Counter-Strike 2

The Intel Core i5-11400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER pairing in Counter-Strike 2 presents a study in balanced, if aging, hardware. The data shows a combination that delivers high frame rates across most settings, with the CPU's six cores and twelve threads providing a solid foundation for the game's physics and entity calculations. The i5-11400F operates with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, characteristics that are directly relevant to the game's performance scaling. With 12 MB of shared L3 cache, the processor has enough on-die storage to keep frequently accessed game data close at hand. This configuration places the CPU in the 75th percentile of all tested processors, indicating it is more capable than a majority of its peers. Its average benchmark score of 17181 sits nearly level with the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U, which scores 17189, a delta of 0%. This suggests that in raw compute terms, the i5-11400F is competitive with a mobile-focused chip, though the desktop part's sustained performance profile is likely different.

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

The Core i5-11400F's architecture is built around 6 cores and 12 threads, a configuration that allows for efficient handling of the game's multi-threaded workload. In Counter-Strike 2, the CPU's role is critical for maintaining high minimum frame rates, as it is responsible for processing player positions, hit detection, and game logic. The boost clock of 4.40 GHz is a key factor here; it allows the processor to quickly ramp up speed for single-threaded tasks that are often the bottleneck in competitive shooters. The processor's 14 nm process node, while not current-generation, is a relevant detail for understanding its thermal and power characteristics, which in turn affect sustained performance in long gaming sessions.

Benchmark data shows the processor achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14372 and a single-core score of 2029. When compared to its nearest rivals, the i5-11400F's average score of 17181 is within a 0.2% delta of the Intel Core i7-1260P and the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U, both scoring 17212 and 17215 respectively. This indicates that the desktop CPU's performance is nearly identical to these more modern, power-efficient mobile parts in synthetic tests. The data suggests that in a game like Counter-Strike 2, which is often CPU-bound at lower resolutions, this processor's performance is sufficient to feed the RTX 2060 SUPER without creating a significant bottleneck. The measured FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings reaches 320.9, a figure that strongly indicates the CPU is capable of pushing frame rates far beyond typical high-refresh-rate monitor limits in this scenario.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture and features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's base clock is 1470 MHz, with a boost clock of 1650 MHz, and it operates with a TDP of 175 W. For Counter-Strike 2, the VRAM capacity is not a limiting factor; the game's textures and geometry at 1080p and 1440p will not exceed the 8 GB buffer, even at High or Ultra settings. The GPU's 7.181 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is a measure of its raw shader throughput, which is more than adequate for a competitive title that prioritizes frame rate over graphical fidelity.

The GPU's percentile ranking of 63rd among all tested GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19774, places it in the mid-range tier. Interestingly, the nearest rival data shows the RTX 2060 SUPER outperforming the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 by a 0.5% delta (19680 vs 19774), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN by 0.3% (19706). This suggests that the SUPER variant is extremely close to its more expensive sibling in synthetic benchmarks. In game, this translates to the GPU being a strong performer at 1080p and 1440p, but the data shows it begins to struggle at 4K, particularly with Ultra settings where the average FPS drops to 57.3. This drop is characteristic of a mid-range GPU being pushed beyond its comfort zone at higher resolutions, where pixel fill rate and memory bandwidth become more critical.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combined performance of the i5-11400F and RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 1129th out of 1632 tested combinations in Counter-Strike 2. This places the pairing in the lower third of all possible configurations, which may seem surprising given the high frame rates observed. However, this ranking includes all possible GPU and CPU pairings, many of which feature much more powerful and expensive components. The rank of 1129 suggests that while this combo is not top-tier, it is far from the bottom, and its performance is representative of a mainstream gaming PC from a few years ago. The data implies that for a user with a 1080p or 1440p monitor, this setup offers a highly playable experience, but it will not compete with high-end builds in raw frame rate output.

This rank is a relative measure; the absolute performance is what matters for the end user. The combo's ability to achieve an average FPS of 197.5 at 1080p High settings demonstrates that it can handle the game's requirements with ease. The ranking is a stark reminder that the hardware market has moved on, with newer generations offering significantly more performance. However, the measured data confirms that this older combination still has substantial life left for esports titles, where frame time consistency and high averages are paramount.

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

The measured FPS data provides a clear picture of how this combo scales with resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, the system is clearly CPU-bound at lower settings, with the Low preset yielding an average of 320.9 FPS. The Medium preset drops this to 267.1, while High achieves 197.5. The Ultra preset reduces the average to 158, indicating that the GPU is becoming more involved but still maintaining high performance. Moving to 2560x1440, the frame rates remain high, with Low settings producing 215.3 FPS, Medium at 180, and High at 130.2. The Ultra preset at 1440p delivers 103.1 FPS, which is still above the 100 FPS threshold for smooth gameplay.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck. The Low preset manages an average of 121.2 FPS, which is quite playable, but the Medium preset drops to 99.7. The High preset yields 76.6 FPS, and the Ultra preset falls to 57.3 FPS. This progression shows a predictable decline in performance as resolution increases, but the magnitude of the drop from 1080p to 4K is significant. For example, the High settings drop from 197.5 FPS at 1080p to 76.6 FPS at 4K, a reduction of 120.9 FPS. This indicates that the RTX 2060 SUPER is not a 4K-capable card for this game at higher quality presets, though it remains functional at lower settings.

FAQ

Q: Can this combination achieve high refresh rates at 1080p?

A: Yes, the data shows the combo achieves 320.9 FPS on Low, 267.1 on Medium, 197.5 on High, and 158 on Ultra at 1920x1080, all of which are well above the 144 Hz threshold.

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

A: The i5-11400F has an average benchmark score of 17181, which is 0% different from the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (17189) and 0.2% lower than the Intel Core i7-1260P (17212).

Q: Is the 8 GB of VRAM sufficient for Counter-Strike 2 at 1440p?

A: The measured FPS indicates no VRAM-related issues, as the combo achieves 130.2 FPS at 1440p High and 103.1 at Ultra, suggesting the 8 GB buffer is sufficient for this game's requirements.

Q: What is the limiting component at 4K resolution?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor at 3840x2160, as evidenced by the significant FPS drop from 197.5 at 1080p High to 76.6 at 4K High, while the CPU has ample headroom.

Q: How does the RTX 2060 SUPER's benchmark score compare to the RTX 2070?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER's average benchmark score is 19774, which is 0.5% higher than the RTX 2070's score of 19680, indicating they perform nearly identically in synthetic tests.

Q: What is the performance delta between the Low and Ultra presets at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, the Low preset averages 215.3 FPS, while the Ultra preset averages 103.1 FPS, a difference of 112.2 FPS, showing a significant performance cost for higher graphical fidelity.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data suggests that the optimal experience depends on the user's display and preference for visual quality versus frame rate. For a 1080p gamer with a 144 Hz monitor, the High preset is the best choice, offering an average of 197.5 FPS, which is well above the refresh rate and provides a significant buffer for demanding scenes. The Ultra preset at 1080p still delivers 158 FPS, making it a viable option for those who prioritize visual fidelity, though the frame rate is closer to the 144 Hz threshold. For 1440p users, the Medium preset at 180 FPS is an excellent sweet spot, balancing visual quality with a high frame rate. The High preset at 130.2 FPS is also a strong contender, but the Medium preset provides a more comfortable cushion above the 144 Hz mark.

At 4K, the data suggests that the Low preset is the only sensible choice for competitive play, with an average of 121.2 FPS. The Medium preset at 99.7 FPS is playable but may not be ideal for fast-paced action, while the High and Ultra presets (76.6 and 57.3 FPS) are better suited for slower, more visually focused gameplay or single-player scenarios. Ultimately, the High preset at 1080p and the Medium preset at 1440p offer the best balance of visual quality and performance, while 4K users should stick to Low settings for a competitive edge.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals the nature of the bottleneck in this system. At 1080p High, the average FPS is 197.5. When the resolution is increased to 1440p, the FPS drops to 130.2, a reduction of 67.3 FPS or approximately 34%. Moving from 1440p to 4K, the FPS falls further to 76.6, a drop of 53.6 FPS or roughly 41%. This scaling pattern indicates that the GPU is heavily taxed by the resolution increase, while the CPU maintains a more consistent load. The fact that the 1080p Low preset (320.9 FPS) is so much higher than the 1440p Low preset (215.3 FPS) reinforces that the CPU is capable of far more work, and the GPU is the primary constraint as resolution climbs.

The data implies that this pairing is well-matched for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the GPU's limitations become apparent at 4K. The 448.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 7.181 TFLOPS of compute are insufficient to maintain high frame rates at that resolution with higher settings. The CPU, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, remains a stable foundation, but its performance headroom is not fully utilized at 4K. This suggests that for users with a 4K display, a GPU upgrade would yield significant benefits, while a CPU upgrade would provide minimal gains at 1080p where the processor is already delivering over 300 FPS on Low settings.