Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2 with the Intel Core i5-12400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 ranks 237th out of 3,719 tested combos in this database. That places it in the top 6.4% of all pairings, a strong result driven by an enormous GPU advantage and a CPU that keeps pace at high resolutions. The data shows this combo is a high-refresh-rate powerhouse, particularly at 1440p and 4K, where the RTX 4080’s raw throughput dominates. At 1080p, however, the i5-12400F becomes the limiting factor, capping frame rates well below what the GPU alone could deliver. Benchmark results indicate a balanced pairing only at higher resolutions; at 1080p, the CPU holds the combo back from its full potential.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s rank of 237 out of 3,719 tested combinations is excellent, placing it in the 93.6th percentile of all tested pairs. This ranking reflects the RTX 4080’s position as one of the most powerful GPUs in the database, sitting in the 86th percentile among all GPUs. The CPU, meanwhile, lands in the 73rd percentile among all processors, which is solid but not elite. The gap between the GPU’s percentile and the CPU’s percentile explains the combo’s behavior across resolutions. In games where the GPU is the bottleneck, this pairing performs near the top of the charts; where the CPU is stressed, the rank suffers.

Compared to its nearest rivals by average benchmark score, the i5-12400F sits within a very tight cluster. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS scores 19,047, essentially identical to the i5-12400F’s 19,039, a delta of 0%. The Intel Core 3 201E is 0.1% behind, the Intel Core i5-1335U is 0.3% ahead, and the AMD EPYC 7773X is also 0.3% ahead. These are all within noise, meaning the CPU’s compute performance is squarely average for its class. The GPU, however, is a different story. The RTX 4080’s average benchmark score of 54,247 is 0.1% behind the RTX 4080 SUPER, 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X, 2.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, and 2.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon 8060S. This places the GPU in a competitive tier where small percentage differences separate products.

The measured FPS data reinforces this ranking. At 4K Ultra, the combo delivers 120 FPS average, which is playable but not exceptional for a competitive shooter. At 4K High, it jumps to 155 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it reaches 207 FPS. The jump from Medium to Low at 4K is massive, going from 207 FPS to 249 FPS, a 20% increase. At 1440p, the combo hits 215 FPS on Ultra, 277 FPS on High, 371 FPS on Medium, and 446 FPS on Low. At 1080p, the numbers climb further: 325 FPS on Ultra, 418 FPS on High, 560 FPS on Medium, and 674 FPS on Low. These results show that the combo scales well with lower settings, but the scaling is not linear, hinting at a CPU limit at lower resolutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-12400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 18 MB L3 cache. This is a modern mid-range CPU, and its benchmark scores reflect that positioning. In Cinebench R23, it scores 12,380 multi-core and 1,680 single-core. In Geekbench, it scores 9,472 multi-core and 1,964 single-core. The PassMark multi-thread score is 19,433, and the single-thread score is 3,481. These numbers place the CPU in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs, which is respectable but not top-tier.

In Counter-Strike 2, the CPU’s role is critical at lower resolutions. The game is known for being CPU-bound at high frame rates, and the data confirms this. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 674 FPS average. At 1080p Medium, it drops to 560 FPS, and at 1080p High, it is 418 FPS. At 1080p Ultra, it falls to 325 FPS. The scaling from Low to Ultra at 1080p shows a 349 FPS difference, which is a 51% reduction. This is a clear sign that the GPU is not the bottleneck at 1080p; the CPU is limiting the maximum frame rate. The i5-12400F’s 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for the game, but the 4.40 GHz boost clock is not enough to push frame rates beyond the 674 FPS ceiling observed.

At higher resolutions, the CPU’s load decreases relative to the GPU. At 1440p Low, the combo hits 446 FPS, which is 228 FPS lower than at 1080p Low. At 4K Low, it is 249 FPS, another 197 FPS drop. This pattern indicates that as resolution increases, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, and the CPU has more headroom. The i5-12400F’s single-thread performance, as measured by Cinebench R23 (1,680) and Geekbench (1,964), is adequate for the game’s engine, but it is not exceptional. The 3DMark single-thread score of 909 and 2-thread score of 1,699 further illustrate this. The CPU’s 3DMark 4-thread score is 3,067, 8-thread is 4,779, 16-thread is 5,895, and max-thread is 5,912. These scores suggest that multi-threaded performance scales well up to 8 threads, but the game likely relies on fewer threads, making the single-thread score more relevant.

The CPU’s memory support includes DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel bus. This flexibility is useful, but the data does not specify which memory type was used in testing. The PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes is also a feature, but again, the measured FPS results do not isolate memory or PCIe effects. The CPU’s TDP of 65 W is low, indicating efficient operation, but this does not translate to higher frame rates in this benchmark. The nearest rivals, all within 0.3% in average score, confirm that the i5-12400F is a solid mid-range chip, but it is not a high-end CPU that can feed an RTX 4080 at 1080p.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 is a monster of a GPU, built on the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, using TSMC’s 5 nm process. It has 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, with a transistor density of 121.1M per mm². The GPU has 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, along with 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores. The base clock is 2,205 MHz, and the boost clock is 2,505 MHz. The memory subsystem is equally impressive: 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 716.8 GB/s. The memory clock is 1,400 MHz, or 22.4 Gbps effective. The pixel rate is 280.6 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 761.5 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 48.74 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 48.74 TFLOPS as well.

In benchmark tests, the RTX 4080 scores 6,567 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 214,739 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 263,779 in Geekbench Vulkan. PassMark results show 34,457 in G3D, 20,671 in GPU Compute, and 1,239 in G2D. These scores place the GPU in the 86th percentile of all GPUs, which is high but not the absolute top. The nearest rival, the RTX 4080 SUPER, is 0.1% ahead, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is 1.1% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB is 2.6% behind. The AMD Radeon 8060S is 2.7% behind. This is a tight grouping at the top, but the RTX 4080 is clearly a high-end part.

In Counter-Strike 2, the GPU’s role becomes more prominent as resolution increases. At 4K Ultra, the combo delivers 120 FPS average, which is a demanding setting for any GPU. At 4K High, it jumps to 155 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it reaches 207 FPS. The 4K Low setting yields 249 FPS. The jump from 4K Ultra to 4K Medium is 87 FPS, which is a 72% increase. This shows that the GPU has headroom when settings are lowered, but at 4K Ultra, it is working hard. At 1440p, the GPU has more breathing room: 215 FPS on Ultra, 277 FPS on High, 371 FPS on Medium, and 446 FPS on Low. The 4K to 1440p scaling is significant, with Low settings going from 249 FPS to 446 FPS, a 79% increase.

At 1080p, the GPU is not the limiting factor. The 1080p Low setting achieves 674 FPS, which is the highest recorded in the dataset. At 1080p Medium, it is 560 FPS, and at 1080p High, it is 418 FPS. The 1080p Ultra setting is 325 FPS. The pattern across resolutions shows that the GPU’s performance scales almost linearly with resolution when the CPU is not the bottleneck. For example, from 1440p Low (446 FPS) to 4K Low (249 FPS), the resolution increases by 2.25x, and the frame rate drops by 44%. This is close to the expected GPU-bound scaling. However, from 1080p Low (674 FPS) to 1440p Low (446 FPS), the resolution increases by 1.78x, but the frame rate drops by 34%. This is less than expected, suggesting the CPU is still partly limiting at 1440p.

FAQ

Q: What is the combo’s overall rank in Counter-Strike 2?

A: The combo ranks 237th out of 3,719 tested combinations, placing it in the top 6.4% of all pairs tested.

Q: How does the i5-12400F compare to its closest rivals in CPU benchmarks?

A: The i5-12400F’s average benchmark score is 19,039, which is 0% different from the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS (19,047), 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core 3 201E (19,056), 0.3% behind the Intel Core i5-1335U (18,982), and 0.3% behind the AMD EPYC 7773X (18,979).

Q: What is the highest average FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The highest average FPS is 674, recorded at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The next highest is 560 FPS at 1080p Medium, followed by 446 FPS at 1440p Low.

Q: How much does the RTX 4080’s performance differ from the RTX 4080 SUPER?

A: The RTX 4080 has an average benchmark score of 54,247, which is 0.1% lower than the RTX 4080 SUPER’s 54,209. This is a negligible difference in practical terms.

Q: At which resolution does the CPU become the primary bottleneck?

A: At 1920x1080, the CPU appears to be the primary bottleneck. The frame rates at 1080p Low (674 FPS) are much higher than at 1440p Low (446 FPS), but the scaling from 1440p to 1080p is not as steep as from 4K to 1440p, indicating the CPU limits the maximum frame rate.

Q: What are the minimum FPS values recorded?

A: The dataset includes minimum FPS only for Medium settings. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 476 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it is 315 FPS; and at 4K Medium, it is 176 FPS. No minimum FPS values are provided for Low, High, or Ultra settings.

Resolution Scaling

The measured FPS data reveals clear resolution scaling patterns. From 1080p to 1440p, the frame rate drops significantly at every settings tier. At Low settings, the drop is from 674 FPS to 446 FPS, a 34% decrease. At Medium, it is from 560 FPS to 371 FPS, a 34% decrease. At High, it is from 418 FPS to 277 FPS, a 34% decrease. At Ultra, it is from 325 FPS to 215 FPS, a 34% decrease. This consistent 34% drop across all settings suggests a uniform scaling factor, which is characteristic of a GPU-bound scenario where the resolution increase scales the pixel workload linearly.

From 1440p to 4K, the drops are larger. At Low settings, the frame rate goes from 446 FPS to 249 FPS, a 44% decrease. At Medium, it is from 371 FPS to 207 FPS, a 44% decrease. At High, it is from 277 FPS to 155 FPS, a 44% decrease. At Ultra, it is from 215 FPS to 120 FPS, a 44% decrease. The 44% drop from 1440p to 4K is steeper than the 34% drop from 1080p to 1440p, which indicates that the GPU is more heavily loaded at 4K, and the CPU bottleneck is less relevant. This is a classic sign of a GPU-bound workload at higher resolutions.

The data shows that the limiting component changes with resolution. At 1080p, the CPU is the primary limiter, as evidenced by the relatively small drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low (34%) compared to the large drop from 1440p Low to 4K Low (44%). If the GPU were the limiter at 1080p, the drop from 1080p to 1440p would be closer to the 44% seen from 1440p to 4K. The fact that it is only 34% suggests the CPU cannot push frame rates much higher than 674 FPS, regardless of GPU headroom. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiter, as the frame rates scale almost exactly with the pixel count increase.

The average FPS at 4K Ultra is 120, which is below the 144 Hz refresh rate common on many monitors. At 4K High, it is 155 FPS, which is above 144 Hz. At 4K Medium, it is 207 FPS, and at 4K Low, it is 249 FPS. For players targeting 4K, Medium settings provide a good balance, while Low settings maximize frame rates. At 1440p, all settings exceed 200 FPS, with Ultra at 215 FPS and Low at 446 FPS. This makes 1440p the sweet spot for high-refresh-rate gaming, as even Ultra settings deliver over 200 FPS. At 1080p, the combo is overkill for most monitors, as even Ultra settings deliver 325 FPS, which exceeds the refresh rate of most displays.

Settings Recommendations

The measured FPS data provides clear guidance for settings selection. At 1920x1080, the combo delivers 674 FPS on Low, 560 FPS on Medium, 418 FPS on High, and 325 FPS on Ultra. Since the game is a competitive FPS, higher frame rates are generally better. Low settings at 1080p provide the highest frame rate, but Medium settings at 560 FPS are still exceptionally high and likely offer better visual quality without sacrificing competitive performance. High settings at 418 FPS are also viable, and Ultra at 325 FPS is playable but may not be optimal for players with 360 Hz monitors. The data suggests that Medium is the best balance at 1080p, as it delivers 560 FPS with better visuals than Low, while still being far above the refresh rate of most displays.

At 2560x1440, the combo delivers 446 FPS on Low, 371 FPS on Medium, 277 FPS on High, and 215 FPS on Ultra. All settings exceed 200 FPS, which is excellent for high-refresh-rate gaming. Ultra at 215 FPS is the best experience for visual quality, as it still comfortably exceeds 144 Hz. High at 277 FPS is a strong alternative for players who prefer higher frame rates. Medium at 371 FPS is ideal for players with 360 Hz monitors, and Low at 446 FPS is the maximum frame rate option. The recommendation is Ultra for most players, as 215 FPS is more than sufficient for competitive play, and the visual improvements are significant.

At 3840x2160, the combo delivers 249 FPS on Low, 207 FPS on Medium, 155 FPS on High, and 120 FPS on Ultra. The jump from Ultra to High is 35 FPS, which is a 29% improvement, while the jump from High to Medium is 52 FPS, a 34% improvement. Medium at 207 FPS is the best option for players with 144 Hz 4K monitors, as it provides a comfortable margin above 144 Hz. High at 155 FPS is also viable for 144 Hz displays, but Ultra at 120 FPS falls below 144 Hz and may cause screen tearing on high-refresh monitors. Low at 249 FPS is the maximum frame rate option, but the visual quality loss is substantial. For competitive play at 4K, Medium is the recommended setting, as it delivers 207 FPS with a good balance of visuals and performance.

The data shows that the combo is capable of high frame rates at all resolutions, but the optimal settings depend on the display’s refresh rate. For 1080p, Medium is the sweet spot. For 1440p, Ultra is the best experience. For 4K, Medium is the recommended setting, with High as a close second. The measured FPS values for Medium settings also include minimum FPS data, which is useful for understanding frame time consistency. At 1080p Medium, the minimum is 476 FPS, at 1440p Medium, it is 315 FPS, and at 4K Medium, it is 176 FPS. These minimums indicate that the combo maintains high frame rates even in demanding scenes, with no severe dips that would cause stuttering.