Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2 is a competitive FPS that has become the de facto benchmark for high-refresh-rate gaming, and the pairing of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D with the Intel Arc B390 presents an unusual data point. The measured frames per second reveal a system that is dramatically imbalanced, with a flagship 16-core processor tethered to an integrated-class graphics solution. The data shows that this configuration is capable of playable frame rates at lower resolutions and settings, but the scaling curve highlights severe limitations imposed by the graphics subsystem as resolution and visual fidelity increase.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data across the three tested resolutions—1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160—exhibits a steep and consistent decline that points directly to the GPU as the primary bottleneck. At the Low preset, the system delivers 179 FPS at 1080p, which drops to 118 FPS at 1440p, and then falls further to 66 FPS at 4K. This represents a 34% performance reduction from 1080p to 1440p, and a 63% reduction from 1080p to 4K. Such a dramatic scaling pattern is characteristic of a graphics card that is saturated by pixel throughput, rather than a CPU that is struggling to feed frames.

The Medium preset tells a similar story, with average frame rates of 149 FPS at 1080p, 98 FPS at 1440p, and 55 FPS at 4K. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is 34%, and the drop from 1080p to 4K is 63%, nearly identical percentage losses to the Low preset. This consistency across presets indicates that the scaling bottleneck is resolution-dependent and not tied to a specific graphics feature being toggled. The High preset shows 111 FPS at 1080p, 73 FPS at 1440p, and 41 FPS at 4K, with the same proportional decline. The Ultra preset is the most demanding, yielding 86 FPS at 1080p, 57 FPS at 1440p, and just 32 FPS at 4K.

Analyzing the resolution scaling more closely, the gap between 1080p and 1440p is consistently around 34% to 37% across all presets, while the gap between 1440p and 4K is another 44% to 56%. For instance, at High settings, moving from 1440p to 4K drops the frame rate from 73 to 41, a 44% reduction. At Ultra settings, the same resolution step drops from 57 to 32, a 44% reduction. This linear degradation with pixel count is the hallmark of a GPU-bound scenario. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D, with its 16 cores and 32 threads, is not the limiting factor here; a CPU bottleneck would typically show less severe scaling at higher resolutions because the CPU workload per frame remains relatively constant while the GPU workload increases.

The fact that even at 1080p Low the system cannot maintain frame rates above 180 FPS further supports the GPU bottleneck diagnosis. A CPU like the Ryzen 9 9950X3D, which scores 42,018 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,259 in single-core, is more than capable of pushing well beyond 200 FPS in a lightweight esports title like Counter-Strike 2. The measured 179 FPS ceiling is therefore an artifact of the Intel Arc B390’s compute and fillrate limitations, not the processor. The data suggests that for competitive play at high refresh rates, this combination will be frustrating, as the GPU will cap performance well below what the CPU can deliver.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is the dominant performance limiter in this configuration, and its specifications explain why. This GPU is built on the Xe3-LPG architecture and is designated as an IGP, meaning it is an integrated graphics processor. Its clock speeds are listed at a base of 300 MHz and a boost of 2500 MHz, which are respectable for an integrated solution, but its memory configuration is "System Shared," with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." This means the GPU relies on the system’s DDR5 memory, and its performance is contingent on the memory controller and bus, rather than dedicated VRAM.

The shading unit count of 1536, along with 48 texture units and 24 ROPs, places this GPU at the entry level. Its FP32 compute rating is 7.680 TFLOPS, and its pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s. These figures are modest for a modern discrete GPU, and the benchmark data confirms this. The Intel Arc B390 scores 1,482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which puts it in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in terms of average benchmark score are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1,463, 1.3% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1,460, 1.5% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1,446, 2.5% delta). These are all legacy or ultra-low-end mobile parts, which contextualizes the Arc B390’s standing as a very weak performer by modern desktop standards.

Given this GPU, the measured FPS in Counter-Strike 2 makes sense. At 1080p Low, the 179 FPS average is likely near the GPU’s absolute ceiling for this game, constrained by its texture rate of 120.0 GTexel/s and pixel fillrate. The VRAM situation is also critical; since the memory is shared with the system, there is no dedicated VRAM pool to buffer textures. At higher settings like High and Ultra, the increased memory pressure and shader complexity cause the frame rate to collapse further, reaching just 86 FPS at Ultra 1080p. The GPU’s boost clock of 2500 MHz is not enough to compensate for the lack of dedicated memory bandwidth and the low ROP count.

The GPU’s role as the bottleneck is further evidenced by the fact that the average FPS at 4K Ultra is only 32, which is below the 60 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay. This GPU simply lacks the raw throughput to handle 4K rendering in a modern game. Even at 1440p Medium, the 98 FPS average is playable, but the 84 FPS minimum indicates occasional dips that could be disruptive in a fast-paced shooter. The Intel Arc B390 is a capable part for basic desktop use or very light gaming, but in the context of Counter-Strike 2, it severely restricts the potential of the Ryzen 9 9950X3D.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is a flagship desktop processor, and its role in this combo is to provide more than enough headroom that the GPU never receives a bottlenecked feed. This CPU features 16 cores and 32 threads based on the Zen 5 architecture, with a base clock of 4.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. It is built on a 4 nm process and has a large 128 MB L3 cache, which is particularly beneficial for gaming workloads. Its benchmark scores are exceptional: 42,018 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 2,259 in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 26,736 in Geekbench multi-core.

In the context of Counter-Strike 2, the CPU’s role is to handle game logic, physics, and draw calls, and this processor is massively overqualified for that task. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 16,374 and the 8-thread score of 9,259 indicate that even when multiple threads are engaged, the CPU has substantial reserve capacity. The single-thread score of 1,292 in 3DMark is also strong, which matters for a game that is often sensitive to single-core performance. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,259 is particularly relevant, as Counter-Strike 2 relies heavily on the primary render thread.

The data shows that the CPU is not the limiting factor in any of the measured scenarios. At 1080p Low, where CPU load would be highest relative to GPU load, the system achieves 179 FPS, but this is still below what the CPU could theoretically deliver. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 (0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D (0.1% delta), and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 (0.4% delta), all of which have similar average benchmark scores. This places the 9950X3D in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, indicating that its processing power is not the constraint.

In practical terms, the CPU is idling while the GPU struggles. The fact that frame rates drop by 63% from 1080p to 4K at Low settings proves that the GPU is the wall. If the CPU were the bottleneck, we would expect frame rates to remain relatively flat as resolution increases, because the CPU work per frame would stay similar. Instead, the frame rates plummet, which is the signature of a GPU that cannot keep up with pixel rendering demands. The 128 MB L3 cache on the 9950X3D is beneficial for game data locality, but it cannot compensate for a GPU that has only 24 ROPs and a system-dependent memory bandwidth. The CPU is a top-tier component, and its performance is entirely wasted in this pairing for gaming purposes.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and the Intel Arc B390 ranks 2,535 out of 2,870 tested combos in Counter-Strike 2. This places it in the bottom 12% of all system configurations, which is a stark contrast to the CPU’s individual ranking. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D alone sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Arc B390 sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs. The combo rank of 2,535 reflects the severe bottleneck created by pairing a top-tier CPU with an entry-level integrated GPU.

This ranking is driven entirely by the GPU’s limitations. The combo rank suggests that most other tested systems, even those with much weaker CPUs, outperform this pairing in Counter-Strike 2 because they have more balanced graphics solutions. The data indicates that the 2,535 rank is a function of the GPU’s 1,482 average benchmark score, which drags the entire system down. For comparison, if the CPU were paired with a mid-range discrete GPU, the combo rank would likely be much higher, but the measured rows show that the Intel Arc B390 simply cannot deliver competitive frame rates in this game.

The delta between the CPU’s high percentile and the GPU’s low percentile creates a situation where the combo rank is almost entirely a measure of GPU performance. The fact that the combo ranks 2,535 out of 2,870 means that only 335 tested combos are slower, and those are likely systems with both weak CPUs and weak GPUs. This pairing is not just unbalanced; it is an extreme example of a CPU-bound system being held back by its graphics component. The measured FPS data confirms this, showing that even at the lowest settings, the system cannot achieve frame rates that would be considered competitive in esports, where 240 Hz or higher monitors are common.

The combo rank also implies that the system is not suitable for the intended use case of the CPU. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D is a processor designed for high-end gaming and productivity, and its pairing with a GPU that ranks in the 9th percentile nullifies its gaming advantage. The data shows that this combo is effectively a workstation configuration with a weak gaming capability, as the CPU excels in tasks like Passmark multi-thread (70,255) and data compression (908,421), but the GPU fails to provide a playable experience at higher settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the average FPS at 1080p with High settings?

A: The measured average FPS at 1920x1080 with High settings is 111 FPS. This is playable but not ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors, and it indicates the GPU is the limiting factor.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the bottleneck in this system?

A: The data strongly indicates the GPU is the bottleneck. The Intel Arc B390 has an FP32 compute of 7.680 TFLOPS and scores 1,482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad, while the Ryzen 9 9950X3D scores 42,018 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The frame rate drops of 63% from 1080p to 4K at Low settings are characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario.

Q: Can this system run Counter-Strike 2 at 4K?

A: At 4K with Ultra settings, the average FPS is 32, which is below the minimum for smooth gameplay. At 4K with Low settings, the average FPS is 66, which is playable but inconsistent. The GPU’s system-shared memory and low ROP count (24) limit its 4K capability.

Q: How does the CPU rank compared to other processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 75,779. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 (0.1% delta) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 (0.4% delta), all within a narrow performance band.

Q: What is the combo rank for this system in Counter-Strike 2?

A: The combo ranks 2,535 out of 2,870 tested combos, placing it in the bottom 12% of all configurations. This low rank is attributable to the Intel Arc B390, which sits in the 9th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded at 1440p Medium?

A: At 2560x1440 with Medium settings, the minimum FPS is 84, with an average of 98 FPS and a maximum of 113 FPS. The minimum is above 60 FPS, but dips could be noticeable in competitive play.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the optimal settings for this combination depend on the target resolution and the desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers an average of 179 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate across all configurations. This is the recommended preset for competitive play, as it provides the smoothest experience and minimizes input latency. The Medium preset at 1080p yields 149 FPS, which is still high, but the 126 FPS minimum suggests occasional drops. The High preset at 1080p drops to 111 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 86 FPS, both of which are lower than what the CPU is capable of feeding.

At 2560x1440, the Low preset is the only one that approaches high-refresh-rate territory, with an average of 118 FPS. The Medium preset at 1440p averages 98 FPS, with a minimum of 84 FPS, which is playable but not ideal for 144 Hz monitors. The High preset at 1440p averages 73 FPS, and the Ultra preset averages 57 FPS, both of which are below the threshold for smooth competitive play. For 1440p users, the Low preset is recommended if frame rate is the priority, while the Medium preset offers a balance between visuals and performance.

At 3840x2160, none of the presets provide a consistently high frame rate. The Low preset averages 66 FPS, which is barely playable, while the Medium preset averages 55 FPS, and the High preset averages 41 FPS. The Ultra preset at 4K averages just 32 FPS, which is not suitable for a first-person shooter. For 4K, the Low preset is the only viable option, but even then, the 66 FPS average may not be stable enough for serious play.

The data shows that the best experience with this combo is achieved at 1080p with the Low preset, where the 179 FPS average is the only measured result that takes advantage of the CPU’s capabilities. For users who prioritize visual quality over frame rate, the Medium preset at 1080p (149 FPS) or 1440p (98 FPS) is acceptable, but the GPU’s limitations become apparent at higher settings. The Ultra preset should be avoided entirely, as it reduces performance by more than half compared to Low at every resolution, without providing a meaningful competitive advantage in a fast-paced game like Counter-Strike 2. Ultimately, the Intel Arc B390 forces a choice between resolution and smoothness, and the measured data indicates that lowering settings is the only way to approach the frame rates that the Ryzen 9 9950X3D can support.