Counter-Strike 2

# Counter-Strike 2 with AMD Ryzen 5 7400F + Intel Arc B390

This combination pairs AMD's 6-core Zen 4 desktop processor with Intel's integrated Arc B390 graphics, producing a system that ranks 2535th out of 2870 tested combos in Counter-Strike 2. The data reveals a profound imbalance: the CPU is a modern desktop part with strong single-threaded performance, while the GPU sits at the 9th percentile of all tested graphics solutions, making the gameplay experience almost entirely dictated by the iGPU's limits rather than the processor's capabilities.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 (Raphael) architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. It runs at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and boosts to 4.70 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a desktop-class CPU with an 83rd percentile ranking among all processors, and its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21,765 and single-core score of 3,072 reflect a solidly capable modern part.

In Counter-Strike 2, which is known to be heavily CPU-dependent for high frame rates, this processor would theoretically be more than sufficient. The 4.70 GHz boost clock and 32 MB of L3 cache should provide the responsive frame pacing that competitive shooters demand. However, the measured FPS data tells a different story. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 179 FPS average, which is respectable, but the CPU's passmark single-thread score of 3,689 suggests it could push far higher if the graphics subsystem were not the bottleneck. The nearest CPU rivals — the Intel Core i5-14600T (0.1% higher average score), Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (0.2% higher), AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (0.2% lower), and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (0.3% higher) — all sit within a fraction of a percent of this chip's average benchmark score of 32,750, confirming that the 7400F is not the limiting factor here.

What is particularly telling is the difference between the CPU's capability and the actual game performance. The processor's Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 9,141 and single-core score of 1,290 place it well above what would be needed for a game like Counter-Strike 2 at reasonable settings. The data implies that the CPU is essentially idling relative to its potential, waiting on the integrated graphics to deliver frames. In fact, the 179 FPS at 1080p Low likely represents a ceiling imposed by the iGPU's fill rate and shading power, not by the CPU's ability to feed draw calls or process game logic. The processor's PassMark physics score of 1,660 and data compression score of 289,999 further indicate a chip that has ample headroom for the computational demands of a modern esports title.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture (Panther Lake chip), built on Intel's 3 nm process. It features 1,536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation pipelines, along with 12 ray tracing cores. The base clock is 300 MHz, boosting to 2,500 MHz, which yields a pixel rate of 60.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 7.680 TFLOPS, and the TDP is 80 W. Critically, the memory configuration is "System Shared" — meaning the GPU uses the system's DDR5 memory rather than dedicated VRAM — with bandwidth described as "System Dependent" and memory type also "System Shared."

This integrated GPU ranks at the 9th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 1,482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12). Its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks are all ancient low-end discrete parts: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1.3% higher), GeForce 800M (1.5% higher), GT 625 OEM (2.5% higher), and GT 710 (2.7% higher). This is a stark indicator of performance class — the B390 is competing with entry-level GPUs from over a decade ago in raw 3D rendering. The 2,500 MHz boost clock is high for an iGPU, but the shared memory bandwidth and lack of dedicated VRAM create a severe constraint, particularly at higher resolutions where memory pressure increases.

In Counter-Strike 2, the GPU's role is clearly the dominant bottleneck. At 1080p Low, the combo hits 179 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it collapses to 32 FPS. The ratio between these extremes — roughly 5.6x performance difference from resolution and settings combined — points to a GPU that is overwhelmed when pixel count and shading complexity increase. The "System Shared" memory means that the GPU competes with the CPU for memory bandwidth, which is particularly problematic in a fast-paced game where frame times need to be consistent. The 12 ray tracing cores are essentially irrelevant for this title, and the 1,536 shading units, while numerous for an iGPU, are insufficient for high-resolution rendering at competitive frame rates.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data across resolutions reveals a clear pattern of GPU-limited scaling. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 179; at 1440p Low, it drops to 118; and at 4K Low, it falls to 66. That is a 63% reduction from 1080p to 4K at the same settings. For High settings, the drop is from 111 FPS at 1080p to 73 FPS at 1440p and 41 FPS at 4K — a 63% reduction as well. The consistency of this percentage across settings strongly suggests that the GPU is the primary constraint, as pixel-count scaling should follow a predictable curve when the processor can keep up.

If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect the FPS to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the processor's workload would stay roughly constant regardless of pixel count. Instead, the FPS drops proportionally with the increase in pixel count. Going from 1080p (2.07 million pixels) to 1440p (3.69 million pixels) is a 78% increase in pixels, but the FPS drops from 179 to 118 at Low settings — that is only a 34% performance reduction, which is less than the pixel increase, suggesting some CPU headroom is still being used at 1440p. However, moving from 1440p to 4K (8.29 million pixels, a 125% increase) drops FPS from 118 to 66 — a 44% reduction — which again is less than the pixel increase but still significant.

The medium settings row provides additional insight, with min and max FPS data. At 1080p Medium, the average is 149 FPS with a range of 126 to 171 FPS — a 45 FPS spread that indicates frame time variability. At 1440p Medium, the average is 98 FPS with a range of 84 to 113 FPS (29 FPS spread), and at 4K Medium, the average is 55 FPS with a range of 47 to 63 FPS (16 FPS spread). The narrowing range at higher resolutions suggests that as the GPU becomes more saturated, the frame times become more consistent because the bottleneck is more uniform — the GPU is always at maximum load, whereas at lower resolutions, the CPU can sometimes feed frames faster, causing more variance. This is a classic sign of a GPU-bound scenario at higher resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the measured average FPS across settings is as follows: Low produces 179 FPS, Medium averages 149 FPS (with min 126 and max 171), High averages 111 FPS, and Ultra drops to 86 FPS. The spread from Low to Ultra is 93 FPS, which is a 52% reduction in performance when going from the lowest to the highest preset. This indicates that even at 1080p, the settings have a significant impact, though Low and Medium remain playable for competitive gaming.

At 2560x1440, the numbers shift downward substantially. Low averages 118 FPS, Medium averages 98 FPS (min 84, max 113), High averages 73 FPS, and Ultra averages 57 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is 61 FPS (52% reduction), which is proportionally similar to 1080p. The key observation is that even at Low settings, 1440p drops below the 144 Hz threshold that many competitive players target, though 118 FPS is still smooth for most users.

At 3840x2160, the performance becomes marginal for a fast-paced shooter. Low averages 66 FPS, Medium averages 55 FPS (min 47, max 63), High averages 41 FPS, and Ultra averages 32 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K produces an experience that is essentially unplayable for a competitive game, with sub-60 FPS even in the best case. The Medium setting at 4K has a min FPS of 47, which means there will be noticeable hitches during intense action. Only Low at 4K achieves a somewhat playable 66 FPS average, though the lack of min FPS data for that row means we cannot verify consistency.

The absence of min/max data for most rows (only Medium settings at each resolution include these values) limits the analysis, but the available data shows that the Medium preset has the most stable frame delivery in each case, with the tightest min-max range relative to its average.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

This system ranks 2535th out of 2870 tested combinations in Counter-Strike 2. That places it in the bottom 11.7% of all tested combos, which is a stark indication of how the integrated GPU holds back the overall experience. The CPU alone would rank in the 83rd percentile of all processors, but the combo ranking is dragged down by the GPU's 9th percentile performance. This mismatch between component capabilities is the defining characteristic of this build.

The data implies that in a game like Counter-Strike 2, where high and consistent frame rates are paramount, this combo is at a significant disadvantage compared to the vast majority of tested systems. The 2,870 total combos likely include a wide range of discrete GPUs, and the B390's integrated nature puts it at the bottom of the performance ladder. However, it is importantly the combo still achieves playable frame rates at 1080p Low and Medium — 179 and 149 FPS respectively — which means it is not entirely unsuitable for casual play or for players who prioritize resolution scaling over competitive frame rates.

The rank of 2535 is a composite measure that likely weights the game's performance across all tested settings and resolutions. Given that the combo delivers 32 FPS at 4K Ultra and 179 FPS at 1080p Low, the wide variance likely contributes to its low rank. A system with more balanced performance would show less dramatic scaling across resolutions. The fact that this combo sits near the bottom, despite having a strong CPU, underscores that Counter-Strike 2's performance is heavily dependent on GPU throughput when playing at higher settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings combination for this system in Counter-Strike 2?

A: The data shows that 1080p Low delivers the highest average FPS at 179, followed by 1080p Medium at 149 FPS. For a competitive advantage, 1080p Low or Medium is recommended, as 1440p Low drops to 118 FPS and 4K Low falls to 66 FPS.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F has an average benchmark score of 32,750, which is within 0.3% of the Intel Core i5-14600T (32,707), Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (32,697), and AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 (32,662), and only 0.2% below the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (32,812). These are essentially performance ties.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking and how does it compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile of all GPUs with an average 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,482. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1,463, 1.3% higher), GeForce 800M (1,460, 1.5% higher), GT 625 OEM (1,446, 2.5% higher), and GT 710 (1,443, 2.7% higher).

Q: At what settings does the system maintain a consistent frame rate above 60 FPS?

A: Based on the measured data, 1080p Low (179 FPS), 1080p Medium (149 FPS), 1080p High (111 FPS), 1080p Ultra (86 FPS), 1440p Low (118 FPS), 1440p Medium (98 FPS), 1440p High (73 FPS), and 4K Low (66 FPS) all exceed 60 FPS on average. The 4K Medium setting averages 55 FPS, which is below that threshold.

Q: How much performance is lost when moving from 1080p to 4K at the same settings?

A: At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 179 at 1080p to 66 at 4K, a 63% reduction. At High settings, the drop is from 111 to 41 FPS, also a 63% reduction. At Ultra settings, the drop is from 86 to 32 FPS, a 63% reduction as well.

Q: What is the minimum FPS at the Medium preset across resolutions?

A: The measured min FPS values are 126 at 1080p Medium, 84 at 1440p Medium, and 47 at 4K Medium. This indicates that 4K Medium will experience frame drops below 50 FPS during demanding scenes.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured rows, the optimal experience for this combo in Counter-Strike 2 is at 1920x1080 with the Medium preset. This configuration delivers an average of 149 FPS with a minimum of 126 FPS and a maximum of 171 FPS, providing a smooth and consistent experience that stays well above the 60 FPS threshold even in the worst-case measured frames. The Medium preset also offers a meaningful visual upgrade over Low while maintaining a 30 FPS advantage over High at the same resolution.

For players who prioritize maximum frame rates, 1080p Low at 179 FPS is the clear choice, but the lack of min/max data for that setting makes it difficult to assess consistency. Given that the Medium preset shows a narrow 45 FPS range, it is likely the safer competitive option. At 1440p, the Medium preset (98 FPS average, 84 min, 113 max) is the highest setting that maintains an average above 90 FPS, though players should be aware that min frames can dip near 84 FPS during intense moments. 1440p Low at 118 FPS is the better option for competitive play at this resolution.

At 4K, only the Low preset (66 FPS average) is playable, but even this is marginal for a fast-paced shooter. The Medium preset at 4K (55 FPS average, 47 min) will produce noticeable stutter during heavy action, and High (41 FPS) and Ultra (32 FPS) are not recommended under any circumstances. The data clearly indicates that this system is best utilized at 1080p, where it can deliver competitive frame rates without sacrificing too much visual fidelity. The Ultra preset at 1080p (86 FPS) is also viable for players who prefer visuals over raw performance, but it does not provide the headroom that Medium offers.