Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2 is a competitive FPS where frame rate consistency often matters more than absolute visual fidelity. The measured data for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F paired with the Intel Arc B370 reveals a configuration that is heavily constrained by its graphics solution, particularly at higher resolutions. The benchmark results indicate that while the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU at lower settings, the Intel Arc B370 becomes the primary bottleneck as graphical demands increase. This analysis breaks down the measured performance across resolutions and settings to determine the optimal configuration for this hardware combo.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data across all three resolutions and four quality presets paints a clear picture: this combo is not designed for maximum visual fidelity. The most balanced experience is achieved at Medium settings across all tested resolutions. At 1920x1080, Medium produces an average of 134 FPS with a minimum of 114 FPS and a maximum of 154 FPS. This is a significant jump from the 100 FPS average at High settings and offers a smoother experience than the 78 FPS average seen at Ultra. The frame time consistency, indicated by the min/max spread, is also tighter at Medium, which is crucial for a game like Counter-Strike 2 where sudden frame drops can affect aiming and reaction time.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset again provides the best compromise, delivering an average of 89 FPS with a minimum of 76 FPS and a maximum of 102 FPS. This is playable and a substantial improvement over the 66 FPS average at High settings. The Low preset at this resolution yields 107 FPS, but the visual compromise is often too severe for a modern title. The data suggests that Medium is the "sweet spot" here, allowing for a visually acceptable image while maintaining a frame rate that is responsive enough for competitive play.

For users with 4K displays, the situation is more challenging. The Low preset is the only viable option for a smooth experience, averaging 60 FPS at 3840x2160. The Medium preset drops to 50 FPS, and while playable, it is less ideal for the fast-paced action of Counter-Strike 2. The High and Ultra presets at 4K are not recommended, with averages of 37 FPS and 29 FPS respectively, as these frame rates will feel sluggish and unresponsive in a competitive environment. The benchmark results strongly indicate that to achieve higher frame rates at 4K, a more powerful GPU would be required, as the Arc B370 is clearly the limiting factor.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is a low-power integrated graphics solution with a TDP of 25 W, and its performance profile reflects this positioning. The GPU's benchmark data shows a percentile rank of 5 among all GPUs, placing it in the entry-level category. Its performance in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 is a score of 1184, which is on par with older discrete cards like the ATI Radeon HD 5770, which scores 1190. This historical comparison underscores that while the architecture is modern (Xe3-LPG on a 3 nm process), the raw compute power is limited.

The GPU's memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system's DDR5 memory rather than dedicated VRAM. This has a direct impact on performance, as the bandwidth is "System Dependent." The clock speeds are listed as a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2400 MHz. This wide boost range suggests that the GPU's clock speed is heavily dependent on thermal and power headroom, which are constrained in an IGP form factor. The data shows this combo's performance is not about raw GPU horsepower; instead, it is about the efficiency of the shared memory architecture and the CPU's ability to feed it data.

The GPU's relationship to the game's results is clear when looking at the FPS scaling. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 162 FPS, but this drops to 37 FPS at 4K High. This drastic reduction is a direct consequence of the GPU being overwhelmed by the increased pixel count and shading complexity. The CPU, a Ryzen 5 8400F with 6 cores and 12 threads, is not the bottleneck in these scenarios; its performance is sufficient to handle the game's simulation and draw calls. The Arc B370, with its 1280 shading units and 40 TMUs, simply cannot process the data fast enough to maintain high frame rates at higher resolutions and settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play Counter-Strike 2 with this hardware?

A: Based on the measured data, 1920x1080 offers the most fluid experience. At this resolution, even the High preset achieves a 100 FPS average, while the Medium preset provides a more consistent 134 FPS average. While 2560x1440 is playable, the frame rates at Medium (89 FPS) are notably lower than at 1080p, and 4K is only viable at the Low preset.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370's performance compare to other GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc B370 has an average benchmark score of 1184 and ranks in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (avg score 1186, 0.2% faster), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (avg score 1190, 0.5% faster), and the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (avg score 1192, 0.7% faster). This indicates its performance level is similar to those older discrete graphics cards.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F a bottleneck for the Intel Arc B370?

A: The data suggests the CPU is not the primary bottleneck in most scenarios. At 1080p Low, the combo reaches 162 FPS, which is a high frame rate. However, the performance drops significantly as resolution and settings increase (e.g., 37 FPS at 4K High), indicating the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU's multi-threaded benchmark score of 24389 in Passmark suggests it has ample headroom for this game.

Q: Does this combo support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc B370 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. This means it is compatible with modern rendering APIs used in Counter-Strike 2, though the low shader count and fill rate limit its ability to leverage these features at high settings.

Q: What kind of frame rate can I expect at 1440p with Medium settings?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the measured average FPS is 89, with a minimum of 76 FPS and a maximum of 102 FPS. This is a solid, playable frame rate for most users, though those seeking the highest refresh rates may need to lower settings to Low, which yields 107 FPS.

Q: Is the performance difference between Low and Ultra settings significant?

A: Yes, the difference is substantial at all resolutions. At 1080p, the average FPS drops from 162 at Low to 78 at Ultra, a reduction of more than half. At 4K, the drop is even more severe, going from 60 FPS at Low to 29 FPS at Ultra. This indicates that the Ultra preset is not suitable for this hardware configuration.

How This Combo Ranks

In the database of tested combinations, this specific pairing of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc B370 ranks at 2642 out of 2870 combos for Counter-Strike 2. This places it in the bottom 8% of all tested systems, confirming that it is a low-performance configuration for this title. The ranking is heavily influenced by the GPU's weak performance, as the CPU is a more capable component.

The CPU alone ranks in the 77th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25005. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (delta 0.2%), Intel Core i7-11850H (delta 0.3%), and Intel Core i7-13620H (delta 0.4%). This shows the Ryzen 5 8400F is a solid mid-range processor. In contrast, the GPU's 5th percentile ranking and its proximity to much older hardware like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 drag the overall combo ranking down.

The disparity between the CPU and GPU performance is stark. The combo's rank of 2642 is a direct result of pairing a 77th-percentile CPU with a 5th-percentile GPU. While the CPU is capable of delivering high frame rates in theory, the GPU's inability to keep up means the system's actual in-game performance is closer to that of a much older or lower-end machine. This pairing creates a significant imbalance, where the GPU is clearly the dominant constraint on the system's gaming capabilities.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data shows a predictable yet dramatic scaling pattern from 1080p to 4K. At Low settings, the average frame rate drops from 162 FPS at 1920x1080 to 107 FPS at 2560x1440, and finally to 60 FPS at 3840x2160. This represents a 63% reduction in frame rate from 1080p to 4K. For the Medium preset, the averages are 134 FPS, 89 FPS, and 50 FPS for 1080p, 1440p, and 4K respectively, a 63% drop as well. The High preset shows a similar trend, with averages of 100 FPS, 66 FPS, and 37 FPS.

This scaling pattern indicates that the system is heavily GPU-limited. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the frame rates would remain more constant as resolution increases, since the CPU's workload (game logic, physics) does not change significantly with resolution. The fact that frame rates nearly halve when moving from 1080p to 4K confirms that the Intel Arc B370's fill rate and memory bandwidth are being saturated. The GPU is working at its maximum capacity at 1080p, and increasing the resolution simply means it has to render more pixels with the same limited resources. The result is a linear decrease in performance that is characteristic of a graphics-bound scenario.

The data suggests that to achieve a consistent 144 FPS or higher experience, the user would need to play at 1080p with the Low preset, which achieves 162 FPS. At 1440p, the system cannot reliably hit high refresh rates, and at 4K, it struggles to maintain even a 60 FPS average on anything other than the lowest settings. This analysis shows that the "sweet spot" for this hardware is 1080p gaming, where the CPU can provide enough data to keep the GPU reasonably busy, but the GPU's limitations still cap the maximum achievable frame rate.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The following table details the exact measured average FPS for each resolution and settings combination tested.

| Resolution | Settings | Average FPS | Minimum FPS | Maximum FPS |

| :--------- | :------- | :---------- | :---------- | :---------- |

| 1920x1080 | Low | 162 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Medium | 134 | 114 | 154 |

| 1920x1080 | High | 100 | - | - |

| 1920x1080 | Ultra | 78 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Low | 107 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Medium | 89 | 76 | 102 |

| 2560x1440 | High | 66 | - | - |

| 2560x1440 | Ultra | 52 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Low | 60 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Medium | 50 | 42 | 57 |

| 3840x2160 | High | 37 | - | - |

| 3840x2160 | Ultra | 29 | - | - |

The data shows a clear hierarchy. At 1080p, the combo is capable of producing high frame rates, with the Low setting offering a very smooth 162 FPS average. The Medium setting provides a good balance with 134 FPS and a narrow frame time distribution. The High and Ultra settings, while visually superior, cause a significant drop in performance. The pattern repeats at 1440p, but the frame rates are lower across the board, and at 4K, the system is only competitive on the Low setting. The minimum and maximum FPS data for the Medium settings at each resolution shows that frame pacing is relatively consistent, which is a positive sign for gameplay smoothness, but the overall averages are the primary indicator of this combo's limited capabilities.