Counter-Strike 2

Intel Core i5-14600K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 sit at rank 199 out of 3719 tested combos in Counter-Strike 2, placing this pairing in the top 5.4% of all combinations the database has measured. That percentile ranking is impressive, but what matters more in a competitive shooter is how the pairing behaves across the presets players actually use, and the data shows a system that is dramatically overqualified for the game's esports-oriented settings while still having enough headroom to handle visually demanding presets at high refresh rates.

How This Combo Ranks

The rank of 199 out of 3719 combos means this setup outperforms roughly 94.6% of all tested pairings in Counter-Strike 2. That is a strong result, but it is not the absolute top tier — the game's performance ceiling is high, and the data indicates that the i5-14600K and RTX 5080 combination is held back by the CPU in certain scenarios rather than being a perfect pairing. In practical terms, this rank suggests the combination delivers excellent frame rates at every resolution and preset in the measured set, but it is not the single fastest option available.

Looking at the CPU's broader benchmark standing, the i5-14600K ranks in the 90th percentile against all CPUs tested across all workloads, with an average benchmark score of 48618. That places it in the same performance class as the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48698, -0.2% delta), the AMD EPYC 4345P (48470, +0.3% delta), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX (48287, +0.7% delta). The margins are razor-thin — less than 1% separates these processors — which tells you the i5-14600K is not a standout in raw compute, but it is squarely in the middle of a very competitive pack. For Counter-Strike 2, what matters more is the single-threaded performance, and the data shows the CPU excels there.

The GPU side tells a similar story. The RTX 5080 ranks in the 87th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 56083. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon 8060S (55757, +0.6% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55698, +0.7% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54828, +2.3% delta), while the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE (57367, -2.2% delta) sits slightly ahead. These deltas are small, but they indicate that the RTX 5080 is not the undisputed king of the GPU charts — it is simply a very fast card that happens to be surrounded by capable alternatives. In Counter-Strike 2 specifically, the measured FPS numbers show the GPU is rarely the limiting factor, which makes the combo rank more dependent on the CPU's ability to feed frames.

CPU Role

The Intel Core i5-14600K is a 14-core, 20-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. It runs at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boosts up to 5.30 GHz, with a 24 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB L2 cache per core. For a game like Counter-Strike 2, which is notoriously sensitive to single-thread performance, the boost clock of 5.30 GHz is the headline figure. The CPU's single-core benchmark scores reflect this strength: Cinebench R23 single-core scores 2064, Geekbench single-core scores 2491, and Passmark single-thread scores 4270. These numbers indicate the i5-14600K is among the stronger single-thread performers in its price class, which directly translates to how quickly the game can process each frame's logic.

The multi-threaded performance is also respectable, with Cinebench R23 multi-core scoring 24491 and Geekbench multi-core scoring 16673, but that is less relevant for Counter-Strike 2. The game's engine does not heavily utilize the 20 threads available; instead, it leans on a few cores running at maximum frequency. The 125 W TDP means the CPU is not a power-hungry monster, but it does require adequate cooling to sustain those boost clocks under sustained gaming loads. The data shows the CPU's overall benchmark average is 48618, which places it in the 90th percentile, but the deltas to its nearest rivals — all within 1% — suggest that the i5-14600K is a solid but not exceptional choice for pure compute. In Counter-Strike 2, the evidence points to the CPU being the primary driver of the highest frame rates, especially at lower resolutions where the GPU is not stressed.

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture card built on TSMC's 5 nm process, with a 45,600 million transistor count on a 378 mm² die. It operates at a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2617 MHz, with memory running at 1875 MHz (30 Gbps effective). The 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is ample for any modern game at 4K resolution. The card has 10752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, with 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores. Its compute capabilities are substantial: FP32 performance is 56.28 TFLOPS, and the pixel rate is 293.1 GPixel/s. In terms of raw throughput, this is a high-end card, but its benchmark scores indicate it is not the absolute fastest in the database.

The RTX 5080's average benchmark score of 56083 places it in the 87th percentile against all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are all within a few percentage points, with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE being 2.2% faster and the AMD Radeon 8060S being 0.6% slower. What this means for Counter-Strike 2 is that the GPU is more than capable of handling the game's rendering demands at any resolution in the measured set. The 16 GB VRAM is far more than the game needs, and the 960.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures there is no memory bottleneck even at 4K Ultra settings. The card's 360 W TDP and suggested 750 W PSU make it a power-hungry component, but that is expected for a card in this performance class. In the context of Counter-Strike 2, the GPU's role is to keep up with the CPU's frame generation, and the measured FPS data shows it does that without breaking a sweat, except at the highest preset and resolution.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the data shows a wide spread across presets. Low settings produce an average of 699 FPS, which is the highest measured frame rate in the entire dataset. Medium settings drop to 580 FPS average, with a minimum of 493 FPS and a maximum of 668 FPS. High settings yield 434 FPS average, and Ultra settings bring that down to 337 FPS. The gap between Low and Ultra is significant — a 362 FPS difference — which indicates that the GPU is doing more work as settings increase, but even at Ultra, the frame rate is far above what any display can show.

Moving to 2560x1440, the numbers scale down but remain extremely high. Low settings average 462 FPS, Medium averages 384 FPS (with min 327 FPS and max 442 FPS), High averages 287 FPS, and Ultra averages 223 FPS. The drop from 1080p to 1440p is consistent — roughly 34-38% fewer frames across all presets — which is a typical result for a game that is becoming more GPU-bound at higher resolutions. At 4K (3840x2160), the frame rates are still playable but noticeably lower. Low settings average 258 FPS, Medium averages 215 FPS (with min 183 FPS and max 247 FPS), High averages 160 FPS, and Ultra averages 125 FPS. Even at 4K Ultra, the system maintains a frame rate that is smooth on a 120 Hz display, which is remarkable for a competitive shooter.

The data includes min and max FPS only for the Medium preset at each resolution. At 1080p Medium, the range is 493 to 668 FPS; at 1440p Medium, it is 327 to 442 FPS; and at 4K Medium, it is 183 to 247 FPS. These ranges suggest that frame pacing is consistent, with no major stutters indicated by the minimum values. The absence of min/max data for other presets means we cannot assess frame consistency there, but the averages are strong enough that this is unlikely to be a concern for most players.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals where the bottleneck lies. At Low settings, the progression is 699 FPS at 1080p, 462 FPS at 1440p, and 258 FPS at 4K. That is a 63% drop from 1080p to 4K, which is substantial but not as steep as you would expect from a purely GPU-bound scenario. At Ultra settings, the progression is 337 FPS at 1080p, 223 FPS at 1440p, and 125 FPS at 4K — a 63% drop as well. The consistency of this drop percentage across presets indicates that the system is scaling as expected when resolution increases.

The key insight is that the gap between Low and Ultra narrows as resolution increases. At 1080p, Ultra delivers 48% of the Low preset's frame rate (337 vs 699). At 4K, Ultra delivers 48% of Low's frame rate (125 vs 258). This proportional relationship suggests that neither the CPU nor the GPU is hitting a hard wall; instead, the system is scaling gracefully. However, the fact that Low at 4K (258 FPS) is still higher than Ultra at 1080p (337 FPS) tells you the CPU is not the limiting factor even at high resolutions. The data points to the GPU being the primary constraint at 4K, but with such high frame rates, the limitation is academic rather than practical. For competitive play, the drop from 1080p to 1440p is more relevant, and the 37-38% decrease in FPS at every preset shows that the GPU is starting to take on more work, but the CPU's single-thread strength keeps the system well above any playability threshold.

Settings Recommendations

For players using a high-refresh-rate monitor at 1080p, the data shows that Low settings provide the highest average FPS at 699, but Medium settings at 580 FPS are the better choice for a balance of visual quality and performance. The min FPS at 1080p Medium is 493, which is still far above any display's refresh rate, so there is no competitive penalty for stepping up from Low to Medium. At 1440p, Medium settings average 384 FPS with a min of 327 FPS, which is ideal for a 240 Hz or 360 Hz display. High settings at 1440p (287 FPS) are also viable, but the drop to 223 FPS at Ultra makes that preset less attractive for competitive play where every frame counts.

At 4K, the recommendation shifts depending on the display. For a 144 Hz monitor, High settings at 160 FPS average is the sweet spot — it clears the refresh rate with headroom. Ultra at 125 FPS is playable but barely exceeds a 120 Hz display's refresh rate, making it a marginal choice. Medium at 4K (215 FPS) is the best option for a 240 Hz 4K display, if such a monitor exists, but for most players, High at 4K offers the best visual fidelity without sacrificing smoothness. The data indicates that the Medium preset provides the most consistent frame pacing, as it is the only preset with min/max measurements showing a tight range relative to the average. In summary, Medium settings at any resolution offer the best combination of high average FPS and stable minimums, with High being a strong alternative for those prioritizing visual quality over raw frame rate.