To The Core

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F paired with the Intel Arc B390 produces a peculiar performance profile in To The Core, one that is defined almost entirely by the graphics solution. The measured frame rates across resolutions reveal a system where the CPU’s substantial processing headroom is consistently capped by a GPU that ranks in the bottom percentile of all tested graphics cards. The data indicates a configuration that is heavily imbalanced for this title, yet the results offer a clear lesson in bottleneck dynamics.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 is steep and consistent, a classic signature of a GPU-limited scenario. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 147 at 1080p to 99 at 1440p, and finally to 56 at 4K. This represents a 62% reduction in average FPS when moving from the lowest tested resolution to the highest. At High settings, the progression is from 107 FPS at 1080p to 72 at 1440p and 41 at 4K, a 62% drop as well. The consistency of this percentage decline across different quality presets strongly suggests that the resolution scaling is governed by the pixel throughput of the Intel Arc B390, not by the Ryzen 7 9700F.

The data shows that the GPU is the limiting component at every resolution tested. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is substantial in every preset, with the average FPS falling by roughly 30% to 35%. For instance, at Medium settings, the average FPS goes from 124 at 1080p to 83 at 1440p, a 33% decrease. The subsequent jump to 4K imposes another significant penalty, with the Medium preset falling from 83 to 48 FPS, a 42% reduction. This non-linear scaling, where the penalty increases with each step up in resolution, is typical of a GPU that is running out of fillrate and memory bandwidth. The Arc B390’s memory is designated as "System Shared" with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," which explains why higher resolutions, which demand more memory throughput, incur such severe performance penalties.

Furthermore, the gap between Low and Ultra settings widens as resolution increases, which indicates the GPU is struggling to maintain its workload. At 1080p, the difference between Low (147 FPS) and Ultra (86 FPS) is 61 FPS. At 4K, the difference between Low (56 FPS) and Ultra (33 FPS) is only 23 FPS. This compression of the settings-based performance delta at higher resolutions confirms that the GPU is saturated; it simply cannot render more frames regardless of the reduced load from lower quality presets. The CPU, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, is never the constraint here, as the frame rate ceiling is set by the graphics processor.

How This Combo Ranks

In the global ranking for To The Core, this specific combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and Intel Arc B390 places at 2643 out of 2991 tested combos. This places it in the bottom 12% of all configurations, a position that reflects the GPU’s profound performance deficit. The combo’s rank is not a measure of the CPU’s capability, but rather a direct consequence of the graphics card’s low output. The Intel Arc B390’s standalone benchmark percentile is 9, meaning it outperforms only 9% of all tested GPUs. This is the primary driver of the combo’s poor standing.

The CPU itself is a top-tier performer. Its percentile versus all CPUs is 94, indicating it is faster than 94% of all processors in the database. This disconnect between the CPU’s high percentile and the combo’s low rank is the defining characteristic of this pairing. The data shows that the Ryzen 7 9700F is capable of far more than the Arc B390 can deliver, making the GPU the unequivocal bottleneck. In a game like To The Core, an idle genre title that typically does not demand extreme graphics power, this pairing still manages to underperform due to the GPU’s absolute limits.

The measured FPS numbers reinforce this ranking. At 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 33, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. Even at 1080p Low, the 147 FPS average is respectable, but it is achieved only by lowering the graphical load to its minimum. The combo’s rank of 2643 suggests that most other tested configurations, even those with less capable CPUs, achieve higher frame rates because they are paired with more competent graphics solutions. The Ryzen 7 9700F’s power is effectively wasted in this context, as the Arc B390 prevents it from ever being fully utilized.

FAQ

*Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F or the Intel Arc B390 the limiting factor in To The Core?*

A: The Intel Arc B390 is the definitive limiting factor. The GPU has a percentile rank of 9 versus all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 1482 is only 1.3% higher than its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX. The CPU, by contrast, has a percentile rank of 94 versus all CPUs, indicating it is vastly more powerful.

Q: What kind of frame rates can be expected at 1920x1080?

A: At 1080p, the average FPS ranges from 147 at Low settings to 86 at Ultra settings. The Medium preset averages 124 FPS, while the High preset averages 107 FPS. These are the highest frame rates achievable with this combo, but they still require a significant reduction in visual fidelity to reach the top of that range.

Q: How does the combo perform at 3840x2160 resolution?

A: Performance at 4K is poor. The average FPS is 56 at Low settings, 48 at Medium, 41 at High, and only 33 at Ultra. These numbers are consistently below 60 FPS, indicating that this resolution is not practical for this configuration in To The Core.

Q: What is the performance difference between the Low and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 99 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 58 FPS. This is a difference of 41 FPS, or a 41% reduction in performance when moving from the lowest to the highest quality settings.

Q: How does this combo rank compared to other tested configurations?

A: The combo ranks 2643 out of 2991 tested combos in To The Core. This places it in the lower percentile of all tested systems, primarily because the GPU is so weak relative to other available options.

Q: Is there a significant frame time variance in the measured data?

A: The data includes minimum and maximum FPS only for the Medium preset. At 1920x1080, the FPS ranges from 105 to 143. At 2560x1440, it ranges from 71 to 96. At 3840x2160, it ranges from 41 to 55. These ranges suggest some frame pacing instability at Medium settings, but the average FPS remains the primary metric for comparison.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured frame rates provide a detailed look at this combo’s performance envelope. The data is structured across three resolutions and four quality presets, with the Medium preset being the only one that includes minimum and maximum FPS values.

At 1920x1080, the configuration performs at its best. The Low preset achieves an average of 147 FPS, which is the highest score in the entire dataset. The Medium preset averages 124 FPS, with a minimum of 105 and a maximum of 143. The High preset averages 107 FPS, and the Ultra preset drops to an average of 86 FPS. This resolution is the only one where the average FPS exceeds 100 on multiple presets, making it the only viable option for high refresh rate displays.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance takes a significant hit. The Low preset averages 99 FPS, just shy of the 100 FPS mark. The Medium preset averages 83 FPS, with a range of 71 to 96 FPS. The High preset averages 72 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 58 FPS. While playable at Low and Medium, the frame rates at High and Ultra are approaching the limits of smoothness for fast-paced scenes, though To The Core is an idle game that may not require high frame rates.

At 3840x2160, the results are underwhelming. The Low preset averages 56 FPS, which is the only preset to break the 50 FPS barrier. The Medium preset averages 48 FPS, with a range of 41 to 55 FPS. The High preset averages 41 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages just 33 FPS. None of these results are ideal for a consistent 60 FPS experience, and the 4K Ultra setting is particularly weak, producing an average that is less than a third of the 1080p Low result.

The pattern is clear: the GPU’s limited fillrate and shared memory bandwidth cause a dramatic performance drop as the pixel count increases. The measured data shows a linear degradation in performance that is directly tied to resolution, with no evidence that the CPU is contributing to any frame rate limitations.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the central figure in this performance analysis, and its specifications explain the measured results. It is a mobile-oriented part based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel’s 3 nm process. Its clock speeds are listed with a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2500 MHz. The memory configuration is notable: it uses "System Shared" memory, with a bus width and type also designated as "System Shared." This means the GPU relies on the system’s main memory (DDR5 in this case) for its frame buffer, which is a major performance bottleneck.

The memory bandwidth is described as "System Dependent," which is a critical detail. Unlike a discrete GPU with dedicated VRAM, the Arc B390’s performance is contingent on the CPU’s memory subsystem. While the Ryzen 7 9700F supports dual-channel DDR5 with a theoretical bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, the latency and contention for that bandwidth can severely impact the GPU’s ability to fetch textures and geometry. This is the primary reason why the 4K results are so poor; the shared memory bus is overwhelmed by the data demands of high-resolution rendering.

With 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, the GPU has a theoretical pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is rated at 7.680 TFLOPS. While these numbers are not exceptionally low on paper, the shared memory architecture undermines their practical impact. The GPU’s percentile rank of 9 and its average benchmark score of 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad place it in the same performance tier as the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, which is 1.3% slower, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710, which is 2.7% slower. These are legacy entry-level parts, indicating that the Arc B390 is not suited for demanding graphical workloads. In To The Core, this results in the low frame rates observed, particularly at higher resolutions.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is a high-end desktop processor that is entirely underutilized in this configuration. It is an 8-core, 16-thread part based on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge, and built on TSMC’s 4 nm process. Its base clock is 3.80 GHz, and it can boost up to 5.50 GHz. The CPU has a 65 W TDP, which is low for its performance class, and it supports DDR5 memory with ECC. These specifications make it a formidable processor for any task, including gaming.

The CPU’s benchmark scores reinforce its strength. Its Passmark single-thread score is 4691, and its multithread score is 36470. Its average benchmark score is 69996, which places it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, which scores 69875 (0.2% slower), the Intel Core i7-14700KF, which scores 70163 (0.2% faster), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, which scores 69515 (0.7% slower). This puts the 9700F in a performance band with some of the best processors available.

In To The Core, the CPU’s role is largely passive. The game is an idle genre title, which typically does not require high CPU thread utilization. The measured FPS data shows no signs of CPU limitation; the frame rates are consistently low across all resolutions, which is the opposite of what would happen if the CPU were the bottleneck. A CPU bottleneck would typically show high frame rates at low resolutions, with performance dropping only when the CPU cannot keep up with the GPU’s output. Here, the frame rates are low even at 1080p Low (147 FPS), which is likely near the GPU’s maximum output, not the CPU’s limit. The 9700F has ample processing power to handle the game’s logic and physics, but it is never given the chance to do so because the Arc B390 cannot deliver frames fast enough to stress it.

Settings Recommendations

Given the GPU’s severe limitations, the choice of settings is critical to achieving a playable experience. The data shows that the only way to get consistently high frame rates is to reduce the resolution and quality settings. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 147 FPS, which is excellent for any display. The Medium preset at 1080p also provides a smooth experience at 124 FPS, making it a reasonable choice for those who want a balance between visual quality and performance. The High preset at 1080p, with an average of 107 FPS, is still playable, but the Ultra preset, at 86 FPS, is the first sign of strain.

For users with a 1440p display, the situation is more constrained. The Low preset at 2560x1440 averages 99 FPS, which is acceptable. The Medium preset averages 83 FPS, which is also playable, but the High (72 FPS) and Ultra (58 FPS) presets begin to dip below the ideal 60 FPS threshold. For the best experience at this resolution, the Medium preset is the highest recommendation, as it offers a significant visual improvement over Low while maintaining an average FPS above 80.

At 4K, the data suggests that this combo is not suited for the task. The Low preset averages 56 FPS, which is borderline, and the Medium preset averages 48 FPS. The High and Ultra presets, at 41 and 33 FPS respectively, are too slow for a smooth experience. The recommendation is to avoid 4K with this configuration, or if it is necessary, to use the Low preset and accept a sub-60 FPS average. The optimal experience for this hardware is clearly at 1080p with Medium settings, which provides a 124 FPS average, a reasonable compromise between visual fidelity and performance, and avoids the frame rate instability seen at lower presets.