Counter-Strike 2

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

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It carries a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The chip's cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 16 MB L3 pool. This configuration places it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs tested, with an average benchmark score of 27051.

In Counter-Strike 2, the CPU's role is substantial, particularly at lower resolutions where the GPU has more headroom. The data shows that at 1080p with Low settings, the combo achieves 657 FPS, which is the highest measured result in the entire dataset. This figure drops to 462 FPS at High settings and 359 FPS at Ultra, indicating that the CPU is not the limiting factor at these settings — the GPU and its workload scaling are driving the differences. The 5700G's 8-core/16-thread design provides ample parallelism for the game's engine, and its single-thread performance, as reflected in a 3DMark single-thread score of 899 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1494, is sufficient to keep frame pacing consistent.

When compared to its nearest rivals, the 5700G sits within a tight performance band. The Intel Core i9-9900K scores 27097, a delta of -0.2% relative to the 5700G, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 is 0.4% ahead at 26936. The Intel Core i5-14400T trails by 0.4% with a score of 27166, and the Intel Core i7-1370P leads by 0.6% at 26900. These differences are negligible in real-world gaming, but the benchmark data suggests the 5700G is a balanced competitor in this segment. Its multi-threaded capabilities, shown by a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 12830.5 and a Geekbench multicore score of 9950, ensure that background tasks don't interfere with frame delivery, a critical factor in competitive FPS titles where consistent frame times matter more than raw peak output.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

The measured FPS data provides a clear hierarchy of settings presets across resolutions. At 1080p, the Low preset delivers 657 FPS, Medium delivers 615 FPS, High delivers 462 FPS, and Ultra delivers 359 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 42 FPS, which is relatively small, but the jump to High costs 153 FPS and Ultra costs another 103 FPS. For competitive play, where high refresh rates are paramount, the Low preset offers the highest headroom, but the Medium preset's 615 FPS with a min FPS of 523 and max of 708 still provides excellent smoothness with potentially better visual clarity.

At 1440p, the pattern shifts. Low yields 493 FPS, Medium 410 FPS (min 348, max 471), High 306 FPS, and Ultra 238 FPS. Here, Medium at 410 FPS is still well above the 240 Hz threshold, making it a strong choice for high-refresh monitors. The High preset at 306 FPS remains viable, but Ultra at 238 FPS is close to the 240 Hz ceiling, which could introduce frame drops on demanding scenes. At 4K, the situation changes dramatically: Low produces 276 FPS, Medium 229 FPS (min 195, max 263), High 171 FPS, and Ultra 133 FPS. The Medium preset at 229 FPS is the best balance, as it stays above 195 FPS minimums while maintaining visual fidelity, whereas High and Ultra fall below 171 FPS and 133 FPS, respectively, which may not satisfy competitive players.

Benchmark results indicate that the Medium preset offers the most consistent experience across all three resolutions, with the smallest relative drop from 1080p to 4K compared to other presets. The data shows that Low settings provide diminishing returns at higher resolutions — the 1080p to 1440p drop is 164 FPS, but the 1440p to 4K drop is 217 FPS, suggesting that CPU overhead becomes more significant at 4K Low. For most users, Medium is the recommended starting point, as it preserves high frame rates while offering better visual quality than Low, and it keeps minimum FPS above 195 even at 4K.

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

The FPS scaling across resolutions reveals the balance between CPU and GPU workload. At Low settings, the drop from 1080p (657 FPS) to 1440p (493 FPS) is 164 FPS, a 25% reduction, and then to 4K (276 FPS) is another 217 FPS, a 44% reduction. This progressive decline indicates that the GPU becomes more dominant as resolution increases, but the CPU is still holding its own at 1440p. At Medium settings, the 1080p result is 615 FPS, dropping to 410 FPS at 1440p (a 205 FPS or 33% reduction) and then to 229 FPS at 4K (a 181 FPS or 44% reduction). The consistent percentage drop from 1440p to 4K across Low and Medium suggests that the GPU is scaling linearly with pixel count, while the CPU is not yet saturated.

At High settings, the pattern is steeper: 1080p yields 462 FPS, 1440p yields 306 FPS (a 156 FPS drop), and 4K yields 171 FPS (a 135 FPS drop). The percentage reductions are 34% and 44%, respectively, which is similar to Medium. At Ultra, 1080p produces 359 FPS, 1440p 238 FPS, and 4K 133 FPS, with drops of 121 FPS (34%) and 105 FPS (44%). The uniformity of these percentage drops across settings indicates that the GPU is the primary scaling factor — as resolution increases, the pixel fill rate demand grows, and the RTX 4090's performance degrades proportionally.

However, the absolute FPS values tell a different story about the CPU. At 4K Low, the combo achieves 276 FPS, which is still high, but the CPU's influence is visible in the min FPS data at 4K Medium (195 FPS) versus 1080p Medium (523 FPS). The min FPS drop from 1080p to 4K is 328 FPS, which is larger than the average FPS drop of 386 FPS, indicating that frame consistency suffers more at higher resolutions. This suggests that while the GPU is the main bottleneck at 4K, the CPU's memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s and PCIe Gen 3 interface may contribute to occasional frame hitches, as the 5700G's DDR4 support and 16 MB L3 cache are less capable than newer platforms.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 achieves a combo rank of 160 out of 3719 tested combinations in Counter-Strike 2. This places it in the top 4.3% of all combos, which is an impressive result given the CPU's age and mid-range positioning. The RTX 4090 is the dominant component in this pairing, as evidenced by its 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 60347. The CPU's 79th percentile ranking is lower, but the combined performance still lands in the top tier.

The rank of 160 means that 3559 other combos perform worse, while only 159 combos outperform it. Given that the RTX 4090 is an end-of-life product with a successor (GeForce 50) already announced, this pairing represents a high-water mark for the previous generation. The data shows that the CPU does not hold back the GPU in most scenarios — at 1080p Low, the 657 FPS result is likely near the engine's practical limit, and at 4K Ultra, the 133 FPS is GPU-bound. The combo's strength lies in its ability to maintain high frame rates across all settings, with the CPU's 8 cores providing sufficient thread scheduling for the game's tick rate and entity updates.

Compared to other combos in the database, this pairing's rank is driven by the GPU's raw compute power — the RTX 4090's 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 1.01 TB/s memory bandwidth are among the highest on record. The CPU's contribution is secondary, but its 16 threads and 3DMark max-thread score of 6627 ensure that it doesn't bottleneck the GPU at lower resolutions. The 4.3% top-tier placement confirms the GPU's capabilities, but the data also shows that newer CPUs, such as those with higher single-thread scores, would likely push this combo higher in the rankings if paired with the same GPU.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD102 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It features 24 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's base clock is 2235 MHz with a boost clock of 2520 MHz, and its 16384 shading units, 512 TMUs, and 176 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 443.5 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,290.2 GTexel/s. The card draws up to 450 W and requires a 850 W power supply, with a triple-slot design and a 16-pin power connector.

In Counter-Strike 2, the RTX 4090's performance is exceptional, but the game is not GPU-heavy at lower settings. The 1080p Low result of 657 FPS is likely constrained by the CPU, as the GPU's 24 GB of VRAM is vastly underutilized — the game's textures at Low settings would fit in a fraction of that memory. The GPU's 128 RT cores and 512 tensor cores are also largely idle, as CS2 does not heavily utilize ray tracing or DLSS in this benchmark setup. The data shows that the GPU's advantage becomes more apparent at higher resolutions and settings, where its memory bandwidth and shading power come into play.

At 4K Ultra, the combo achieves 133 FPS, which is 24% of the 1080p Low result. This scaling is typical for a GPU-bound scenario, as the pixel count increases by 4x from 1080p to 4K, and the RTX 4090's 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 is pushed harder. The GPU's 1.01 TB/s bandwidth is sufficient to feed the 384-bit bus at these resolutions, but the min FPS data at 4K Medium (195 FPS) suggests that frame pacing can vary. The GPU's 24 GB VRAM is overkill for CS2, but it ensures that no texture streaming issues occur, even at Ultra settings with high-resolution assets.

The RTX 4090's nearest rivals, based on average benchmark scores, include the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60326, 0% delta), AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60140, 0.3% delta), AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61896, -2.5% delta), and AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58657, 2.9% delta). These professional-grade cards are not direct competitors in gaming, but the data shows that the RTX 4090's consumer-focused design delivers superior gaming performance, as evidenced by its top-tier rank in this combo.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS achievable with this combo in Counter-Strike 2?

A: The highest measured average FPS is 657, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. The next highest is 615 FPS at 1080p Medium, with a min FPS of 523 and max of 708.

Q: Does the Ryzen 7 5700G bottleneck the RTX 4090 in this game?

A: The data indicates that the CPU does not significantly bottleneck the GPU at higher resolutions. At 4K Ultra, the combo achieves 133 FPS, which is GPU-bound. However, at 1080p Low, the 657 FPS result may be limited by the CPU's single-thread performance, as the GPU could potentially render more frames.

Q: What is the best setting for a 240 Hz monitor at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Medium preset delivers 410 FPS with a min of 348 FPS, which is well above the 240 Hz refresh rate. The High preset at 306 FPS also exceeds 240 Hz, but Medium offers a higher margin for frame drops.

Q: How does the combo rank compared to other tested systems?

A: This combo ranks 160 out of 3719 tested combinations, placing it in the top 4.3% of all systems tested in Counter-Strike 2. This is driven primarily by the RTX 4090's performance.

Q: Is the RTX 4090's 24 GB VRAM necessary for this game?

A: No, Counter-Strike 2 does not require 24 GB of VRAM at any settings. The GPU's memory size is excessive for this title, but it eliminates any possibility of VRAM-related stuttering, even at 4K Ultra with high-resolution textures.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values for the Medium preset across resolutions?

A: At 1920x1080, the min FPS is 523. At 2560x1440, the min FPS is 348. At 3840x2160, the min FPS is 195. These values show that frame consistency decreases with resolution.

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

1920x1080 (1080p):

• Low: Average 657 FPS
• Medium: Average 615 FPS, Min 523 FPS, Max 708 FPS
• High: Average 462 FPS
• Ultra: Average 359 FPS

2560x1440 (1440p):

• Low: Average 493 FPS
• Medium: Average 410 FPS, Min 348 FPS, Max 471 FPS
• High: Average 306 FPS
• Ultra: Average 238 FPS

3840x2160 (4K):

• Low: Average 276 FPS
• Medium: Average 229 FPS, Min 195 FPS, Max 263 FPS
• High: Average 171 FPS
• Ultra: Average 133 FPS

The data shows a consistent scaling pattern: the Medium preset is the only one with min/max FPS recorded across all resolutions, providing insight into frame consistency. At 1080p, the Medium preset's min FPS of 523 is 85% of its average, indicating strong stability. At 1440p, the min FPS of 348 is 85% of the average, and at 4K, the min FPS of 195 is 85% of the average. This consistency suggests that the game engine maintains a similar frame-time distribution regardless of resolution, with the GPU handling the increased load predictably.

The Ultra preset shows the largest relative drop from 1080p to 4K, falling from 359 FPS to 133 FPS, a 63% reduction. The Low preset drops from 657 FPS to 276 FPS, a 58% reduction. This indicates that higher settings impose a proportionally larger GPU workload, as expected, but the CPU's contribution to frame generation remains relatively constant. The High preset's drop from 462 FPS to 171 FPS is a 63% reduction, matching Ultra's scaling, which further confirms that the GPU is the primary bottleneck at higher presets.