To The Core

To The Core is an idle game that scales unusually hard with resolution, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus paired with the Intel Arc B370 produces a playable but constrained experience. The data shows that this combo is firmly entry-level for this title, sitting at rank 2750 out of 2991 tested combos, which places it in the bottom 8% of configurations. The measured frame rates reveal that the Intel Arc B370 is the decisive limiting factor, with the powerful 24-core CPU unable to compensate for the integrated graphics’ throughput at higher resolutions. The combo delivers smooth performance at 1080p, acceptable results at 1440p, and drops below the 60 FPS threshold at 4K, making resolution choice the single most important decision for owners of this hardware.

Resolution Scaling

The performance drop from 1080p to 4K is steep and consistent across all settings, indicating that the Intel Arc B370’s fill rate and shading capacity are the bottleneck rather than the CPU. At Low settings, the average frame rate falls from 132 FPS at 1920x1080 to 89 FPS at 2560x1440, a reduction of 43 FPS, and then to 51 FPS at 3840x2160, a further drop of 38 FPS. This represents a 61% loss in average FPS from 1080p to 4K at Low settings, which is a severe scaling curve that points directly at the GPU’s limited pixel throughput and its 20 ROPs.

The pattern holds at Medium settings, where the average goes from 112 FPS at 1080p to 75 FPS at 1440p and then to 43 FPS at 4K. The gap between 1440p and 4K remains large, suggesting that the memory bandwidth, listed as "System Dependent" since the GPU uses System Shared memory, becomes a critical constraint as pixel count increases. At High settings, the averages are 97 FPS at 1080p, 65 FPS at 1440p, and 37 FPS at 4K, showing that even the more demanding preset cannot hide the GPU’s fundamental limitations at higher resolutions.

The most demanding preset, Ultra, shows the clearest evidence of GPU saturation. The average FPS at 1080p is 78, which drops to 53 at 1440p and then plummets to 30 at 4K. The fact that the 4K Ultra result is exactly 30 FPS suggests the system is hitting a hard performance floor, likely due to the integrated graphics’ 25W TDP and the 1280 shading units being overwhelmed. Notably, the CPU’s boost clock of 5.80 GHz and 24 cores do not prevent this bottleneck, proving that To The Core is heavily GPU-bound at every resolution above 1080p.

The data indicates that the jump from 1440p to 4K is proportionally more punishing than the jump from 1080p to 1440p. For instance, at Medium settings, moving from 1080p to 1440p costs 37 FPS, while moving from 1440p to 4K costs 32 FPS. However, the percentage drop is more telling: the 1440p to 4K transition at Medium represents a 43% reduction in FPS, which is the largest single-step percentage loss in the entire dataset. This confirms that the Arc B370’s 2400 MHz boost clock cannot compensate for the geometric increase in pixel shading work required at 4K.

Settings Recommendations

For the best balance of visual quality and frame rate, Medium settings at 1920x1080 provide the most sensible starting point, delivering an average of 112 FPS with minimum frame rates of 95 FPS. This ensures that the game stays comfortably above the 60 FPS threshold even during busy idle-game scenes, and the 95 FPS minimum shows that the system avoids severe hitches. Dropping from Medium to Low at 1080p yields a 20 FPS average increase to 132 FPS, but the visual fidelity loss may not be worth it given that Medium already maintains a high minimum of 95 FPS.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings are still viable, producing an average of 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 FPS. This is the edge of playability, as the minimum frame rate dips close to the 60 FPS line, but it remains acceptable for a genre where twitch reactions are not required. High settings at 1440p drop the average to 65 FPS, which is playable but leaves little headroom, and the lack of a reported minimum makes it riskier. Low settings at 1440p are the safest choice for a locked experience, with an average of 89 FPS that provides ample margin.

At 3840x2160, the recommendation changes entirely. The only setting that achieves an average above 50 FPS is Low, with 51 FPS, which is technically playable but below the ideal 60 FPS target. Medium at 4K averages 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 FPS, which will feel sluggish. High and Ultra at 4K average 37 FPS and 30 FPS respectively, making them unsuitable for anything but static viewing. For 4K owners, the data strongly suggests using Low settings and accepting a sub-60 FPS experience, or alternatively lowering the resolution to 1440p where the combo can shine.

The Ultra preset is universally the worst choice for this hardware, regardless of resolution. At 1080p, it averages 78 FPS, which is 34 FPS lower than Medium and 54 FPS lower than Low. The performance cost of Ultra is disproportionate to its visual benefit in an idle game, and the data shows that the Arc B370’s 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance is simply insufficient to handle the extra effects and draw calls at higher settings. Users should avoid Ultra unless they prioritize image quality over responsiveness and are playing at 1080p.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel’s 3 nm process with a 25W TDP. Its role in To The Core is entirely dominant, as the benchmark results show that the CPU, an Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with 24 cores and a 5.80 GHz boost clock, is never the limiting factor. The GPU’s performance percentile of 5 out of 100 places it in the bottom tier of all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 confirms its entry-level status. The nearest rivals, such as the ATI Radeon HD 5770 with a score of 1190 and the AMD FirePro M2000 with 1168, show that the Arc B370 is performing in a similar league to decade-old discrete GPUs.

The GPU’s memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it has no dedicated VRAM and instead borrows from the system’s DDR5 memory. This is a critical weakness in To The Core, as the game appears to be sensitive to memory bandwidth at higher resolutions. The memory bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which means the effective throughput varies based on the CPU’s dual-channel memory controller. The CPU’s memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s is theoretically sufficient, but the shared nature of the memory pool creates latency and contention issues that manifest as the steep FPS drops seen at 4K.

The GPU’s clock speeds are modest, with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The large difference between base and boost suggests that the GPU is thermally and power-limited, especially given the 25W TDP. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are low by modern standards, which directly explains why the 4K Ultra setting averages only 30 FPS. The 10 ray tracing cores are present but irrelevant for an idle game, and the 1280 shading units are the primary workhorses, yet they are insufficient for heavy pixel loads.

The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which means it is feature-complete from an API standpoint. However, the raw compute throughput of 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS FP16 is what determines the frame rates. The data shows that even at 1080p Low, the GPU is producing 132 FPS, which indicates that it is not completely underpowered for lighter loads, but the scaling curve suggests that the GPU’s fill rate is exhausted quickly as resolution increases. The 20 ROPs are a particular bottleneck, as they limit the pixel output rate, which is why the 4K results are so poor.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with the Intel Arc B370 delivers its best results. Low settings produce an average of 132 FPS, which is the highest number in the entire dataset. Medium settings follow with 112 FPS average, and the minimum of 95 FPS and maximum of 129 FPS show a tight frame delivery window. High settings average 97 FPS, which is still smooth, while Ultra settings drop to 78 FPS average. The data shows that at 1080p, the combo can handle all presets above 75 FPS, making this the only resolution where Ultra is a viable option.

At 2560x1440, the performance degrades noticeably. Low settings average 89 FPS, which is a 43 FPS drop from 1080p Low. Medium settings average 75 FPS with a minimum of 64 FPS and a maximum of 87 FPS, indicating that the frame rate is starting to fluctuate more. High settings average 65 FPS, which is borderline for a 60 Hz display. Ultra settings at 1440p average 53 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and shows that the GPU is struggling. The minimum frame rates for Low, High, and Ultra are not reported, but the Medium preset’s minimum of 64 FPS suggests that other presets may dip lower.

At 3840x2160, the combo’s limitations become severe. Low settings average 51 FPS, which is the only preset above 50 FPS at this resolution. Medium settings average 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS, showing that the frame rate is consistently below the playable threshold. High settings average 37 FPS, and Ultra settings average 30 FPS, which is the absolute floor for the game to remain responsive. The progression from 1080p to 4K at each setting shows a consistent pattern: Low loses 81 FPS, Medium loses 69 FPS, High loses 60 FPS, and Ultra loses 48 FPS. This indicates that the GPU’s performance scales inversely with the pixel count, and the shared memory bandwidth exacerbates the issue at 4K.

The data also reveals a notable anomaly: the gap between Low and Ultra settings narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, the difference between Low and Ultra is 54 FPS (132 vs 78). At 1440p, the difference is 36 FPS (89 vs 53). At 4K, the difference is only 21 FPS (51 vs 30). This convergence suggests that at 4K, the GPU is so overwhelmed that even the lowest settings cannot escape the rendering bottleneck, and the preset choice has diminishing returns. In other words, at 4K, users are paying a large visual penalty for a relatively small frame rate gain by switching from Ultra to Low.

How This Combo Ranks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with the Intel Arc B370 ranks 2750 out of 2991 tested combos in To The Core, placing it in the 8th percentile of all configurations. This is a remarkably low ranking for a CPU that itself is in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, highlighting the massive mismatch between the processor and the integrated graphics. The combo’s performance is dragged down entirely by the GPU, which sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. The gap between the CPU’s capability and the GPU’s output is the defining characteristic of this pairing.

Compared to other combos, this system is outperformed by nearly every discrete GPU configuration, but it is also importantly the ranking is not the absolute worst. The 241 combos ranked below this one likely feature even older or weaker integrated graphics or severely mismatched CPUs. The data shows that the Intel Arc B370’s nearest rivals in pure GPU benchmark terms are the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1184 vs 1190 score) and the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1184 vs 1186 score), which are both legacy parts. This indicates that in To The Core, the combo performs like a system from the early 2010s, despite the modern CPU.

The CPU’s nearest rivals in the overall benchmark database are the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K with an average score of 83807 (0.2% delta), the AMD EPYC 4584PX with 83090 (1.1% delta), and the AMD EPYC 9135 with 82980 (1.2% delta). These scores show that the 290K Plus is competitive at the top of the CPU hierarchy, but this has zero impact on the game’s frame rates because the GPU is the bottleneck. In an idle game like To The Core, which is not CPU-intensive, the 24 cores and 36 MB of L3 cache go largely unused, while the Arc B370’s 1280 shading units are saturated.

The combo rank of 2750 out of 2991 is a cautionary data point for anyone considering this pairing for gaming. The CPU’s impressive Passmark multi-thread score of 60860 and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 do not translate into gaming performance when paired with such a weak GPU. The data unequivocally shows that for To The Core, the Intel Arc B370’s integrated nature is a severe handicap, and the combo’s ranking reflects that reality. Users with this hardware should treat it as a productivity-focused system with casual gaming capabilities at 1080p only.

FAQ

Q: Can this combo run To The Core at 4K smoothly?

A: No. At 3840x2160, the highest average frame rate achieved is 51 FPS on Low settings. Medium settings average 43 FPS, High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 30 FPS. All 4K results are below the 60 FPS target, indicating that this resolution is not viable for smooth gameplay.

Q: What is the best settings preset for 1080p gaming?

A: Medium settings at 1920x1080 provide the best balance, with an average of 112 FPS and a minimum of 95 FPS. This ensures consistent performance above 60 FPS while maintaining better visual quality than Low settings, which average 132 FPS but with reduced fidelity.

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

A: The Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 0.2% below the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186) and 0.5% below the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190). It is 1.4% above the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168), showing it performs in the same tier as decade-old discrete parts.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in To The Core?

A: The GPU is the definitive bottleneck. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a top-tier CPU in the 96th percentile, but the Intel Arc B370 is in the 5th percentile. The steep FPS drops from 1080p to 4K at every setting prove that the integrated graphics cannot keep up, regardless of the CPU’s 24 cores and 5.80 GHz boost clock.

Q: What is the combo’s overall ranking in this game?

A: The combo ranks 2750 out of 2991 tested configurations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all systems tested in To The Core. This low ranking is due to the GPU’s weak performance, as the CPU itself outperforms rivals like the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K by 0.2% in average benchmark score.

Q: Does the Arc B370 have dedicated VRAM?

A: No. The memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared," and the memory bandwidth is "System Dependent." This means the GPU relies on the system’s DDR5 memory, which contributes to the severe performance degradation at higher resolutions due to shared bandwidth constraints.