Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2 pairs the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X, a 12-core Zen 5 desktop processor, with the Intel Arc B370, an integrated-class GPU built on the Xe3-LPG architecture. The measured data shows this combination ranks 2642nd out of 2870 tested combos for this game, placing it in the lower tier of systems. The Arc B370’s benchmark percentile of 5 versus all GPUs underscores its position as a limiting factor, while the Ryzen 9 9900X’s 92nd percentile CPU ranking indicates substantial headroom that the GPU cannot fully utilize in most scenarios.

FAQ

Q: What is the best average frame rate this combo achieves in Counter-Strike 2?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 162, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only measured result above 160 FPS, with the next closest being 134 FPS at 1080p Medium.

Q: How does the combo perform at 4K resolution?

A: At 3840x2160, average FPS ranges from 29 (Ultra) to 60 (Low). Medium settings produce an average of 50 FPS with a min of 42 and max of 57, while High settings yield 37 FPS. None of the 4K results reach the 60 FPS threshold except Low, which hits exactly 60.

Q: What are the measured FPS values at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings deliver 107 FPS average, Medium provides 89 FPS (min 76, max 102), High achieves 66 FPS, and Ultra drops to 52 FPS. The data shows a clear scaling pattern where each settings tier reduces performance by roughly 20-25%.

Q: Which settings preset offers the best balance of performance and quality?

A: The 1080p Medium preset delivers 134 FPS average with a min of 114 and max of 154, which represents the highest frame rates at a preset that includes the measured min/max data. Low settings at 1080p reach 162 FPS but lack the quality enhancements of Medium.

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

A: The Intel Arc B370 scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 0.2% below the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), 0.5% below the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), and 0.7% below the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192). It sits 1.4% above the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168).

Q: What is the CPU’s average benchmark score relative to its closest competitors?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X has an average benchmark score of 57498, which is 0.1% below the AMD EPYC 9015 (57555) and 1.1% below the Intel Core i9-14900 (58115). It is 0.2% above the AMD EPYC 7313 (57399) and 1.4% above the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (58323).

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and Intel Arc B370 achieves a rank of 2642 out of 2870 tested combos in Counter-Strike 2, placing it in the bottom 8% of all systems evaluated. This ranking reflects the severe bottleneck imposed by the GPU, which has a percentile of 5 versus all GPUs and an average benchmark score of just 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The CPU, by contrast, ranks in the 92nd percentile among all processors, with an average score of 57498 across various tests including Cinebench R23 multicore (32172) and Geekbench multicore (22174).

The disparity between CPU and GPU capabilities explains the combo’s low position. Counter-Strike 2’s measured FPS at 1920x1080 Low settings reaches 162 FPS, which suggests the CPU can drive high frame rates, but the GPU’s ceiling becomes apparent at higher resolutions and settings. At 4K Ultra, the average drops to 29 FPS, a 82% reduction from the 1080p Low result. This scaling pattern indicates that the Arc B370’s 1280 shading units and 20 ROPs cannot sustain the workload as pixel count increases, despite the CPU’s 12 cores and 5.60 GHz boost clock being more than capable of feeding frames.

Relative to its nearest GPU rivals, the Arc B370’s 3DMark score of 1184 places it alongside legacy discrete GPUs like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190) and AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192). These comparisons highlight that the Arc B370 performs at a level consistent with approximately 15-year-old graphics hardware in synthetic workloads, which directly translates to the modest FPS figures observed in this game. The CPU’s nearest rivals, including the Intel Core i9-14900 (58115) and AMD EPYC 9015 (57555), show that the processor is competitive with high-end desktop and server parts, but that performance advantage is largely wasted when paired with a GPU that ranks in the 5th percentile.

The measured FPS data confirms the ranking’s implication: this combo is suitable for low-resolution, low-settings play but struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher presets. With a combo rank of 2642 out of 2870, it falls behind the vast majority of systems tested, and the data does not suggest any configuration where the combo excels beyond 1080p Medium.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS breakdown provides clear guidance on which settings preset delivers the best experience for this combo. At 1920x1080, Low settings achieve 162 FPS average, which is the highest recorded across any resolution and settings combination. However, Medium settings at the same resolution produce 134 FPS average with a minimum of 114 and maximum of 154, offering a more balanced visual experience while still maintaining frame rates well above the 60 FPS threshold commonly considered the baseline for smooth gameplay.

For players prioritizing maximum frame rates, 1080p Low is the optimal choice, as it delivers 162 FPS and avoids any dips below playable levels based on the available data. The 1080p Medium preset, though 17% slower in average FPS, provides min/max data indicating consistent performance between 114 and 154 FPS, which suggests a stable experience with improved visual fidelity. High settings at 1080p drop to 100 FPS average, while Ultra falls to 78 FPS, both of which are still playable but represent diminishing returns in quality versus the frame rate cost.

At 2560x1440, the recommendation shifts to Low settings, which achieve 107 FPS average. Medium at this resolution provides 89 FPS average with a min of 76 and max of 102, which is playable but with a narrower margin above 60 FPS. High settings at 1440p yield 66 FPS, and Ultra drops to 52 FPS, the latter falling below the 60 FPS threshold. For 4K resolution, only Low settings reach 60 FPS exactly, while Medium sits at 50 FPS average (min 42, max 57), High at 37 FPS, and Ultra at 29 FPS. The data suggests that 4K play is only viable at Low settings, and even then, the lack of min/max data for that preset leaves uncertainty about frame time consistency.

The best overall experience, balancing frame rate and visual quality, is the 1080p Medium preset. It provides 134 FPS average with a documented minimum of 114 FPS, ensuring no significant drops below the refresh rate of most standard monitors. For competitive play where every frame counts, 1080p Low’s 162 FPS is superior, but the Medium preset’s min/max range indicates it can hold higher frame rates more consistently than the Ultra preset, which lacks min/max data and averages 78 FPS.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (3840x2160, 2560x1440, and 1920x1080) across four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, and Ultra), providing 12 data points for analysis.

At 1920x1080, the combo achieves its peak performance. Low settings produce 162 FPS average, Medium delivers 134 FPS average with a minimum of 114 and maximum of 154, High reaches 100 FPS, and Ultra falls to 78 FPS. The progression from Low to Ultra shows a 52% reduction in average FPS (from 162 to 78), with each settings tier costing approximately 20-30 FPS. The Medium preset’s min/max data (114-154) demonstrates a narrower range than the gap between presets, suggesting that within a given preset, frame pacing remains relatively stable.

At 2560x1440, performance scales down predictably. Low settings achieve 107 FPS, Medium provides 89 FPS (min 76, max 102), High delivers 66 FPS, and Ultra drops to 52 FPS. Comparing to 1080p, the resolution increase from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 reduces FPS by 34% at Low settings (162 to 107), 34% at Medium (134 to 89), 34% at High (100 to 66), and 33% at Ultra (78 to 52). This consistent ~34% reduction indicates that the GPU’s fill rate is the primary constraint, as the pixel count increases by 78% (from 2.07 million to 3.69 million pixels) but the FPS drop is proportionally smaller, suggesting some CPU involvement in the lower settings.

At 3840x2160, the combo’s limitations become pronounced. Low settings hit exactly 60 FPS, Medium averages 50 FPS (min 42, max 57), High averages 37 FPS, and Ultra averages 29 FPS. The 4K resolution contains 8.29 million pixels, which is 4 times the 1080p count. The FPS at Low settings drops from 162 at 1080p to 60 at 4K, a 63% reduction, while Ultra drops from 78 to 29, a 63% reduction as well. This consistent scaling suggests the GPU is fully saturated at 4K across all settings, with the CPU having minimal impact on the final frame rate.

The Medium preset is the only one with min and max FPS data at all three resolutions: 1920x1080 (114-154), 2560x1440 (76-102), and 3840x2160 (42-57). This data shows that the gap between min and max FPS remains relatively constant at approximately 40 FPS regardless of resolution, indicating that frame time variance scales with overall performance rather than being resolution-dependent. The average FPS for Medium settings decreases by 34% from 1080p to 1440p and by 44% from 1440p to 4K, showing a steeper decline at higher resolutions.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated GPU based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel’s 3 nm process. It features 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 ROPs, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its clock speeds range from a base of 300 MHz to a boost of 2400 MHz, with a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The GPU’s memory configuration is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM. Memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as system shared or system dependent, meaning the GPU relies on the CPU’s DDR5 memory controller. The Ryzen 9 9900X supports dual-channel DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, but the actual GPU memory bandwidth is dependent on the system configuration. This shared memory arrangement is typical for integrated graphics and contributes to the GPU’s low benchmark percentile of 5 versus all GPUs.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the Arc B370 scores 1184, placing it in the bottom percentile of GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2%), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5%), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7%), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, +1.4%). These comparisons show the Arc B370 performs similarly to GPUs from the early 2010s, which explains its inability to maintain high frame rates in Counter-Strike 2 at higher resolutions and settings.

The GPU’s TDP is 25 W, and it operates as an IGP with no power connectors or suggested PSU, making it suitable for low-power systems. The measured FPS data reflects this hardware profile: at 1080p Low, the GPU can produce 162 FPS, but at 4K Ultra, it falls to 29 FPS. The boost clock of 2400 MHz provides some headroom, but the limited number of shading units (1280) and ROPs (20) constrain fill rate and pixel throughput. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s means that at 4K (8.29 million pixels), the theoretical maximum fill rate is 5.8 billion pixels per second, but the actual performance is far below this due to other bottlenecks.

The GPU’s role in this combo is the primary limiting factor. The CPU can clearly deliver high frame rates, as evidenced by the 162 FPS at 1080p Low, but the GPU’s 5th percentile ranking means it cannot scale beyond entry-level discrete graphics performance. The fact that the GPU shares system memory further exacerbates the issue, as memory bandwidth is not dedicated and may be shared with the CPU’s workloads.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture (Granite Ridge), built on TSMC’s 4 nm process. It has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, with a TDP of 120 W. The CPU features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, and it has 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

In synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 9 9900X demonstrates strong performance. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 32172, and single-core is 2253. Geekbench results show a multicore score of 22174 and single-core of 3010. In 3DMark tests, the CPU scores 12552 at 16 threads, 9114 at 8 threads, 4886 at 4 threads, 2519 at 2 threads, and 1286 at single thread. PassMark tests show a multithread score of 54643 and single-thread score of 4672. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 57498, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs.

The CPU’s nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9015 (57555, -0.1%), AMD EPYC 7313 (57399, +0.2%), Intel Core i9-14900 (58115, -1.1%), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (58323, -1.4%). These comparisons show the Ryzen 9 9900X is competitive with high-end server and desktop processors, with a less than 1.5% difference from each rival. This indicates the CPU is not a bottleneck in most workloads, including gaming.

In Counter-Strike 2, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with rendered frames. The measured FPS at 1080p Low (162 FPS) suggests the CPU can handle high frame rates, but the 1440p and 4K results show the GPU saturating before the CPU reaches its limit. The 12 cores and 24 threads provide ample parallelism for game logic and physics, and the 5.60 GHz boost clock ensures strong single-thread performance, which is often critical in FPS games. The 64 MB L3 cache helps reduce memory latency, and the DDR5 memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s supports both the CPU and the shared GPU memory.

The CPU’s benchmark scores indicate it has significant headroom. For example, the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32172 is more than double the 3DMark 16-thread score of 12552, showing that the CPU can handle heavily threaded workloads. However, in this game, the GPU’s 5th percentile ranking means that the CPU’s performance is rarely the limiting factor. The only scenario where the CPU might become more relevant is at 1080p Low, where the GPU’s workload is light enough for the CPU to dictate the 162 FPS ceiling.

The CPU’s release date of August 2024 and launch MSRP of $499 indicate it is a current-generation desktop part, but its pairing with an integrated GPU creates an imbalance. The data shows that the CPU’s performance is largely untapped in this configuration, as even the highest FPS measured (162) is well below what the CPU could theoretically support if paired with a more capable GPU. The CPU’s 92nd percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 5th percentile creates a massive gap that the measured FPS data confirms, with the GPU limiting performance at all resolutions above 1080p Low.