Can I Run It?

Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips

Fivem
Multiplayer 2017

Fivem

35%
Not Recommended Your system may struggle with this game.

Performance

1080p (Full HD)

Low 1080p Measured
80 FPS
Ultra 1080p Measured
39 FPS

1440p (2K / QHD)

Low 1440p Measured
53 FPS
Ultra 1440p Measured
26 FPS

4K (Ultra HD)

Low 4K Measured
29 FPS
Ultra 4K Measured
14 FPS
20ms Frame Time
30ms Input Latency
1440p Best Resolution

Requirements Check

Processor
Required 37,479
Your CPU 24,964
Graphics Card
Required 27,716
Your GPU 1,184

Recommendations

Upgrade Needed

Your hardware doesn't meet minimum requirements for this game.

Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings

UltraHighMediumLow
4K Ultra HD 14 18 23 29
1440p QHD 26 33 41 53
1080p Full HD 39 50 63 80

Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.

Every measured configuration

1920x1080 High 50
1920x1080 Low 80
1920x1080 Medium 63
1920x1080 Ultra 39
2560x1440 High 33
2560x1440 Low 53
2560x1440 Medium 41
2560x1440 Ultra 26
3840x2160 High 18
3840x2160 Low 29
3840x2160 Medium 23
3840x2160 Ultra 14

Performance Analysis: Fivem on Your System

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F paired with the Intel Arc B370 presents a highly unbalanced combination for Fivem, a multiplayer title that relies heavily on both CPU and GPU resources. The recorded data shows a system that can achieve playable frame rates only at 1920x1080 resolution, and even then, only on Low and Medium presets. The following analysis breaks down the measured performance, contextualizes the hardware within the database, and provides clear guidance on what this combo can and cannot deliver.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The database contains measured average frame rates for this combo across three resolutions and four quality presets. Minimum and maximum FPS values are only recorded for the Medium preset at each resolution, so the analysis primarily relies on average FPS with those specific min/max data points where available.

At 3840x2160, performance is uniformly below playable thresholds. The Low preset delivers an average of 29 FPS, which is the highest recorded at this resolution. Medium drops to 23 FPS average, with a minimum of 20 FPS and a maximum of 26 FPS. High preset averages 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 14 FPS. None of these figures approach the 60 FPS playable threshold, and even the minimum FPS at Medium (20) is far below acceptable for smooth gameplay. The gap between Low and Ultra at 4K is 15 FPS, indicating that visual fidelity scaling has a significant impact but cannot rescue the frame rate.

At 2560x1440, the results improve but still fall short of the 60 FPS target. Low preset averages 53 FPS, which is the closest this combo gets to playable at this resolution. Medium averages 41 FPS, with a minimum of 35 FPS and a maximum of 48 FPS. High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 27 FPS drop, demonstrating that the GPU becomes the limiting factor as settings increase. The minimum FPS at Medium (35) suggests that even the highest average at Low (53) would likely dip below 60 in demanding scenes, which is why the verdict marks 1440p as unplayable.

At 1920x1080, the combo finally reaches playable territory. Low preset averages 80 FPS, which is the highest recorded value for this system. Medium averages 63 FPS, with a minimum of 54 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS. High averages 50 FPS, and Ultra averages 39 FPS. The Medium preset clears the 60 FPS threshold on average, though the minimum of 54 FPS indicates occasional dips below 60. Low preset provides a comfortable margin at 80 FPS average. High and Ultra remain below 60 FPS, making them unsuitable for playable performance. The 41 FPS difference between Low and Ultra at 1080p shows the full range of settings impact.

The data reveals a consistent pattern: each resolution step down from 4K to 1440p to 1080p yields approximately a 1.8x improvement in average FPS at the same preset. For example, Low goes from 29 FPS at 4K to 53 FPS at 1440p to 80 FPS at 1080p. This scaling is characteristic of a GPU that is severely underpowered for higher resolutions, while the CPU has sufficient headroom to maintain frame rates when the GPU is less stressed.

How This Combo Ranks

Within the database of tested combos for Fivem, this pairing ranks at position 3420 out of 3707 total combinations. This places it in the bottom 8 percent of all tested systems, which aligns with the measured FPS results showing playability only at 1080p Low and Medium. The rank reflects the combined capability of both components, and the low position indicates that most other tested combos deliver better performance in this game.

The GPU is the dominant factor in this low ranking. The Intel Arc B370 sits at the 5th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 1184 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. This is an extremely low score, placing the GPU below the vast majority of discrete graphics cards. The nearest GPU rivals in the database include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 with an average score of 1186 (0.2 percent higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 with an average score of 1190 (0.5 percent higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M with an average score of 1192 (0.7 percent higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 with an average score of 1168 (1.4 percent lower). These are all legacy or entry-level GPUs, confirming that the Arc B370 is positioned at the very bottom of the performance spectrum.

The CPU, by contrast, is a strong performer. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 24964. Its nearest CPU rivals include the Intel Core i7-11850H with an average score of 24935 (0.1 percent higher), the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F with an average score of 25005 (0.2 percent higher), the Intel Core i7-13620H with an average score of 24911 (0.2 percent higher), and the Intel Core 5 210H with an average score of 24872 (0.4 percent higher). The CPU is clearly not the bottleneck in this pairing; the GPU holds the combo back.

Best Settings per Resolution

The verdict data identifies playable settings for each resolution based on the 60 FPS threshold.

At 3840x2160, there are no playable settings. The best average FPS at any preset is 29 FPS on Low, which is less than half of the 60 FPS target. Medium, High, and Ultra all fall progressively lower. The database records no best settings for this resolution because none qualify as playable.

At 2560x1440, the same situation applies. There are no playable settings. Low preset comes closest with 53 FPS average, but this still falls 7 FPS short of the threshold. Medium averages 41 FPS, High averages 33 FPS, and Ultra averages 26 FPS. The database lists no best settings for this resolution.

At 1920x1080, playable settings are identified as Low and Medium. Low averages 80 FPS, providing a substantial buffer above the 60 FPS threshold. Medium averages 63 FPS, which clears the threshold but with less headroom given the recorded minimum of 54 FPS. The best settings for 1080p are Medium, with an average FPS of 63 at that preset. This represents the highest quality preset that maintains an average above 60 FPS. High (50 FPS) and Ultra (39 FPS) are not playable.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for both components provides context for what other hardware might behave similarly in Fivem.

For the CPU, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F is closely matched by several other processors. The Intel Core i7-11850H, with an average benchmark score of 24935, is within 0.1 percent of the Ryzen 5 7500F's score of 24964. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 25005, just 0.2 percent higher. The Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911, 0.2 percent lower. The Intel Core 5 210H scores 24872, 0.4 percent lower. In practical terms, any of these CPUs would produce nearly identical CPU-bound performance in Fivem, meaning the frame rate differences between them would be negligible. The CPU is not the limiting factor, so swapping to any of these rivals would not meaningfully change the measured FPS.

For the GPU, the Intel Arc B370 is matched by a group of much older or weaker graphics solutions. The ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186, which is 0.2 percent higher than the Arc B370's 1184. The ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190, 0.5 percent higher. The AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192, 0.7 percent higher. The AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168, 1.4 percent lower. These delta values are all within a narrow band, suggesting that the Arc B370 performs on par with these legacy GPUs in the Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark. For Fivem, any of these GPUs would likely produce similar frame rates, meaning the same 1080p-only playability would apply.

The combination of a top-quartile CPU with a bottom-quartile GPU creates a situation where the GPU is the clear performance ceiling. Users with any of the rival CPUs listed above and the Arc B370 would see virtually identical results. Users with the Arc B370 and a weaker CPU might see slight reductions in minimum FPS, but the average FPS would remain GPU-limited.

CPU and GPU Roles

The measured FPS data across resolutions and presets reveals which component matters more for this game.

The CPU's role is most evident at lower resolutions and lower presets, where the GPU has less work to do. At 1920x1080 Low, the combo achieves 80 FPS average, which is the highest recorded value. This suggests that the CPU can push frame rates well above 60 FPS when the GPU is not overwhelmed. The Ryzen 5 7500F has 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, and its benchmark scores are strong, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22799 and a single-core score of 3218. For a multiplayer game like Fivem, which involves many entities and player interactions, this CPU provides sufficient processing power.

The GPU's role becomes dominant as resolution and settings increase. At 3840x2160, even Low preset only reaches 29 FPS. The GPU's shading units, texture mapping units, and raster output processors are limited, and its FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS. The Arc B370's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1184 places it at the 5th percentile, meaning it is simply not designed for high-resolution gaming.

The scaling between resolutions confirms this division. Going from 1080p Low (80 FPS) to 1440p Low (53 FPS) represents a 34 percent drop, and from 1440p Low to 4K Low (29 FPS) represents a 45 percent drop. These are large reductions that would not occur if the CPU were the bottleneck. Conversely, at 1080p, the difference between Low (80 FPS) and Ultra (39 FPS) is 51 percent, while at 4K, the difference between Low (29 FPS) and Ultra (14 FPS) is 52 percent. The consistent percentage drop across settings at all resolutions indicates that the GPU scales poorly with both resolution and quality settings.

The CPU's influence is also visible in the minimum FPS data. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 54 FPS, which is only 9 FPS below the average of 63. At 1440p Medium, the minimum is 35 FPS against an average of 41, a 6 FPS gap. At 4K Medium, the minimum is 20 FPS against an average of 23, a 3 FPS gap. The tightening of the min-to-avg gap at higher resolutions suggests that the GPU is consistently saturated, leaving little variation, while at 1080p the CPU has enough headroom to occasionally push frame rates higher, creating a wider range.

The Verdict

Based on the verdict data, this PC can run Fivem, but only under specific conditions. At 3840x2160, no settings clear the 60 FPS threshold. The best average FPS is 29 on Low, which is well below playable. At 2560x1440, the situation is the same: no settings are playable, with Low averaging 53 FPS, just short of the mark. At 1920x1080, the system is playable on Low and Medium presets. Low averages 80 FPS, providing a comfortable margin. Medium averages 63 FPS, which clears the threshold, though the minimum of 54 FPS means there will be moments where frame rates dip below 60. The best playable settings at 1080p are Medium, with an average FPS of 63.

Users with this combination should plan to run Fivem at 1080p. Low preset is the safest choice for consistent performance, while Medium offers higher visual quality at the cost of occasional dips. Higher resolutions are not viable, and even High or Ultra settings at 1080p will drop below 60 FPS. The system is functional for this game, but only at the most modest settings and resolution.

FAQ

Q: Can this PC run Fivem at 1920x1080 with Medium settings?

A: Yes. The measured average FPS at 1080p Medium is 63, which clears the 60 FPS playable threshold. The minimum FPS is 54, so there may be brief drops below 60 in demanding scenes.

Q: What is the best playable quality setting at 1920x1080?

A: Medium is the best playable setting at 1080p, with an average FPS of 63. Low also qualifies with an average of 80 FPS, but Medium provides higher visual quality while still averaging above 60 FPS.

Q: Is this system capable of running Fivem at 2560x1440?

A: No. The verdict data shows no playable settings at 1440p. The highest average FPS is 53 on Low, which falls 7 FPS short of the 60 FPS threshold.

Q: How does the GPU compare to other tested GPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Arc B370 ranks at the 5th percentile among all GPUs, with an average 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570, ATI Radeon HD 5770, and AMD Radeon HD 7650M, all of which score within 1 percent of the Arc B370.

Q: Does the CPU or GPU limit performance in Fivem?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU ranks at the 77th percentile, while the GPU ranks at the 5th percentile. Frame rates drop dramatically as resolution increases, which is characteristic of a GPU bottleneck. The CPU can deliver 80 FPS at 1080p Low, but the GPU cannot maintain playable rates at higher resolutions.

Q: What happens if I lower the resolution to 3840x2160?

A: Lowering the resolution to 4K does not help; the highest average FPS at 4K is 29 on Low preset. None of the settings at 4K come close to the 60 FPS threshold, so this resolution is not viable for playable performance.