To The Core

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core i9-14900K paired with the Intel Arc B370 lands at rank 2750 out of 2991 tested combos in To The Core. That places this configuration in the bottom 8% of all tested systems, a stark result for a CPU that is otherwise a top-tier performer. The combo’s standing is dragged down almost entirely by the GPU side of the equation, as the Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The i9-14900K, by contrast, ranks at the 95th percentile among all CPUs, creating one of the most lopsided pairings in the benchmark set.

What this rank means in practical terms is that the system will run To The Core, but it will not excel at it. In a game where the average tested combo likely clears 60 FPS at most settings, this pairing struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher presets, particularly at 4K. The data shows a clear pattern: the CPU is never the bottleneck, and the GPU is almost always the limiting factor. The 2750th rank out of 2991 combos suggests that users would need to drop resolution or settings significantly to get smooth performance, and even then, the ceiling is modest.

Compared to the CPU’s nearest rivals, the i9-14900K holds its own. The 14900KF scores 0.3% higher on average, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is 0.6% ahead, and the AMD EPYC 7413 leads by 1.2%. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 trails by 1.7%. These are marginal differences, all within a couple of percentage points, confirming that the processor is not the source of this combo’s low rank. The GPU’s nearest rivals tell a different story: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 is 0.2% faster, the ATI Radeon HD 5770 is 0.5% faster, and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M is 0.7% faster. The AMD FirePro M2000 falls 1.4% short. These are all legacy or low-end parts, underscoring how far the Arc B370 sits from modern gaming GPUs.

The benchmark results indicate that this combo is best suited for users who prioritize CPU compute tasks and are willing to accept modest gaming performance. For To The Core specifically, the rank suggests that the experience will be playable at lower settings but will not approach the smooth high-refresh gameplay that the CPU alone could enable.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution built on the Xe3-LPG architecture, using the Panther Lake chip on a 3 nm process from Intel. Its specifications are modest: 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 raster output units, and 10 ray tracing cores. The GPU runs at a base clock of 300 MHz and boosts to 2400 MHz, with a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. Floating point performance is 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS for FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The TDP is just 25 W, and it draws power through the IGP bus interface with no external power connectors.

The memory configuration is entirely system-dependent. The Arc B370 uses shared system memory, with the type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system shared or system dependent. This is a critical weakness for gaming, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth. In To The Core, the impact is visible in the measured frame rates: at 1080p Low, the combo achieves 132 FPS, but that drops to 78 FPS at 1080p Ultra. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p represents a 41% performance loss, which is substantial but not catastrophic for an integrated GPU.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark score for the Arc B370 is 1184, placing it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs. That score is essentially tied with the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192), while slightly ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168). These are all parts from a much older era, which contextualizes the Arc B370’s performance level. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so it has modern API support, but the raw hardware throughput is limited.

In To The Core, the GPU’s role is decisive. At 4K, the highest resolution tested, the Arc B370 manages 37 FPS on High settings, 43 FPS on Medium, 51 FPS on Low, and 30 FPS on Ultra. The delta between Low and Ultra at 4K is 21 FPS, or 41% — the same relative drop as at 1080p. This consistency suggests that the GPU is scaling predictably with settings, but the absolute performance is low. The 4K Ultra result of 30 FPS is borderline playable, while 4K Low at 51 FPS is smoother but still below the 60 FPS target most gamers prefer.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i9-14900K is a 24-core, 32-thread processor from the Core 14th Gen series, built on the Raptor Lake architecture with a 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz, with a TDP of 125 W. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with ECC support. The CPU connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, and it includes integrated UHD Graphics 770. The launch MSRP was $589.

The CPU’s benchmark results are strong across the board. In Cinebench R23, it scores 39399.5 in multi-core and 2262.5 in single-core. Geekbench results show 21697 multi-core and 2655 single-core. PassMark tests reveal a multithread score of 58674, a single-thread score of 4697, and specialized scores including 792694 for data compression, 46813 for data encryption, 45154 for extended instructions, 210622 for integer math, and 152975 for floating point math. The average benchmark score is 79097, placing the CPU at the 95th percentile among all CPUs.

In To The Core, the CPU’s role is almost certainly secondary. The game is an Idle genre title, which typically does not stress high core counts or heavy multi-threaded workloads. The i9-14900K’s 24 cores and 32 threads are far more than this game would require, and the single-core boost of 6.00 GHz ensures that any lightly-threaded tasks are handled with ease. The data supports this interpretation: the combo’s performance scales almost entirely with GPU settings and resolution, not with CPU capability. At 1080p Low, the system hits 132 FPS, which is the highest recorded result across all tested configurations. This suggests that the CPU is not holding back the GPU at lower resolutions.

The CPU’s nearest rivals all score within 1.7% of the i9-14900K’s average, confirming that this processor is at the top of its class. The 14900KF is 0.3% faster, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is 0.6% faster, and the AMD EPYC 7413 is 1.2% faster, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is 1.7% slower. For To The Core, these differences are negligible. The bottleneck is unequivocally the GPU, and the CPU has ample headroom to feed the Arc B370 at any settings combination.

FAQ

*Q: Is the Intel Core i9-14900K the reason this combo ranks so low in To The Core?*

A: No. The i9-14900K ranks at the 95th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 79097, while the Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile among GPUs with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184. The GPU is the limiting factor.

*Q: What is the best frame rate this combo can achieve in To The Core?*

A: The highest recorded average FPS is 132, achieved at 1920x1080 with Low settings. At 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 89 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low, it falls to 51 FPS.

Q: How does the Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad, which is 0.2% behind the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), 0.5% behind the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192). It is 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168).

*Q: Does the i9-14900K’s 24-core configuration benefit To The Core?*

A: The game is an Idle genre title, which typically does not utilize many cores. The CPU’s 24 cores and 32 threads provide far more capacity than needed, and the 6.00 GHz boost clock ensures strong single-thread performance, but the GPU limits overall results.

Q: What is the frame rate difference between 1080p and 4K at Medium settings?

A: At 1920x1080 Medium, the average FPS is 112, with a minimum of 95 and a maximum of 129. At 3840x2160 Medium, the average drops to 43 FPS, with a minimum of 37 and a maximum of 50 — a 62% reduction.

Q: Is the Arc B370 a discrete GPU?

A: No. The Arc B370 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 25 W TDP, no power connectors, and system shared memory. It uses the Xe3-LPG architecture on the Panther Lake chip.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases from 1080p to 4K. At Low settings, the combo delivers 132 FPS at 1920x1080, 89 FPS at 2560x1440, and 51 FPS at 3840x2160. That represents a 68% drop from 1080p to 1440p, and an additional 43% drop from 1440p to 4K. The total reduction from 1080p Low to 4K Low is 81 FPS, or 61% of the original performance.

At High settings, the pattern is similar: 97 FPS at 1080p, 65 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 33%, and from 1440p to 4K is 43%. At Medium settings, the numbers are 112 FPS at 1080p, 75 FPS at 1440p, and 43 FPS at 4K, with respective drops of 33% and 43%. At Ultra settings, the results are 78 FPS at 1080p, 53 FPS at 1440p, and 30 FPS at 4K, with drops of 32% and 43% respectively.

The consistency of the 1440p-to-4K drop at approximately 43% across all settings strongly indicates that the GPU is the limiting component. A CPU-bound system would show less degradation at higher resolutions because the CPU workload remains constant while the GPU workload increases. Instead, the Arc B370’s shared system memory and limited shading units (1280) cause the frame rate to fall proportionally with pixel count. The 4K Ultra result of 30 FPS is exactly half of the 1080p Ultra result of 78 FPS, further reinforcing the GPU-bound nature of this combo.

The data also reveals that the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference is 54 FPS (132 vs 78); at 1440p, it is 36 FPS (89 vs 53); at 4K, it is 21 FPS (51 vs 30). This suggests that at 4K, the GPU is so heavily saturated that settings adjustments have diminishing returns. The minimum FPS recorded at Medium settings — 95 at 1080p, 64 at 1440p, and 37 at 4K — shows that frame time consistency also degrades with resolution.

Settings Recommendations

For users seeking the best experience with this combo in To The Core, the data supports a clear hierarchy of choices. At 1920x1080, the Medium preset offers an excellent balance: 112 FPS average with a minimum of 95 and a maximum of 129. This ensures smooth gameplay with no frame drops below 60 FPS, which is the typical threshold for comfortable play. The High preset at 1080p delivers 97 FPS average, which is still smooth, but the Medium preset’s higher minimum (95 vs the unlisted min for High) provides a more consistent experience.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset again stands out. It averages 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 and a maximum of 87, keeping the frame rate above 60 FPS throughout. The Low preset at 1440p averages 89 FPS, but the visual quality reduction may not be worth the extra 14 FPS. The High preset at 1440p drops to 65 FPS average, which is playable but leaves less headroom for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset at 1440p falls to 53 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target and not recommended.

At 3840x2160, none of the presets achieve a 60 FPS average. The best result is Low at 51 FPS, followed by Medium at 43 FPS, High at 37 FPS, and Ultra at 30 FPS. For 4K gaming, the Low preset is the only viable option if smoothness is a priority, but even then, the 51 FPS average is below the ideal. The Medium preset’s minimum of 37 FPS suggests that frame drops will be noticeable. Users prioritizing 4K should accept that this combo will not deliver a high-refresh experience in To The Core.

The overall recommendation is to run the game at 1920x1080 with the Medium preset, which provides the best combination of frame rate, consistency, and visual quality. At 1440p, Medium is the sweet spot. At 4K, Low is the only preset that approaches playability. The data shows that the Arc B370’s 1280 shading units and system shared memory cannot sustain high settings at higher resolutions, and the Ultra preset offers the worst performance-to-quality tradeoff at every resolution tested.