary factor limiting performance at higher resolutions and quality presets.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 7600 is a 6-core, 12-thread processor built on the Zen 4 architecture using a 5 nm process at TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, which provides substantial single-thread headroom for an idle game like To The Core. The processor has a 65 W TDP and sits on the AMD Socket AM5 platform, supporting DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s.

Benchmark results for the CPU show strong multi-threaded performance that far exceeds what this game requires. In Cinebench R23, the chip scores 12,735 points in multi-core and 1,852 in single-core. Geekbench results are similarly robust at 13,413 multi-core and 2,521 single-core. The 3DMark tests show scaling from 999 in single-thread to 6,503 in max-threads, indicating that the processor's 12 threads are effectively utilized as workloads expand.

For To The Core, an idle genre game, the 6-core/12-thread configuration is more than sufficient. The game's mechanics do not typically demand heavy parallel processing, but the Ryzen 5 7600's high boost clock ensures that any single-threaded tasks are handled without bottlenecking. The processor's 32 MB of shared L3 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache per core further support low-latency access to game data, which is beneficial for maintaining consistent frame pacing in a title that may have periodic update ticks rather than continuous heavy simulation.

The CPU's percentile ranking at 78 among all tested processors places it well above average. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX with an average score of 26,274 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 7435HS at 26,402 (0.3% lower), the Intel Core i9-11900KF at 26,212 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 5 8540U at 26,187 (0.5% higher). These extremely tight deltas of less than half a percent suggest that the Ryzen 5 7600 sits in a performance plateau where minor architectural differences do not translate into meaningful changes for this game. In practice, the CPU is unlikely to be the limiting factor in any of the measured FPS results.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 5 7600 and the Intel Arc B370 ranks 2,750 out of 2,991 tested combos in To The Core. This places it in the 92nd percentile from the top, meaning only about 8% of tested configurations perform worse. This is a low ranking that reflects the significant constraint imposed by the Intel Arc B370, which is an integrated graphics processor rather than a discrete GPU.

The GPU's own percentile ranking is 5, which places it in the bottom 5% of all tested graphics processors. Its single benchmark score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 is 1,184, and its nearest rivals are all older or lower-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1,186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192 (0.7% higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1,168 (1.4% lower). These rivals are from a much earlier hardware generation, which underscores how modest the Arc B370's raw graphics throughput is.

The combo rank being so far down the list is driven almost entirely by the GPU. The Ryzen 5 7600 is a strong modern desktop processor, but when paired with an integrated graphics solution like the Arc B370, the overall system performance in graphics-bound scenarios is dragged down. The data shows a clear mismatch: a top-quartile CPU paired with a bottom-quartile GPU results in a system that ranks in the bottom 8% of combos for this game. This indicates that users of this configuration will experience frame rates that are typical of entry-level integrated graphics, regardless of the CPU's computational strength.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Given the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for To The Core depend heavily on the target resolution and the user's preference for visual quality versus smoothness. The data shows a consistent pattern: lower settings yield higher frame rates, but even the highest settings are playable at lower resolutions.

At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 132 FPS, which is excellent for a smooth experience on any display. The Medium preset still provides a very playable 112 FPS with a minimum of 95 FPS and a maximum of 129 FPS, indicating good consistency. The High preset drops to 97 FPS, which remains fluid, while the Ultra preset delivers 78 FPS, which is acceptable for most users. For 1080p, the Medium preset appears to offer the best balance, with a 14.8% performance cost over Low but a significant visual improvement, while still maintaining a frame rate well above 100.

At 2560x1440, the scaling is more pronounced. Low offers 89 FPS, which is still smooth. Medium drops to 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS. High averages 65 FPS, and Ultra falls to 53 FPS. For 1440p, the Medium preset is the recommended choice because it stays above 60 FPS on average and the minimum of 64 FPS indicates that dips below 60 are rare. High is borderline, and Ultra should be avoided if frame rate stability is a priority.

At 3840x2160, the situation becomes more constrained. Low averages 51 FPS, Medium averages 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS, High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. None of these settings achieve a locked 60 FPS, so users at 4K will have to choose between visual fidelity and smoothness. The Low preset at 51 FPS is the most playable, while the Ultra preset at 30 FPS is at the threshold of what is typically considered acceptable for slower-paced games but may feel choppy in more dynamic scenes.

The data suggests that the best overall experience for most users is the Medium preset at 1080p or 1440p, as it provides a stable frame rate with a quality boost over Low. At 4K, the recommendation is to use Low or accept lower frame rates with higher settings.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data provides a complete matrix of performance across three resolutions and four quality presets. At 1920x1080, the Low preset achieves an average of 132 FPS. Medium reduces this to 112 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 95 FPS and a maximum of 129 FPS, showing a tight band of performance. High averages 97 FPS, and Ultra drops to 78 FPS. The performance delta from Low to Ultra at 1080p is 54 FPS, or a 40.9% reduction, indicating that the visual quality settings have a substantial impact on the integrated GPU's workload.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 89 FPS. Medium delivers 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS. High averages 65 FPS, and Ultra averages 53 FPS. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is 43 FPS, showing the significant cost of additional pixels. The delta from Low to Ultra at 1440p is 36 FPS, or a 40.4% reduction, which is nearly identical to the percentage drop seen at 1080p.

At 3840x2160, the Low preset averages 51 FPS. Medium averages 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS. High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. The delta from Low to Ultra at 4K is 21 FPS, or a 41.2% reduction, following the same proportional trend. However, the absolute numbers are much lower, with the highest setting (Ultra) barely hitting 30 FPS and the lowest setting (Low) just barely breaking 50 FPS.

The minimum FPS data points, where provided, indicate the frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 95 FPS against an average of 112 FPS shows a 15.2% difference, suggesting occasional dips but overall stability. At 1440p Medium, the minimum of 64 FPS against an average of 75 FPS shows a 14.7% difference, similar behavior. At 4K Medium, the minimum of 37 FPS against an average of 43 FPS shows a 14.0% difference, indicating that the relative stability is maintained even as absolute performance drops.

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

The resolution scaling data reveals a clear and consistent pattern that identifies the GPU as the primary bottleneck in this system. Moving from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 at the Low setting, the average FPS drops from 132 to 89, a reduction of 32.6%. Moving further to 3840x2160 at Low, the FPS drops to 51, which is a 42.7% reduction from 1440p and a 61.4% reduction from 1080p. These are steep declines that are characteristic of a graphics-limited scenario, where the rendering workload increases dramatically with pixel count.

At the Medium setting, the progression is 112 FPS at 1080p, 75 FPS at 1440p, and 43 FPS at 4K. The percentage drops are 33.0% from 1080p to 1440p and 42.7% from 1440p to 4K. At High, the numbers are 97, 65, and 37, with drops of 33.0% and 43.1%. At Ultra, the numbers are 78, 53, and 30, with drops of 32.1% and 43.4%. The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings—around 33% for the resolution step from 1080p to 1440p and around 43% for the step from 1440p to 4K—indicates that the scaling is purely pixel-driven and not affected by CPU limitations.

If the CPU were the limiting factor, we would expect to see the frame rate remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU would be busy with game logic regardless of pixel count. Instead, the data shows a near-linear relationship between resolution and frame rate, which is the hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario. The Intel Arc B370's integrated nature and its low benchmark score (1,184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad) corroborate this. The system's shared memory architecture, where the GPU uses system RAM, also contributes to the scaling penalty, as memory bandwidth becomes a constraint at higher resolutions.

The data also shows that the performance drop from 1080p to 1440p is slightly less severe than from 1440p to 4K, which is expected because the pixel count increase from 1440p to 4K (2.25x) is larger than from 1080p to 1440p (1.78x). However, the FPS drop percentages do not perfectly match the pixel count ratios, indicating that other factors such as memory bandwidth and texture fill rate are also coming into play. Overall, the resolution scaling analysis points definitively to the Intel Arc B370 as the component that governs this combo's performance in To The Core.

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

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, using a 3 nm process at Intel. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The GPU has 1,280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its compute capabilities are rated at 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS for FP16, which are modest figures for modern gaming.

The Arc B370 uses system shared memory for both its VRAM and memory bandwidth, meaning it has no dedicated video memory. The memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared," with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." This is a critical limitation for gaming performance, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for system memory bandwidth, and the available bandwidth is contingent on the installed DDR5 memory configuration. In this combo with the Ryzen 5 7600, the dual-channel DDR5 setup provides 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth, but this is shared between the CPU and GPU, which can cause contention and reduce effective graphics performance.

The GPU's benchmark results are sparse, with only a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,184. This places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all older discrete or integrated parts from a decade ago. The ATI Radeon HD 5770, a 2009-era discrete GPU, scores just 0.5% higher, which puts the Arc B370's performance into perspective. It is a modern integrated solution that performs at the level of legacy entry-level discrete graphics.

In the context of To The Core, the GPU's role is to render the game's visuals, and the measured FPS data shows that it struggles at higher resolutions. The 30 FPS average at 4K Ultra and the 37 FPS at 4K High indicate that the GPU is being pushed to its limits. The 10 ray tracing cores are present but likely underutilized in an idle game unless specific visual effects are enabled. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) ensures compatibility with modern APIs, but the raw throughput of 6.144 TFLOPS is the limiting factor.

The GPU's low TDP of 25 W and its IGP slot width indicate that it is designed for power efficiency rather than raw performance. This is reflected in the measured results, where the GPU's output is sufficient for 1080p at high frame rates but falls apart at 4K. The data clearly shows that the Arc B370 is the component that defines this combo's performance ceiling in To The Core, with the Ryzen 5 7600 providing ample headroom that goes unused due to graphics limitations.