To The Core

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance tier of the Intel Core i5-9400 + Intel Arc B390 combo in To The Core?

A: This combo ranks 2643rd out of 2991 tested combinations, placing it in the lower half of the database. The CPU sits at the 47th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU is at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, indicating the graphics adapter is the primary limiting factor.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-9400 compare to its closest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The i5-9400 has an average benchmark score of 2254. It is essentially tied with the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (2259, -0.2% delta) and the Intel Core i3-10305 (2264, -0.4% delta). It edges out the Intel Core i7-10710U (2248, +0.3% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 (2246, +0.4% delta).

Q: What is the GPU's standing relative to its nearest rivals based on 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 scores?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. It sits 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443). These are very small margins.

Q: What is the best resolution for achieving smooth gameplay with this combo?

A: At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 107 FPS on High, 124 FPS on Medium, and 147 FPS on Low, which are the only settings that break the 100 FPS threshold. At 2560x1440, the best result is 99 FPS on Low. At 3840x2160, the highest average is 56 FPS on Low.

Q: Which settings preset offers the best balance of visual quality and frame rate at 1920x1080?

A: The High preset at 1920x1080 provides 107 FPS average, which is a substantial 21 FPS improvement over the Ultra preset (86 FPS) while retaining significantly higher visual fidelity than Low (147 FPS). Medium sits in between at 124 FPS.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU bottleneck this combo more severely in To The Core?

A: The GPU is the clear bottleneck. The Arc B390 sits at the 9th percentile among all GPUs, while the i5-9400 is at the 47th percentile. The GPU's nearest rivals are all legacy NVIDIA parts (GT 520MX, 800M, GT 625 OEM, GT 710), whereas the CPU is competitive with much more recent Core i7 and Ryzen 5 parts.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-9400 provides six physical cores and six threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. This Coffee Lake Refresh part, built on Intel's 14 nm process, features 9 MB of shared L3 cache and 64 KB of L1 cache per core, alongside 256 KB of L2 per core. Its memory bandwidth is rated at 42.7 GB/s over DDR4 dual-channel.

In synthetic workloads, the i5-9400 demonstrates modest but competent performance. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 6629 and single-core score of 935 indicate that it can handle modern threaded workloads reasonably well, though it is not a high-end part. The Geekbench multicore score of 5141 and single-core score of 1389 reinforce this picture of a mid-range desktop processor from the Coffee Lake era.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the i5-9400 is essentially a statistical dead heat. It is 0.2% slower than the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 and 0.4% slower than the Intel Core i3-10305. It is 0.3% faster than the Intel Core i7-10710U and 0.4% faster than the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500. These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, meaning the i5-9400's computational power is indistinguishable from its closest competitors in aggregate benchmarking.

For To The Core, an idle game, the CPU's six cores are likely sufficient to handle game logic, background processes, and the rendering thread. The 4.10 GHz boost clock provides responsive single-threaded performance, which idle games often rely on for simulation ticks. The 47th percentile standing among all CPUs suggests the i5-9400 is firmly in the middle of the pack, neither a liability nor a strength for this combo.

The CPU's 65 W TDP and end-of-life production status indicate this is a legacy part. However, the benchmark data shows no signs of CPU-induced frame rate collapses in To The Core; the measured FPS scales predictably across resolutions, which points to the GPU being the primary constraint. The CPU's role here is to feed the Arc B390 without becoming a bottleneck, and the data supports that it does so adequately.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics processor based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, manufactured on Intel's 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, with system-shared memory and system-dependent bandwidth. The GPU features 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output pipelines, along with 12 ray tracing cores.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the Arc B390 scores 1482, which places it at the 9th percentile among all GPUs. This is a very low standing, and the nearest rivals confirm it: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463) is only 1.3% behind, the GeForce 800M (1460) is 1.5% behind, the GT 625 OEM (1446) is 2.5% behind, and the GT 710 (1443) is 2.7% behind. These are all entry-level or legacy discrete GPUs, and the Arc B390 is only marginally faster than them.

The pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its 80 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate this is an integrated solution, not a discrete card.

In To The Core, the GPU's limitations become apparent at higher resolutions. At 3840x2160, the Ultra preset yields only 33 FPS average, and High is 41 FPS. Even at Low, 4K only reaches 56 FPS. This is consistent with a GPU that sits in the bottom 9% of all graphics adapters. The measured FPS data shows clear scaling: dropping from Ultra to Low at 4K improves average FPS by 23 frames (33 to 56), which is a 70% gain.

At 2560x1440, the GPU performs better: Low hits 99 FPS, Medium 83 FPS, and High 72 FPS. Ultra still dips to 58 FPS. At 1920x1080, the GPU is finally able to stretch its legs: Low reaches 147 FPS, Medium 124 FPS, High 107 FPS, and Ultra 86 FPS.

The GPU's system-shared memory configuration means its effective bandwidth is dependent on the system's memory subsystem. This can be a limiting factor in memory-intensive scenes, but the measured FPS data shows reasonably smooth scaling, suggesting the shared memory arrangement does not cause catastrophic frame drops in To The Core.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i5-9400 + Intel Arc B390 combination ranks 2643rd out of 2991 tested combos in To The Core. This places the combo in the 12th percentile of all tested configurations, meaning roughly 88% of tested combos perform better.

This low ranking is driven almost entirely by the GPU. The i5-9400, at the 47th percentile among CPUs, is a genuinely mid-range processor. The Arc B390, at the 9th percentile among GPUs, is a bottom-tier graphics solution. The combination of a mid-range CPU with a bottom-decile GPU creates a lopsided pairing where the GPU is the clear performance ceiling.

In practical terms, this combo ranks below the vast majority of gaming PCs. It is not competitive with any modern discrete GPU pairing. The nearest GPU rivals—GT 520MX, 800M, GT 625 OEM, GT 710—are all parts that would have been considered entry-level even a decade ago. The fact that the Arc B390 only marginally outperforms these parts underscores its very low absolute performance.

However, the combo's ranking is not catastrophic in absolute terms. It is still ahead of 348 other tested combos, which likely include older or even more severely mismatched hardware. The measured FPS data shows the combo can deliver playable frame rates at 1080p and even 1440p on lower settings, which is more than some legacy integrated graphics solutions could manage.

The discrepancy between the CPU's 47th percentile and the GPU's 9th percentile suggests that users of this combo are leaving CPU performance on the table. If paired with a stronger GPU, the i5-9400 would likely support significantly higher frame rates. As configured, the Arc B390 holds the entire system back.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for optimal settings across resolutions. At 1920x1080, the High preset delivers 107 FPS average, which is the best combination of visual quality and frame rate. Medium offers 124 FPS, a 17 FPS improvement, but the visual downgrade from High to Medium is typically noticeable. Low hits 147 FPS, but the graphical compromise is substantial. Ultra drops to 86 FPS, which is a significant reduction from High without a commensurate visual gain in most titles.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only one that achieves near-100 FPS (99 FPS). Medium sits at 83 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for fast-paced scenes. High drops to 72 FPS, which is acceptable for an idle game, though Ultra at 58 FPS may feel slightly sluggish. The recommendation for 1440p is Low for maximum smoothness, or Medium if visual fidelity takes priority over frame rate.

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. Low is the best at 56 FPS, followed by Medium at 48 FPS, High at 41 FPS, and Ultra at 33 FPS. For 4K, the Low preset is the only viable option for near-smooth gameplay. Medium could be considered if the user is willing to accept 48 FPS, but the data suggests Low is the pragmatic choice.

The Medium preset at each resolution provides the most consistent frame pacing, as it is the only one with measured min and max FPS values. At 1080p Medium, the range is 105-143 FPS; at 1440p Medium, 71-96 FPS; at 4K Medium, 41-55 FPS. This consistency suggests Medium is a well-balanced setting for this combo, avoiding the extremes of Low and Ultra.

For the best overall experience, the 1080p High preset represents the sweet spot: 107 FPS average with visual quality that is only one step below the maximum. Users with 1440p displays should prioritize Low, and 4K users should accept Low as the ceiling.

Measured FPS Breakdown

1920x1080:

• Low: 147 FPS average
• Medium: 124 FPS average, with a measured range of 105-143 FPS
• High: 107 FPS average
• Ultra: 86 FPS average

The 1080p results show a clear progression: each step down in settings yields roughly a 20-25 FPS improvement. The jump from Ultra (86 FPS) to High (107 FPS) is a 24.4% increase, and from High to Medium (124 FPS) is a 15.9% increase. The gap from Medium to Low (147 FPS) is 18.5%. This scaling indicates the GPU is the limiting factor, as CPU-bound scenarios would show diminishing returns at lower settings.

2560x1440:

• Low: 99 FPS average
• Medium: 83 FPS average, with a measured range of 71-96 FPS
• High: 72 FPS average
• Ultra: 58 FPS average

At 1440p, the frame rates drop by roughly 30-35% compared to 1080p across all settings. The Low preset is the only one that approaches 100 FPS. The Medium range of 71-96 FPS shows a 25 FPS spread, indicating some scene-to-scene variability. Ultra at 58 FPS is borderline for smooth gameplay, especially in an idle game where the UI may update frequently.

3840x2160:

• Low: 56 FPS average
• Medium: 48 FPS average, with a measured range of 41-55 FPS
• High: 41 FPS average
• Ultra: 33 FPS average

At 4K, the combo struggles to maintain 60 FPS even on Low. The Medium range of 41-55 FPS shows significant dips below the 48 FPS average. Ultra at 33 FPS is below the threshold for comfortable gameplay, and even High at 41 FPS is marginal. The data indicates that 4K gaming is only viable on the Low preset, and even then, the frame rate is not ideal.

The overall pattern across all resolutions shows that the Arc B390's performance degrades predictably with increasing pixel count. The 1080p results are playable across all settings, 1440p is playable on Low through High, and 4K is only playable on Low. The measured data confirms the GPU's 9th percentile ranking: it is capable of handling an idle game at mainstream resolutions, but it is not a high-performance part by any measure.