To The Core

The Intel Core i5-11400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 delivers a playable, though not exceptional, experience in To The Core, an idle game that is far more demanding on the GPU than the CPU at higher resolutions. Benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy where the graphics card becomes the primary bottleneck as resolution increases, while the processor’s six cores provide ample headroom for the game’s logic. The measured frame rates across three resolutions and four quality presets reveal a system that is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K requiring significant settings compromises to maintain smooth motion.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is substantial and indicates a system that is heavily GPU-limited at higher pixel counts. At High settings, the average frame rate falls from 97 FPS at 1920x1080 to 65 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 32 FPS, and then plummets to 37 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 61.9% decrease in performance from 1080p to 4K, a scaling pattern that points directly at the Intel Arc B370’s limited fillrate and memory bandwidth. The GPU’s pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are simply insufficient to feed the 8.3 million pixels of a 4K display at high detail levels.

The scaling pattern is consistent across all quality presets. At Low settings, the frame rate drops from 132 FPS at 1080p to 89 FPS at 1440p, and finally to 51 FPS at 4K. This 61.4% drop from 1080p to 4K mirrors the High settings result, confirming that the resolution penalty is not mitigated by reducing graphical fidelity. The Ultra preset shows the most dramatic absolute decline, falling from 78 FPS at 1080p to 53 FPS at 1440p and then to 30 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1440p and 4K at Ultra is 23 FPS, which is a 43.4% performance loss for a single resolution step, underscoring how the GPU’s 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute power is overwhelmed by the pixel count.

Interestingly, the difference between Medium and High is relatively small at each resolution. At 1440p, Medium delivers 75 FPS while High achieves 65 FPS, a 10 FPS gap. At 4K, the same two presets yield 43 FPS and 37 FPS, respectively. This suggests that the GPU is not bound by shader complexity but rather by raw pixel throughput and memory access patterns. The Arc B370’s system-shared memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," likely becomes a severe constraint at 4K, as the integrated graphics must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth. The data strongly indicates that the limiting component at 4K is the GPU, while at 1080p, the CPU’s 2.60 GHz base clock and 4.40 GHz boost clock are more than sufficient to keep up.

FAQ

Q: What is the average frame rate at 1080p with Medium settings?

A: The system delivers an average of 112 FPS at 1920x1080 with Medium settings, with a minimum frame rate of 95 FPS and a maximum of 129 FPS. This is the highest average FPS among the presets that include min/max data, indicating a stable and smooth experience.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-11400F compare to its nearest rival in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Core i5-11400F has an average benchmark score of 17177, which places it 0.3% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7H12 (score 17120) and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U (score 17074). It trails the Intel Core i5-12450H by 0.4% (score 17239) and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G by 0.6% (score 17278), indicating near-parity with all four rivals.

Q: Is the Intel Arc B370 a discrete graphics card?

A: No, the Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a bus interface of "IGP" and a slot width of "IGP." It has a TDP of 25 W, uses system-shared memory, and requires no power connectors, confirming it is designed for mobile or compact systems rather than desktop expansion.

Q: What is the best resolution for this combo to maintain a 60+ FPS average?

A: At 1440p, the High preset achieves 65 FPS, and the Medium preset achieves 75 FPS, both above 60 FPS. At 4K, no preset reaches 60 FPS; the highest average is 51 FPS at Low settings. Therefore, 2560x1440 is the recommended resolution for a 60 FPS experience.

*Q: How does this combo rank among all tested combinations in To The Core?*

A: This specific combination of the Intel Core i5-11400F and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2750 out of 2991 tested combos in the game, placing it in the bottom 8.1% of all configurations. This low rank is primarily due to the GPU’s weak performance relative to other graphics cards.

Q: What is the CPU’s multi-threaded performance score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F scores 14340 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core testing, which is consistent with its 6-core, 12-thread configuration. Its single-core score in the same test is 2024 points, showing a balanced performance profile for gaming workloads.

How This Combo Ranks

The overall ranking of this combo in To The Core is poor, sitting at position 2750 out of 2991 tested combinations. This places the system in the bottom percentile of performance, which is surprising given that the CPU is a capable mid-range part. The Intel Core i5-11400F itself ranks in the 71st percentile among all CPUs, indicating it is a better-than-average processor. However, the GPU tells a different story: the Intel Arc B370 ranks in the 5th percentile among all GPUs, meaning it performs worse than 95% of graphics cards in the database.

The disparity between the CPU and GPU performance explains the combo’s low rank. The Arc B370’s average benchmark score is 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is nearly identical to the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (score 1186, delta -0.2%) and the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (score 1190, delta -0.5%). These rivals are over a decade old, highlighting the Arc B370’s position as a low-end integrated solution. In contrast, the CPU’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD EPYC 7H12 and the Intel Core i5-12450H, are modern server and mobile parts, respectively, yet the 11400F holds its own against them.

For To The Core, the GPU bottleneck is the overriding factor in the combo ranking. Even though the CPU can deliver high frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios, the GPU’s 20 ROPs and 40 TMUs severely limit pixel and texture throughput. The data shows that at 1080p, the system can achieve 132 FPS on Low settings, which is respectable, but the 4K Ultra result of 30 FPS is below the threshold for smooth gameplay. The combo’s rank of 2750 reflects a system that is unbalanced for this title, with the GPU acting as a significant drag on overall performance.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal experience for this combo is achieved at 1920x1080 with Medium settings, which yields 112 FPS average with a minimum of 95 FPS. This provides a smooth, tear-free experience that is well above the 60 FPS threshold and leaves headroom for frame time spikes. The High preset at 1080p delivers 97 FPS, which is still excellent, but the 15 FPS drop from Medium to High suggests that the extra graphical features are not worth the performance cost. For players who prioritize visual fidelity over raw frame rate, High at 1080p is a viable alternative, but Medium offers the best balance of smoothness and quality.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset is the recommended choice, delivering 75 FPS average with a minimum of 64 FPS. This is the only 1440p preset that maintains a minimum above 60 FPS, ensuring consistent gameplay without drops below the refresh rate of a standard 60 Hz monitor. The High preset at 1440p drops to 65 FPS average, which is playable but may experience occasional stutters in intense scenes. The Low preset at 1440p achieves 89 FPS, which is excellent for competitive play, but the visual downgrade is significant. Ultra at 1440p falls to 53 FPS, which is below the ideal threshold and not recommended for this combo.

At 3840x2160, all presets struggle to maintain playable frame rates. The Low preset delivers 51 FPS, which is marginally above 30 FPS but below 60 FPS, making it suitable only for turn-based or slow-paced gameplay. The Medium preset at 4K achieves 43 FPS average with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS, which is a borderline experience. High and Ultra at 4K are not recommended, as they produce 37 FPS and 30 FPS respectively, which fall below the 30 FPS minimum for acceptable playability in an idle game. For 4K, the only viable option is Low settings, and even then, the experience is compromised.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates its strongest performance. Low settings produce an average of 132 FPS, the highest score in the entire dataset. Medium settings yield 112 FPS average, with a minimum of 95 FPS and a maximum of 129 FPS, indicating a stable frame time distribution. High settings deliver 97 FPS average, while Ultra settings fall to 78 FPS. The 54 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p shows that the GPU can handle the pixel count but is sensitive to shader complexity and texture filtering.

Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates drop across all presets. Low settings achieve 89 FPS average, a 32.6% decrease from 1080p. Medium settings produce 75 FPS average, with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS. High settings deliver 65 FPS, while Ultra settings drop to 53 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra at 1440p is 36 FPS, which is smaller than at 1080p, suggesting the GPU is becoming more pixel-bound. The minimum frame rate of 64 FPS at Medium ensures that the system rarely dips below 60 FPS, making this the sweet spot for 1440p.

At 3840x2160, the GPU’s limitations are fully exposed. Low settings produce 51 FPS average, a 61.4% drop from 1080p. Medium settings yield 43 FPS average, with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS. High settings drop to 37 FPS, and Ultra settings fall to 30 FPS. The 4K Medium result shows a wide 13 FPS range between minimum and maximum, indicating inconsistent frame pacing. The 4K Ultra result of 30 FPS is exactly at the edge of playability, but the lack of min/max data for this preset suggests it may drop below 30 FPS in demanding scenes. The data clearly shows that 4K is not a viable resolution for this combo without significant compromises.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-11400F features 6 cores and 12 threads, based on the Rocket Lake architecture and manufactured on Intel’s 14 nm process. Its base clock is 2.60 GHz, with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, providing a 1.8 GHz headroom for single-threaded workloads. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache, which is sufficient for the game’s logic and asset management. In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU scores 14340 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2024 in single-core, indicating a balanced performance profile.

For To The Core, an idle game, the CPU’s role is primarily to handle the game’s simulation and update loops, which are typically single-threaded or lightly threaded. The 11400F’s single-thread score of 2981 in PassMark is strong, and its 3DMark single-thread score of 868 suggests it can handle the game’s main thread without bottlenecking. The CPU’s 12 threads provide ample parallelism for background tasks and the game’s auxiliary systems, such as asset streaming and UI rendering. The memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s over dual-channel DDR4 is adequate for the game’s data requirements.

The CPU’s performance relative to its rivals is competitive. It scores 0.3% higher than the AMD EPYC 7H12 and 0.6% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U in average benchmark scores, while trailing the Intel Core i5-12450H by 0.4% and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G by 0.6%. This near-parity means the 11400F is not a weak link in this combo. At 1080p, the CPU can easily feed the GPU, as evidenced by the 132 FPS result at Low settings, which is likely CPU-bound or memory-bound. However, at higher resolutions, the CPU’s role diminishes, and the GPU takes over as the primary bottleneck, as shown by the 4K results where frame rates are consistently below 60 FPS regardless of CPU headroom.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated GPU based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, using the Panther Lake chip on a 3 nm process. It has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster output units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, providing a maximum FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS. Its memory is system-shared, with bandwidth that is system-dependent, meaning performance is tied to the host system’s memory configuration. The GPU’s TDP is 25 W, and it interfaces via IGP, making it a low-power integrated solution.

In To The Core, the GPU’s limited resources are the primary constraint. The 20 ROPs cap pixel fillrate at 48.00 GPixel/s, which is insufficient for 4K resolution at high detail. The 40 TMUs provide a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s, which becomes a bottleneck at higher settings where texture filtering demands increase. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (delta -0.2%), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (delta -0.5%), and AMD Radeon HD 7650M (delta -0.7%). These comparisons highlight the Arc B370’s position as a low-end part, despite its modern architecture and 3 nm process.

The GPU’s performance scaling in To The Core is consistent with its hardware specifications. At 1080p, it can deliver 132 FPS on Low, showing that it has sufficient bandwidth for lower pixel counts. However, as resolution increases, the GPU’s fillrate and memory bandwidth become exhausted, leading to the dramatic frame rate drops observed. The 4K Ultra result of 30 FPS is a clear indication that the GPU lacks the raw throughput for high-resolution gaming. The system-shared memory is a particular weakness, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth, which is likely why the 4K results are so poor. The GPU’s 25 W TDP and integrated nature make it suitable for portable devices, but for To The Core, it is the limiting factor in achieving higher performance.