To The Core

To The Core is an idle game, and the benchmark results for the Intel Core i5-10400F paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 show a configuration that is heavily skewed toward raw GPU throughput. The measured frames per second are exceptionally high across all settings, indicating that this pairing is far more capable than the game’s genre typically demands. The data suggests that the RTX 3080 is the dominant component in this setup, while the i5-10400F provides sufficient support without becoming a significant constraint at most settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals a predictable but steep decline as resolution increases, which is the classic signature of a GPU-bound workload. At 1080p with Low settings, the system produces 387.3 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same settings drops that figure to 278.4 FPS, a reduction of roughly 28%. The jump to 4K at Low settings yields 160.7 FPS, which is a 42% drop from the 1440p result and a 58% drop from the 1080p result. This scaling pattern is consistent with the RTX 3080’s memory bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s and its 10 GB of GDDR6X memory being taxed more heavily as pixel count rises.

The delta between Low and Ultra settings at each resolution further confirms the GPU’s role as the limiting factor. At 1080p, the gap between Low (387.3 FPS) and Ultra (243.1 FPS) is 144.2 FPS, showing that even at the lowest resolution, the GPU is doing most of the work. At 4K, the same comparison shows a drop from 160.7 FPS to 96.7 FPS, a 64 FPS difference. This tightening of the spread at higher resolutions indicates that while the GPU is still the bottleneck, the CPU’s influence becomes relatively more pronounced as the frame rate targets become more modest.

Notably, the system never dips below 96.7 FPS in any measured configuration, which means that even at 4K Ultra, this combination maintains a frame rate well above standard display refresh rates. The data shows no signs of a CPU-induced frame rate ceiling at 1440p or 4K, as the FPS continues to scale with GPU load. However, at 1080p with Low settings, the 387.3 FPS result approaches the practical limit for many displays, and the scaling from Medium (352 FPS) to Low (387.3 FPS) is only a 10% improvement, suggesting that the i5-10400F’s single-thread performance is beginning to matter more at these extreme frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average frame rate recorded for this configuration?

A: The highest average frame rate is 387.3 FPS, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings.

Q: How does the RTX 3080 compare to its closest rival in benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 3080 has an average benchmark score of 35787. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE, scores 36101, which puts the RTX 3080 0.9% behind. Conversely, the RTX 3080 is 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile, which scores 35435.

Q: What is the largest FPS drop when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: At Ultra settings, the average frame rate drops from 243.1 FPS at 1080p to 96.7 FPS at 4K, a reduction of 146.4 FPS. This is the largest absolute drop among the four settings presets.

Q: Does the CPU’s benchmark score indicate it is a strong performer?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F has a percentile rank of 73, meaning it outperforms 73% of all CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 14168, which is 0.4% higher than the AMD EPYC 7552’s score of 14115.

Q: Is the game playable at 4K Ultra with this hardware?

A: Yes, the measured average frame rate at 3840x2160 with Ultra settings is 96.7 FPS, which is comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

Q: How much faster is the system at 1080p Low compared to 4K Ultra?

A: The system runs at 387.3 FPS at 1080p Low and 96.7 FPS at 4K Ultra, making the 1080p Low result exactly 4 times faster than the 4K Ultra result.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is the clear performance leader in this pairing. Its benchmark data shows an average score of 35787, placing it in the 80th percentile of all GPUs. The card’s nearest rivals are tightly clustered: it sits 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (36101) and 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile (35435). This indicates that the RTX 3080 is a mid-to-high-tier performer that remains competitive with newer hardware.

The GPU’s memory configuration is integral to its 4K performance. With 10 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 320-bit bus, the card achieves a bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s. This bandwidth allows the card to handle the increased data load at 3840x2160 without collapsing, as evidenced by the 96.7 FPS result at Ultra settings. The memory clocks run at 1188 MHz, translating to 19 Gbps effective, which is a high-speed configuration that suits the game’s resolution scaling demands.

Clock speeds also play a role in the measured results. The GPU has a base clock of 1440 MHz and a boost clock of 1710 MHz. The boost clock is what the card sustains under load, and the data shows that this is sufficient to drive frame rates above 160 FPS even at 4K Low settings. The card’s FP32 performance of 29.77 TFLOPS and its 8704 shading units provide the raw compute necessary for the high frame rates observed, though the game’s idle genre suggests that these resources are not being fully stressed by complex visual effects.

The RTX 3080’s 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores are present, but their impact on this title is likely minimal given the genre. Instead, the traditional ROP throughput of 164.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 465.1 GTexel/s are the specifications that correlate with the measured FPS, as these directly affect rasterization and texture fill at higher resolutions. The GPU’s 80th percentile ranking confirms that it is a well-above-average card, and the benchmark results show it delivering playable frame rates at every tested configuration.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data provides a complete picture of the system’s capabilities across three resolutions and four settings presets. At 1920x1080, the system achieves its peak performance. Low settings produce 387.3 FPS, Medium settings yield 352 FPS, High settings drop to 304.7 FPS, and Ultra settings bottom out at 243.1 FPS. This shows a 144.2 FPS spread between the lowest and highest quality presets, with each step down in quality providing a meaningful boost to frame rate.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance remains high but the gaps between presets narrow slightly. Low settings run at 278.4 FPS, Medium at 238 FPS, High at 204.8 FPS, and Ultra at 166 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra is 112.4 FPS, which is smaller than the 1080p spread but still substantial. The percentage drop from Low to Ultra is 40%, compared to a 37% drop at 1080p, indicating that the GPU is becoming more of a bottleneck as resolution increases.

At 3840x2160, the system still delivers excellent frame rates but the performance curve flattens. Low settings produce 160.7 FPS, Medium drops to 136.3 FPS, High runs at 118.6 FPS, and Ultra falls to 96.7 FPS. The spread between Low and Ultra is 64 FPS, which is the smallest absolute difference of the three resolutions. This is a clear sign that the GPU is being tasked more heavily, and the relative cost of each quality step is reduced because the base frame rate is lower.

The data shows consistent scaling: at every resolution, Low is the fastest preset and Ultra is the slowest, with Medium and High falling in between in that order. The 4K Ultra result of 96.7 FPS is the only measured configuration that falls below 100 FPS, but it remains well within playable territory. The 1080p Low result of 387.3 FPS is the only configuration that exceeds 350 FPS, highlighting that this pairing is more than capable of driving high-refresh-rate monitors at lower resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-10400F provides the foundation for this system, and its benchmark results show a capable mid-range processor that does not bottleneck the RTX 3080 in this game. The CPU has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Its 12 MB of shared L3 cache is sufficient for the game’s workload, and its 14 nm process node is older but still effective.

The CPU’s benchmark scores reveal a processor that is strong in multi-threaded tasks but less impressive in single-threaded performance. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 10297, while the single-core score is 1453. The Geekbench scores follow a similar pattern: 5783 multicore and 1454 single-core. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 4748 and 2-thread score of 1350 indicate that the CPU scales well with additional threads, which is expected given its 6-core/12-thread configuration.

In the context of To The Core, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic. The data suggests that the i5-10400F is up to the task, as the FPS continues to scale with GPU load rather than hitting a CPU-imposed ceiling. The CPU’s 73rd percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 14168 place it in the upper tier of processors, and its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7552 (14115, 0.4% slower) and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14277, 0.8% faster). This tight grouping indicates that the i5-10400F is competitive with other mid-range options.

The CPU’s 65 W TDP and DDR4 memory support with dual-channel 42.7 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for this game. The PCIe Gen 3 interface with 16 lanes provides sufficient bandwidth for the RTX 3080, though the GPU’s PCIe 4.0 capability is not fully utilized. The benchmark results show that the CPU is not holding the GPU back at 4K, where the GPU is clearly the limiting factor, but at 1080p Low, the 387.3 FPS result suggests that the CPU’s single-thread performance might be approaching its limit, as the scaling from Medium to Low is only 10%.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this configuration depend on the target resolution and refresh rate. At 1920x1080, the system is so fast that even Ultra settings at 243.1 FPS will exceed the refresh rate of most monitors. Players with 144 Hz or 240 Hz displays can safely use Ultra settings without any risk of hitting a frame rate ceiling. For those with 360 Hz monitors, dropping to High settings at 304.7 FPS or Medium at 352 FPS provides the headroom needed to stay above that threshold, with Low at 387.3 FPS being the only preset that fully saturates a 360 Hz display.

At 2560x1440, the recommended preset is High at 204.8 FPS, which comfortably exceeds 144 Hz and approaches 240 Hz refresh rates. Ultra settings at 166 FPS are also viable for 144 Hz displays, but High offers a 23% performance uplift over Ultra while maintaining most visual fidelity. Players with 240 Hz monitors should consider Medium at 238 FPS, as this provides a 16% boost over High and a 43% boost over Ultra. Low settings at 278.4 FPS are only necessary for those chasing the absolute highest frame rates.

At 3840x2160, the system is still highly capable, but the settings choices matter more. High settings at 118.6 FPS are the best balance for 4K gaming, as they provide a 23% improvement over Ultra’s 96.7 FPS while remaining above 100 FPS. Medium settings at 136.3 FPS are recommended for players with 144 Hz 4K displays, as they offer a 41% boost over Ultra. Low settings at 160.7 FPS are only useful for competitive play, where the visual quality trade-off is worth the 66% performance increase over Ultra.

Across all resolutions, Ultra settings are the least efficient choice, offering the lowest frame rates with diminishing visual returns in a game of this genre. High settings provide the best balance of visual quality and performance, while Medium is the pragmatic choice for high-refresh-rate displays. The data shows that this system is so powerful that even the most demanding preset at 4K remains playable, making the settings recommendation more about matching the refresh rate of the display than about achieving minimum playability.