To The Core

The Intel Core i3-12100F paired with the Intel Arc B390 ranks 2643rd out of 2991 tested combos in To The Core, placing it in the 12th percentile of all configurations measured. This is a low position, but the data shows it is not a catastrophic pairing; rather, it reflects a combination where the GPU is the primary constraint, as evidenced by the FPS scaling across resolutions and settings. The combo’s rank indicates that while it can deliver playable frame rates at lower resolutions, it falls behind the vast majority of tested systems when pushing higher graphical loads.

How This Combo Ranks

The comboRankInGame of 2643 out of 2991 places this configuration firmly in the lower quartile of all tested combinations. To contextualize, this means roughly 88% of all other CPU-GPU pairings tested in To The Core outperform it. This is a significant deficit, but the reasons are clear from the component-level data. The Intel Arc B390 GPU sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1482. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (score 1463, delta 1.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (score 1460, delta 1.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (score 1446, delta 2.5%). These are all entry-level or legacy mobile/desktop parts, indicating the B390 is positioned at the very bottom of the discrete GPU performance spectrum.

In contrast, the Intel Core i3-12100F is a more capable component. It sits in the 68th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13494. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core 3 N355 (score 13492, delta 0%), the Intel Core i5-9500 (score 13452, delta 0.3%), and the Intel Core 5 120UL (score 13594, delta -0.7%). This suggests the CPU is roughly on par with a mid-range processor from a few generations ago, providing adequate single-threaded and multi-threaded performance for most gaming workloads. The discrepancy between the CPU’s 68th percentile and the GPU’s 9th percentile is stark, and it directly explains the combo’s low overall rank. The system is bottlenecked by the graphics card in nearly every scenario, preventing the i3-12100F from expressing its full potential.

FAQ

*Q: How well does this combo perform in To The Core compared to other tested systems?*

A: The combo ranks 2643rd out of 2991 tested combinations, placing it in the 12th percentile. This means about 88% of all tested systems deliver higher frame rates in this game.

Q: Is the CPU or the GPU the limiting factor in this pairing?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The Intel Arc B390 sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel Core i3-12100F sits in the 68th percentile of all CPUs. The vast gap in performance percentiles indicates the graphics card cannot keep up with the processor’s output.

Q: What is the best performance I can expect at 1080p with this setup?

A: At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the measured average FPS is 147. This is the highest frame rate recorded for this combo across all tested settings and resolutions.

*Q: Can this combo handle 4K resolution in To The Core?*

A: Yes, but with compromises. At 3840x2160 with Low settings, it achieves an average of 56 FPS. At High settings, this drops to 41 FPS, and at Ultra, it falls to 33 FPS, which may be below the threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How does the Arc B390 compare to its closest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 has an average benchmark score of 1482. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, scores 1463, which is 1.3% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce 800M scores 1460 (1.5% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM scores 1446 (2.5% lower). The B390 is marginally faster than these older parts.

Q: What is the typical frame-time variance for this combo at Medium settings?

A: At Medium settings, the combo shows consistent frame times. At 1920x1080, the average is 124 FPS with a minimum of 105 FPS and a maximum of 143 FPS. At 2560x1440, the average is 83 FPS with a minimum of 71 FPS and a maximum of 96 FPS. At 3840x2160, the average is 48 FPS with a minimum of 41 FPS and a maximum of 55 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal balance between visual quality and performance for this combo is the Medium preset. The data shows that at 1920x1080, Medium yields an average of 124 FPS, which is smooth for most gaming scenarios. Dropping to Low increases the average to 147 FPS, a 23 FPS gain, but the visual fidelity reduction is substantial for an idle game where the aesthetic may be part of the appeal. High settings at 1080p produce 107 FPS, which is still playable, but Medium offers a better compromise between detail and headroom, especially considering the minimum FPS of 105 at this setting.

For 2560x1440, the Medium preset is again the recommended choice. It delivers an average of 83 FPS, with a minimum of 71 FPS, ensuring consistent gameplay. Low settings at this resolution hit 99 FPS, but the jump to High brings the average down to 72 FPS, which is closer to the edge of comfort. At 3840x2160, the situation changes. The data shows that Medium is the highest preset that maintains a playable frame rate, averaging 48 FPS. High settings drop to 41 FPS, and Ultra falls to 33 FPS, which is likely too choppy for a pleasant experience. Therefore, for 4K, Low settings (56 FPS) or Medium settings (48 FPS) are the only viable options, with Medium offering a better visual experience at a modest FPS cost.

The Ultra preset is not recommended for any resolution with this combo. At 1080p, it yields 86 FPS, at 1440p it yields 58 FPS, and at 4K it yields 33 FPS. The performance penalty for Ultra over Medium is significant—a 38 FPS drop at 1080p, a 25 FPS drop at 1440p, and a 15 FPS drop at 4K—without a correspondingly large improvement in visual quality for an idle game.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of the combo’s capabilities across three resolutions and four settings presets. Beginning with 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers the highest average at 147 FPS. Moving up the settings chain, Medium averages 124 FPS (min 105, max 143), High averages 107 FPS, and Ultra averages 86 FPS. The progression shows a linear decline in performance as graphical fidelity increases, with a total drop of 61 FPS from Low to Ultra.

At 2560x1440, the same pattern holds but with lower absolute numbers. Low settings average 99 FPS, Medium averages 83 FPS (min 71, max 96), High averages 72 FPS, and Ultra averages 58 FPS. The delta between Low and Ultra is 41 FPS, which is a smaller absolute drop than at 1080p, but the percentage loss is similar. At 3840x2160, the performance is significantly reduced. Low settings average 56 FPS, Medium averages 48 FPS (min 41, max 55), High averages 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 33 FPS. The range from Low to Ultra spans only 23 FPS, indicating that the GPU is heavily saturated at this resolution, and even lowering settings has a diminishing return on frame rate.

The data also shows that the minimum FPS values are only recorded for the Medium preset. At 1080p, the minimum is 105 FPS, at 1440p it is 71 FPS, and at 4K it is 41 FPS. These figures suggest that the Medium preset provides a stable frame time experience, with the minimum not falling below 71 FPS even at 1440p, which is a solid result for gameplay smoothness.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the bottleneck in this system. At Low settings, the average FPS falls from 147 at 1920x1080 to 99 at 2560x1440, and then to 56 at 3840x2160. This represents a 33% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and a 62% drop from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, the averages are 124, 83, and 48 FPS respectively, showing a 33% drop to 1440p and a 61% drop to 4K. At High settings, the averages are 107, 72, and 41 FPS, with a 33% drop to 1440p and a 62% drop to 4K. At Ultra settings, the averages are 86, 58, and 33 FPS, with a 33% drop to 1440p and a 62% drop to 4K.

This consistent pattern—a roughly one-third reduction in FPS when moving from 1080p to 1440p, and a further one-third reduction when moving from 1440p to 4K—is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario. The number of pixels being rendered increases by 78% from 1080p to 1440p, and by 225% from 1080p to 4K. The fact that the FPS drops nearly proportionally to the pixel count increase indicates that the Intel Arc B390 is fully utilized at all resolutions and is the primary limit on performance. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect to see smaller FPS differences between resolutions, particularly at higher settings where the GPU load is heavier. Instead, the data shows that the i3-12100F has ample headroom, and the GPU is unable to keep up with the increasing pixel load.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i3-12100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, fabricated on a 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. In synthetic benchmarks, it scores 11860 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1674 in single-core, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 7252. Its Passmark multi-thread score is 14015, and its single-thread score is 3444.

For To The Core, an idle game, the CPU demands are typically modest, focusing on single-thread performance for game logic and UI updates. The i3-12100F’s single-thread score of 1674 in Cinebench R23 is strong, placing it in the 68th percentile of all CPUs. This suggests the processor is more than capable of handling the game’s logic without becoming a bottleneck. The multi-threaded performance, while not as critical for this genre, is also respectable, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11860. The 8 threads allow for background tasks and any multi-threaded game systems to run smoothly. The data supports the conclusion that the CPU is not the limiting factor; its performance percentile is far higher than the GPU’s, and the FPS scaling with resolution confirms that the graphics card is the ceiling.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the clear constraint in this pairing. It is based on the Panther Lake chip with the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on a 3 nm process. It features 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with 12 ray tracing cores. The GPU has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. Its memory is system-shared, with bandwidth described as system-dependent. The GPU’s theoretical performance is 7.680 TFLOPS for FP32 and 15.36 TFLOPS for FP16 (2:1). In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scores 1482, placing it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs.

This performance level is extremely low for a modern discrete GPU. The nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% slower), GeForce 800M (1.5% slower), and GeForce GT 625 OEM (2.5% slower). These are all parts from a decade or more ago, indicating the B390 is essentially a modern integrated-class GPU. In To The Core, the GPU’s limitations are evident in the FPS data. At 1080p Low, it manages 147 FPS, but this drops to 86 FPS at Ultra, showing that even at the lowest resolution, the GPU’s fill rate and shader power are taxed. At 4K, the GPU is overwhelmed, with even Low settings only yielding 56 FPS. The system-shared memory architecture means the GPU relies on the CPU’s system memory, which can introduce latency and bandwidth constraints, further limiting its performance in demanding scenarios. The data clearly shows that the Arc B390 is the primary reason for this combo’s low rank, as it cannot deliver the frame rates that the i3-12100F is capable of supporting.