Fivem

Measured FPS Breakdown

The recorded data for Fivem on this AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and Intel Arc B370 combination shows a clear performance ceiling tied directly to resolution and preset. At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable framerates across all settings. The High preset delivers an average of 18 FPS, while Low reaches 29 FPS. Medium sits between them at 23 FPS, with a recorded minimum of 20 FPS and maximum of 26 FPS. Ultra is the most demanding, producing only 14 FPS on average. No setting at 4K comes close to the 60 FPS threshold; the gap is substantial, with the best case (Low) still 31 FPS short of the target.

Dropping to 2560x1440 improves matters but does not fully rescue the experience. High averages 33 FPS, Low climbs to 53 FPS, and Medium lands at 41 FPS with a minimum of 35 FPS and maximum of 48 FPS. Ultra remains weak at 26 FPS. The pattern here is consistent: even at the lowest preset, the average framerate stays below 60 FPS, meaning this resolution cannot be considered playable under the database's 60 FPS standard. The jump from Low to Medium costs roughly 12 FPS, while moving from Medium to High costs another 8 FPS, showing a steep scaling curve as graphical load increases.

At 1920x1080, the picture changes significantly. Low settings deliver a solid 80 FPS average, comfortably clearing the playable threshold. Medium follows at 63 FPS, with a minimum of 54 FPS and maximum of 72 FPS. High drops to 50 FPS, and Ultra falls to 39 FPS. The data indicates that 1080p is the only resolution where this combo can sustain 60 FPS or higher, and only on Low or Medium presets. Notably, the spread between Low and Medium at 1080p is 17 FPS, while the spread between Medium and High is 13 FPS, suggesting that each preset tier imposes a meaningful performance penalty. The minimum FPS at Medium (54) hovers just below the threshold, so even though the average is playable, occasional dips may occur in demanding scenes.

Across all resolutions, the measured FPS values show a consistent hierarchy: Low always outperforms Medium, which outperforms High, which outperforms Ultra. The delta between Low and Ultra is particularly pronounced: at 4K, the difference is 15 FPS; at 1440p, it is 27 FPS; at 1080p, it is 41 FPS. This widening gap at lower resolutions suggests that the GPU becomes less of a bottleneck as resolution decreases, allowing the CPU to push higher framerates when graphical settings are reduced.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals for each component provides context for what this combo behaves like. For the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X, the database lists four close competitors. The AMD EPYC 9015 scores 57555, which is 0.1% higher than the 9900X's average benchmark score of 57498. The AMD EPYC 7313 trails by 0.2%, and the Intel Core i9-14900 sits 1.1% ahead. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M is 1.4% faster in average score. These deltas are all within a narrow band, meaning the CPU's compute performance is roughly comparable to these server and desktop parts, though the 9900X holds its own in single-threaded workloads with a 3dmark_single_thread score of 1286 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4672.

For the Intel Arc B370, the situation is starkly different. This GPU sits in the 5th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1184 from a single 3dmark test (Steel Nomad DX12). Its nearest rivals are all older or lower-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1190 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1192 (0.7% higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1168 (1.4% lower). This places the Arc B370 in the company of legacy mobile and entry-level desktop GPUs from over a decade ago, which explains why Fivem's framerates are so constrained at higher resolutions.

The implication for gameplay is that the CPU has ample headroom, but the GPU is the limiting factor. If a user swapped the Arc B370 for a graphics solution with performance closer to the AMD EPYC 7313 or Intel Core i9-14900 tier (which are CPU rivals, not GPU rivals), the framerates would change only if the GPU also changed. Within the GPU's peer group, the performance differences are minimal, so a user with an ATI Radeon HD 5770 or AMD Radeon HD 7650M would likely see nearly identical FPS numbers in Fivem at the same settings. The data shows no GPU rival that would meaningfully alter the playability verdict at 1440p or 4K.

FAQ

Q: Can this system run Fivem at 60 FPS on a 4K monitor?

A: No. The highest average FPS recorded at 3840x2160 is 29 FPS on Low settings. Medium averages 23 FPS, High averages 18 FPS, and Ultra averages 14 FPS. None of these approach the 60 FPS threshold.

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

A: Medium is the best preset that maintains an average of 63 FPS, which clears the 60 FPS threshold. Low also works at 80 FPS, but Medium offers higher graphical fidelity while staying playable. High and Ultra fall below 60 FPS at 50 and 39 FPS respectively.

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

A: The Arc B370's average benchmark score is 1184. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% higher), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% higher), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, 0.7% higher), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, 1.4% lower). All are within 1.4% of each other, indicating nearly identical performance levels.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU more responsible for the low framerates at 2560x1440?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU's average benchmark score (57498) places it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 5th percentile. At 1440p, even Low settings only reach 53 FPS, which suggests the GPU cannot push enough frames regardless of CPU capability.

Q: What framerate can I expect at 1080p with Ultra settings?

A: The average FPS on Ultra at 1920x1080 is 39 FPS, with no recorded minimum or maximum values in the data. This is 21 FPS below the playable threshold, so Ultra is not recommended for smooth gameplay.

Q: Does the combo rank high among all tested combinations for this game?

A: No. The combo ranks 3420 out of 3707 tested combos in Fivem, placing it in the lower percentile of systems. This is consistent with the GPU's low benchmark standing.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: this PC can run Fivem, but only at 1920x1080 and only on Low or Medium presets. At Low, the average FPS is 80, well above the 60 FPS threshold. At Medium, the average drops to 63 FPS, still playable but with a recorded minimum of 54 FPS that may cause brief stutters. High at 1080p averages 50 FPS, which is below the threshold, and Ultra averages 39 FPS. The verdictByResolution field confirms this: playable settings exist only for 1920x1080, with Medium listed as the best setting at 63 FPS.

At 2560x1440, no preset achieves 60 FPS. Low comes closest at 53 FPS, but the database marks this resolution as having no playable settings. The same applies to 3840x2160, where the best case is 29 FPS on Low. For users with 1440p or 4K displays, this system will require significant graphical compromises and still miss the playability target. The conclusion is that this combo is suitable for 1080p gaming with moderate settings, but not for higher resolutions.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested hardware combinations for Fivem, this AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and Intel Arc B370 pairing ranks 3420 out of 3707 combos. That places it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems. The ranking reflects the GPU's severe limitation: the Arc B370's 5th percentile standing among all GPUs drags down what would otherwise be a strong CPU showing. The Ryzen 9 9900X alone ranks in the 92nd percentile of CPUs, but the GPU's 3dmark Steel Nomad score of 1184 is barely above the lowest-tier graphics adapters.

The rank means that most other tested combos deliver higher framerates in Fivem, likely because they pair more capable GPUs with mid-range or high-end CPUs. The 3420th position out of 3707 is not a catastrophic failure, but it indicates that this system is closer to entry-level performance than to mainstream gaming. For comparison, the CPU's nearest rivals (EPYC 9015, EPYC 7313, Core i9-14900, Xeon Platinum 8260M) all have similar compute scores, so swapping the CPU alone would not change the ranking much. The bottleneck is squarely on the graphics side.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset reaches 60 FPS, so there is no best playable setting. The data records Low at 29 FPS, Medium at 23 FPS, High at 18 FPS, and Ultra at 14 FPS, but all are unplayable under the threshold. At 2560x1440, the same situation applies: Low averages 53 FPS, Medium 41 FPS, High 33 FPS, and Ultra 26 FPS, yet none clear 60 FPS. The verdictByResolution field confirms both resolutions have empty playableSettings lists.

At 1920x1080, Medium is the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS. It averages 63 FPS, with a minimum of 54 FPS and maximum of 72 FPS. Low is also playable at 80 FPS, but Medium offers higher visual quality while still meeting the threshold. High (50 FPS) and Ultra (39 FPS) are not recommended. For users who prioritize smoothness over visuals, Low is the safest choice; for those who want better graphics, Medium is the ceiling.

CPU and GPU Roles

The division of labor between the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and Intel Arc B370 becomes clear when examining scaling across resolutions and presets. At 3840x2160, the framerates are uniformly low (14 to 29 FPS), and the differences between Low and Ultra are compressed (15 FPS). This indicates that the GPU is completely saturated at 4K, unable to render enough frames regardless of CPU headroom. The CPU, with 12 cores and 24 threads and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, is not the limiting factor; its Passmark multithread score of 54643 and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32172 show ample processing power.

At 2560x1440, the framerates improve but still stay below 60 FPS. The gap between Low (53 FPS) and Ultra (26 FPS) widens to 27 FPS, showing that the GPU has more room to work as resolution drops, but it still cannot reach the target. The CPU's role becomes slightly more relevant here, as the higher framerates (approaching 53 FPS) begin to demand more from the processor, but the GPU remains the primary constraint.

At 1920x1080, the scaling pattern reveals the CPU's importance. Low settings hit 80 FPS, which is 27 FPS higher than at 1440p Low. This jump is larger than the 24 FPS increase seen when moving from 4K Low to 1440p Low, suggesting that the CPU is finally able to drive the GPU harder at lower resolutions. The Medium preset at 1080p (63 FPS) also shows that the system can sustain playable framerates when the GPU is not overwhelmed. However, the fact that High drops to 50 FPS and Ultra to 39 FPS indicates that the GPU's architecture (Xe3-LPG, 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 20 ROPs) struggles with the added pixel and texture work of higher presets, even at 1080p.

In summary, the CPU is not the bottleneck at any resolution; its performance is sufficient to push well beyond 60 FPS if the GPU allowed it. The GPU is the limiting factor at all resolutions and presets, and its low benchmark percentile (5th) reflects this. Users considering this combo should understand that the Ryzen 9 9900X is a high-end processor that will remain relevant for years, but the Arc B370 will cap gameplay at 1080p Medium for Fivem and similar titles.